Resolving Mismatches in U.S. Ocean Governance

Crowder, Larry B.; Osherenko, Gail; Young, Oran R.; Airamé, Satie; Norse, Elliott A.; Baron, Nancy; Day, Jon C.; Douvere, Fanny; Ehler, Charles N.; Halpern, Benjamin S.; Langdon, Steve J.; McLeod, Karen L.; Ogden, John C.; Peach, Robbin; Rosenberg, Andrew A.; Wilson, James A.

doi:10.1126/science.1129706

Cited by 353 publications

(226 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

215

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A good example is that of the growing success of ecosystem-based management. While, in some governance regimes, notably the United States marine zoning and shifts to ecosystem-based management have been severely constrained by inflexible institutions, lack of public support, and difficulties developing acceptable legislation (Crowder et al 2006), in many others new integrated management systems, like adaptive co-management and ecosystem-based management, are emerging and being institutionalized around the world (Garaway and Arthur 2004;Armitage et al 2007;Olsson et al 2008;Berkes 2009;Cundill and Fabricius 2010). Disruptive innovation has a fundamentally different relationship to system transformation than the innovation process identified in the corporate innovation literature and described above.…”

Section: Tipping Toward Sustainability: Understanding and Supporting mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tipping Toward Sustainability: Emerging Pathways of Transformation

Westley

Olsson

Folke

et al. 2011

AMBIO

755

476

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the links between agency, institutions, and innovation in navigating shifts and largescale transformations toward global sustainability. Our central question is whether social and technical innovations can reverse the trends that are challenging critical thresholds and creating tipping points in the earth system, and if not, what conditions are necessary to escape the current lock-in. Large-scale transformations in information technology, nano-and biotechnology, and new energy systems have the potential to significantly improve our lives; but if, in framing them, our globalized society fails to consider the capacity of the biosphere, there is a risk that unsustainable development pathways may be reinforced. Current institutional arrangements, including the lack of incentives for the private sector to innovate for sustainability, and the lags inherent in the path dependent nature of innovation, contribute to lock-in, as does our incapacity to easily grasp the interactions implicit in complex problems, referred to here as the ingenuity gap. Nonetheless, promising social and technical innovations with potential to change unsustainable trajectories need to be nurtured and connected to broad institutional resources and responses. In parallel, institutional entrepreneurs can work to reduce the resilience of dominant institutional systems and position viable shadow alternatives and niche regimes.

show abstract

Section: Tipping Toward Sustainability: Understanding and Supporting mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tipping Toward Sustainability: Emerging Pathways of Transformation

Westley

Olsson

Folke

et al. 2011

AMBIO

755

476

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Breaking robust institutions and moving toward integrated approaches might be very difficult. For example, marine zoning and shifts to ecosystem-based management in the United States have been severely constrained by inflexible institutions, lack of public support, and difficulties developing acceptable legislation (Crowder et al 2006). Despite these difficulties, new integrated management systems, like adaptive co-management of ecosystems are emerging and being institutionalized around the world (Gunderson and Light 2006;Armitage et al 2007;Berkes 2009;Gunningham 2009;Cundill and Fabricius 2010).…”

Section: Ecosystem-based Management and Adaptive Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Reconnecting to the Biosphere

Folke

Jansson

Rockström

et al. 2011

AMBIO

498

320

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humanity has emerged as a major force in the operation of the biosphere, with a significant imprint on the Earth System, challenging social-ecological resilience. This new situation calls for a fundamental shift in perspectives, world views, and institutions. Human development and progress must be reconnected to the capacity of the biosphere and essential ecosystem services to be sustained. Governance challenges include a highly interconnected and faster world, cascading social-ecological interactions and planetary boundaries that create vulnerabilities but also opportunities for social-ecological change and transformation. Tipping points and thresholds highlight the importance of understanding and managing resilience. New modes of flexible governance are emerging. A central challenge is to reconnect these efforts to the changing preconditions for societal development as active stewards of the Earth System. We suggest that the Millennium Development Goals need to be reframed in such a planetary stewardship context combined with a call for a new social contract on global sustainability. The ongoing mind shift in human relations with Earth and its boundaries provides exciting opportunities for societal development in collaboration with the biosphere-a global sustainability agenda for humanity.

show abstract

“…This is more acute in conservation and management that is the product of transdisciplinary collaboration and that requires the appropriate matching of methodological (observational and analytical), ecological, social (i.e., the scale at which people or industry use the resources) and management scales (Edgar et al, 2008;Levin et al, 2014). Mismatches between the natural and social scales have been identified as causes for failures in conservation and management (Crowder et al, 2006;Cumming et al, 2006). Much work remains to fully understand the underpinnings of attempting to match the many different types of scale to produce sound science, better inform decisions, and answer the needs of the different stakeholders.…”

Section: Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

On the Use of Maps and Models in Conservation and Resource Management (Warning: Results May Vary)

Lecours

2017

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation planning and management typically require accurate and spatially explicit data at scales that are relevant for conservation objectives. In marine conservation, these data are often combined with spatial analytical techniques to produce marine habitat maps. While marine habitat mapping is increasingly used to inform conservation efforts, this field is still relatively young and its methods are rapidly evolving. Because conservation efforts do not always specify standards or guidelines for the production of habitat maps, results can vary dramatically. As representations of real environmental characteristics, habitat maps are highly sensitive to how they are produced. In this review paper, I present four concepts that are known to cause variation in spatial representation and prediction of habitats: the methodology used, the quality and scale of the data, and the choice of variables in regards to fitness for use. I then discuss the potential antinomy associated with the use of habitat maps in conservation: while habitat maps have become an invaluable tool to inform and assist decision-making, maps of the same area built using different methods and data may provide dissimilar representations, thus providing different information and possibly leading to different decisions. Exploring the theories and methods that have proved effective in terrestrial conservation and the spatial sciences, and how they can be integrated in marine habitat mapping practices, could help improve maps used to support marine conservation efforts and result in more reliable products to inform conservation decisions. Having a strong, consistent, transparent, repeatable, and science-based protocol for data collection and mapping is essential for effectively supporting decision-makers in developing conservation and management plans. The development of user-friendly tools to assist in the application of such protocol is crucial to a widespread improvement in practices. I discuss the potential to use interactive and collaborative Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to encourage the conservation and management community, from data collectors and mapmakers to decision-makers, to move toward a digital resilience and to develop such science-based protocol. Until standards and protocols are developed, habitat maps should always be interpreted with care, and the methods and metadata associated with their production should always be explicitly stated.

show abstract

Resolving Mismatches in U.S. Ocean Governance

Cited by 353 publications

References 12 publications

Tipping Toward Sustainability: Emerging Pathways of Transformation

Tipping Toward Sustainability: Emerging Pathways of Transformation

Reconnecting to the Biosphere

On the Use of Maps and Models in Conservation and Resource Management (Warning: Results May Vary)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About