Societal, policy and academic ‘visions’ for the future of the marine environment and its management, exemplified in the Northern and Western Isles of Scotland.

Abstract

Abstract:Interactions between environmental and social change are complex and require deep insights into human perceptions, values, motivations and choices. Humanities disciplines can bring these insights to the study of marine social-ecological systems in the context of global environmental challenges. Such systems can be defined on a range of scales, but the cases most easily studied include those of small islands and their communities. This paper presents findings from three studies in the Western and Northern isles of Scotland, concentrating on some of the processes involved in social sustainability that contribute on the one hand to protecting what a community has, and on the other hand allowing a community to evolve so as to adapt to new conditions. It relates the several sorts of transformations involved, to the role and impact of external institutions such as those of governance of the natural environment, the energy market, and academic research, which together make up the environment of the transformation. By examining the world-views of different groups of actors, this paper illustrates that an understanding of the mental constructs underlying these world-views can help marine governance through integrating different ways of knowing. This paper identifies where it would be useful to employ a transdisciplinary 'translator' or a 'space' for dialogue in order to capture the diverse 'visions' and perceptions that these groups have in relation to management of the marine environment, where there are synergies and where more should to be done to negotiate between competing values and needs. It illustrates the practical contributions to operational policy that can emerge through challenging the dominant management discourses for the marine environment.

Humanities for the Environment 2018 Report—Ways to Here, Ways Forward

“…Little concludes that grappling with this internal complexity serves to sharpen the focus on disciplinary strengths and weaknesses, and thus clarify the contribution that the humanities can make to societal challenges such as the transition to renewable energy sources to mitigate climate change. Holm et al (2013) join other scholars (e.g., Billing et al 2017;Brennan, forthcoming;Castree et al 2014;Kitch 2017;Nightingale 2014) in arguing for opening up the ways in which 'natural' environments are framed by acknowledging how human value systems, practices, imaginations and identities have shaped them. Yet, the dominant narrative in the environmental policy sphere tends to treat humans and nature as essentially separate by assuming that other-than-human nature can be defined separately from human culture (Billing et al 2017;Brechin et al 2002;Peterson et al 2010).…”

“…It offers strategies for expanding stakeholder engagement, and draws attention to power dynamics and inequalities that underpin problems and shape their solutions. It joins Billing, Tett, Brennan and Miller (Billing et al 2017) in opening up spaces for co-designing multiple ways forward based on a recognition of alternative values, cultural practices and beliefs. While Kitch charts recent signs of progress towards integrating the environmental humanities and qualitative social sciences into quantitative environmental science research, she also draws attention to the institutional barriers and social and political climate for higher education that limit the radical interdisciplinarity necessary to transform environmental research.…”

“…As such, Murcott clearly argues for an ecocentric worldview that recognises the intrinsic value of nature. Juxtaposing this with Billing, Tett, Brennan and Miller's (Billing et al 2017) contribution illustrates how the humanities and social sciences bring questions of social justice into policy debates by revealing pluralistic worldviews around, for example, the concept of conservation which is generally assumed to be 'good' and development which is often assumed to be detrimental to 'nature'. This paper critiques how the legislation protecting 'nature' (biological diversity under the European Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) in this case) conceptualised the biophysical environment as separate from the human species.…”

“…This inclusive process aligns with a recent EU report which recommends involving citizens through co-design and adopting an impact-focused approach to address global challenges (European Commission 2017). It also reflects the integration of different ways of knowing called for by Billing, Tett, Brennan and Miller (Billing et al 2017) in order to grapple with the complexities of social-ecological systems.…”

“…Ellie Graham, Joanna Hambly and Tom Dawson (Graham et al 2017) show how citizen science can help to provide local coastal users with an awareness of climate change by affording public involvement a central role in strategies to safeguard coastal heritage against erosion, while Suzannah-Lynn Billing, Paul Tett, Ruth Brennan and Raeanne Miller (Billing et al 2017) discuss how integrating different epistemologies of local marine resource users, policymakers and academics in marine management approaches can guide more effective marine governance.…”