Politics and Power in Marine Spatial Planning

Abstract

Marine spatial planning (MSP) has been lauded as a remedy to unsuitable marine management. There is, however, growing MSP research illustrating that it is failing to foster paradigm shifts towards sustainable governance. The gap between MSP theory and practice is due to its asocial and apolitical implementation. This narrow version of MSP has been advanced through post-political planning and uncritical rationalities. The result is a choreographed form of MSP, with clearly defined outcomes that serve the needs of elite actors rather than the public interest. This chapter argues that to recapture its democratising potential, MSP requires explicit engagement with politics and power. We highlight the use of the boundary object lens and citizen science as two potential avenues to facilitate this engagement.

Small-scale fishers as allies or opponents? Unlocking looming tensions and potential exclusions in Poland's marine spatial planning

“…In terms of issues of social justice and equity, it is feared that the discourse of participation may be serving only as ideological cover for growth objectives, so that several MSPs may end up generating more negative attitudes than 'buy-in' among coastal communities (Tafon, 2018). It is also argued that because the epistemological basis of MSP is framed in predominantly rationalist terms, the production of knowledge is not only constrained, but its circulation mainly rationalizes the rationalities of dominant groups (Flannery et al, 2016;Flannery, Clarke, & McAteer, 2019;Jentoft, 2017;Saunders, Gilek, & Tafon, 2019;Tafon, Saunders, & Gilek, forthcoming).…”

A vision at sea: women in fisheries in the Azores Islands, Portugal

“…What we wish to demonstrate is that law has the capacity to make visible and prioritise the interests and perspectives of particular actors at the expense of others, thus contributing to the 'tilted plane' between bodies. In grounding our analysis in a spatial justice concept that interrogates how law creates and fills physical and conceptual space, 1 we also seek to take a closer look at how legal discourse and practice may thwart the "radical potential" of MSP (Flannery et al 2019). We begin by introducing the debates bringing into question the notion of MSP as a democratic decision-making process that provides an equal balance between economic, ecological and social concerns pertaining to the ocean.…”

“…While some welcome it as a progressive process that enables integrated and democratic decisionmaking in relation to ocean governance (Pomeroy and Douvere 2008), others adopt a more cautious perspective. A key critique relates to the reluctance of MSP practitioners to address systemic power asymmetries between actors and knowledge systems, with many arguing for greater engagement with the social sciences in order to grapple with the social, political and cultural dimensions of the planning process (Ritchie and Ellis 2010;Boucquey et al 2016;Smith and Jentoft 2017;Smith 2018;Flannery et al 2019).…”

“…A key issue regarding passive exclusion is the outward legitimising effect this has on a decisionmaking process, making it appear democratic and inclusive. Indeed, without critical reflection on what counts as genuine and inclusive participation, this easily becomes a box-ticking exercise that powerful groups can employ to define and limit roles and processes in ways that make outcomes acceptable to them (Gray and Hatchard 2008;Flannery et al 2019). The popular perception of MSP as a democratic decision-making mechanism in relation to ocean governance must therefore be questioned, especially if the consequence is the outward legitimisation of decisions made to favour and benefit certain actors while others remain on the periphery.…”

Editorial: Sea dragons

“…The selection of papers will not therefore offer a full picture when it comes to various theoretical approaches explaining the emergence of new spatial patterns at sea, as well as the land-sea interface. For instance, certain attempts at the explanation of the latter -by reference to spatial economics -have come to the attention of the scientific community thanks to Schultz-Zehden, Weig and Lukic (2019), Zaucha (2019), and Zaucha et al (2020), or whereas an approach based in the social sciences has been espoused by Flannery, Clarke and McAteer (2019), McKinley, Acott and Stojanovic (2019), and Saunders, Gilek and Tafon (2019). The legal sciences have also injected interesting input into the discourse (Maes, 2008;Pyć, 2019).…”