Knowledge integration in Marine Spatial Planning: A practitioners' view on decision support tools with special focus on Marxan

Janßen, Holger; Göke, Cordula; Luttmann, Anne

doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.11.006

Cited by 33 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Use and perception of DSTs in the BSR has been widely studied in the context of MSP (e.g., Stelzenmüller et al, 2013;Gee et al, 2019;Janßen et al, 2019;Pınarbaşı et al, 2019). In this study, we focused on end-users' current uses and demands for DSTs for supporting the management of the Baltic Sea.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…MPAs) to protect biodiversity. This demand can be tackled in the context of MSP, and various DSTs (such as Marxan) have been developed to assist marine spatial planners (Pınarbaşı et al, 2017), yet their application in MSP practice remains limited (Janßen et al, 2019;Pınarbaşı et al, 2019).…”

Section: Gaps and Development Areas For Which Dsts Are Most Neededmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, their transfer into practice often remains impeded and their application by end-users (e.g., public authorities) for supporting policy implementation seems to be limited. This has been shown, for instance, for MSP (Janßen et al, 2019;Pınarbaşı et al, 2017) or the use of ecosystem services-based tools (Grêt-Regamey et al, 2017). Furthermore, the need for tools and approaches, which incorporate data and information of marine ecosystems and human-induced pressures, for supporting policy implementation is emphasized in policy-driven research agendas, such as the joint Baltic Sea research and development program, BONUS (Snoeijs-Leijonmalm et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bridging the Science-Policy Gap – Toward Better Integration of Decision Support Tools in Coastal and Marine Policy Implementation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decision support tools (DSTs), like models, GIS-based planning tools and assessment tools, play an important role in incorporating scientific information into decision-making and facilitating policy implementation. In an interdisciplinary Baltic research group, we compiled 43 DSTs developed to support ecosystem-based management of the Baltic Sea and conducted a thorough review. Analyzed DSTs cover a wide variety of policy issues (e.g., eutrophication, biodiversity, human uses) and address environmental as well as socioeconomic aspects. In this study, we aim to identify gaps between existing DSTs and end-user needs for DSTs for supporting coastal and marine policy implementation, and to provide recommendations for future DST development. In two online surveys, we assess the awareness and use of DSTs in general, as well as policy implementation challenges and DST needs of representatives of public authorities from all Baltic countries, in particular. Through a policy review we identify major policy issues, policies, and general implementation steps and requirements and develop the synthesis-matrix, which is used to compare DST demand and supply. Our results show that DSTs are predominantly used by researchers. End-users from public authorities use DSTs mostly as background information. Major obstacles for DST use are lacking awareness and experiences. DST demand is strongest for the policy issue eutrophication. Furthermore, DSTs that support the development of plans or programs of measures and assess their impacts and effectiveness are needed. DST supply is low for recently emerging topics, such as non-indigenous species, marine litter, and underwater noise. To overcome existing obstacles, a common database for DSTs available in the BSR is needed. Furthermore, end-users need guidance and training, and cooperation between DST developers and end-users needs to be enhanced to ensure the practical relevance of DSTs for supporting coastal and marine policy implementation. To fill existing gaps, DSTs that address impacts on human welfare and link environmental and socioeconomic

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gaps and Development Areas For Which Dsts Are Most Neededmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bridging the Science-Policy Gap – Toward Better Integration of Decision Support Tools in Coastal and Marine Policy Implementation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Perceptions of success and failure of conservation planning have been predominantly linked to contextual factors such as governance and socio-economic characteristics (e.g. degree of stakeholder support and overall cost of implementation), rather than elements of protected area design (Giakoumi et al, 2018;Janßen et al, 2019). In the case of the GBR RAP, the responses I received broadly matched the two primary views reported in the Review of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act (particularly findings 20 and 21) (Commonwealth of Australia, 2006, p. 166), that the RAP was a) a "significant conservation achievement" according to stakeholders associated with tourism, science, conservation, shipping and some community groups, or b) a dissatisfying process, in which "the Authority [GBRMPA] was biased against them", a view reported by stakeholders from recreational and commercial fishing and associated industries.…”

Section: Perceptions Of Effectiveness Vary By Stakeholder Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers to the evaluation of systematic conservation plans: Insights from landmark Australian plans

McIntosh

2019

Biological Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evaluation of conservation programs is often inhibited by barriers such as time 7 constraints and a lack of funding. Through an exploration of two internationally influential 8 systematic conservation planning activities conducted in Australia in the 1990s and 2000s, I 9 demonstrate this is also true for conservation planning programs. Forestry agreements in North East New South Wales and the rezoning of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park popularised the now widely used planning software packages C-Plan and Marxan. Through 37 semi-structured interviews with senior stakeholders involved in decision-making around both plans, I examined barriers to evaluation, the factors underpinning these barriers, and, in the absence of program-wide evaluations, stakeholder perceptions of the effectiveness of the plans. My findings confirmed that the primary barriers to the evaluation of conservation planning exercises are a lack of suitable monitoring data, resource limitations and inadequate preparation. Respondents also shed light on the factors which shaped these barriers in a conservation context, such as the need for political expediency, a loss of momentum postplan, and the presence or absence of necessary leadership. Perceptions of the effectiveness of the plans reflected interpretations of a) whether the planning process followed good practice, b) the fact a planning result was agreed upon and implemented, c) the longer-term influence of the plan, and, in contrast to much of the current literature on these case studies, d) the consequences of industry restructuring. Highlights • Barriers to evaluation were due to lack of resources and preparation • Political context and organisational culture shaped barriers to evaluation • Healthcare and other disciplines face similar challenges and can offer lessons • New perspectives on project effectiveness are shared from senior decision-makers • Perceptions of effectiveness also reflected the effects of industry compensation

show abstract

“…just because a wide range of stakeholders participated in MSP does not necessarily mean that stakeholders were influential or that different knowledge types were meaningfully considered in decisionmaking" [11]. This specificity of contexts and processes is not easily standardized by using software-based simulation and analytical tools since, although they are frequently mentioned in the scientific literature on marine management approaches, these are still mainly used in academic circles and have not yet found their way into everyday MSP practice [12]. Improving software-based, analytical tools and scientific knowledge in general is important but it cannot be the only working guideline.…”

Section: The Difficulties Of Integrated Management Of Thementioning

confidence: 99%

Bioregional Approach to Integrating Transport Networks and Natural Areas in the Lazio Region Coastal Area, Italy

Budoni

Mazzeschi

2019

WIT Transactions on the Built Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioregion", a term coined by Peter Berg in 1977, was improved by Alberto Magnaghi, who defined it as the space for developing new relationships of coexistence between the inhabitants-producers and the territory of a region. Therefore, bioregion is a tool for rethinking regional planning, no longer as the sum of different sectorial planning exercises, but as a "transdisciplinary planning" approach that considers all of a territory's aspects. This approach is related to EU policies for Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) and the protection of maritime and coastal areas. This paper presents a case study on the coastal areas of the Lazio region of Italy which have a great many natural areas but which is also one of the most anthropized areas in the region. Indeed, due to the rising population, many interventions in the coastal areas resulted in the transformation of natural zones into urban areas. One effect has been urban sprawl and the related lack of capillarity of the public transport network. The result was that many ecosystems and natural areas were fragmented, losing their biodiversity. With a view to reconnecting these fragmented areas, this paper discusses a new regional scenario based on enhancing the linkages between land transport networks and the maritime gateway. In this scenario, railway corridors would stimulate a new organisation for the region's settlements by representing not only the network connecting the bioregion's cities and towns but also the cornerstones for the environmental regeneration of the coastal areas.

show abstract

Knowledge integration in Marine Spatial Planning: A practitioners' view on decision support tools with special focus on Marxan

Cited by 33 publications

References 30 publications

Bridging the Science-Policy Gap – Toward Better Integration of Decision Support Tools in Coastal and Marine Policy Implementation

Bridging the Science-Policy Gap – Toward Better Integration of Decision Support Tools in Coastal and Marine Policy Implementation

Barriers to the evaluation of systematic conservation plans: Insights from landmark Australian plans

Bioregional Approach to Integrating Transport Networks and Natural Areas in the Lazio Region Coastal Area, Italy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About