Transparent and consistent? Aquaculture impact assessments and trade-offs in coastal zone planning in Norway

Mikkelsen, Eirik; Sørdahl, Patrick Berg; Solås, Ann-Magnhild

doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106150

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In recognition of this issue, farms that fulfil strict criteria regarding lice levels and anti‐lice treatments have been allowed to expand capacity regardless of the traffic light colour designation of the production zone where they are located. Still, concerns over fairness can undermine both the regulatory system and its legitimacy amongst all stakeholders and the wider public 131,135 ; this issue is also relevant to the spatial planning of potential aquaculture areas 99 . In spatial planning, fairness requires consistency in decisions, with the same rules applied to all.…”

Section: Review Of Research Articles and Academic Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using examples of Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) in Norway, Mikkelsen et al 99 showed that it can be difficult to ensure consistency in decision rules as local values on use of an area will vary, and decision‐makers may interpret such values differently depending on their experience and familiarity with the location. External consultants with little connection to an area may be more consistent in applying decision rules in the SEA, but the decisions may not reflect the values of the community 99 . So even if a decision appears to be consistent and fair on paper, if local values are not sufficiently considered the local community may feel disenfranchised, and their trust in the planning process may be reduced.…”

Section: Review Of Research Articles and Academic Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This has in some cases been found to depend on peoples' perceptions about the fairness of distribution of benefits and burdens from industry activities, about the governance system, and the communication and relationship between industry actors and society (e.g., Sinner et al 98 ). Measures to increase the legitimacy of the governance system 99 then can be relevant. It could also be that lack of information or misperceptions are behind views and expectations.…”

Section: Review Of Research Articles and Academic Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Still, concerns over fairness can undermine both the regulatory system and its legitimacy amongst all stakeholders and the wider public 131 , 135 ; this issue is also relevant to the spatial planning of potential aquaculture areas. 99 In spatial planning, fairness requires consistency in decisions, with the same rules applied to all. Using examples of Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) in Norway, Mikkelsen et al 99 showed that it can be difficult to ensure consistency in decision rules as local values on use of an area will vary, and decision‐makers may interpret such values differently depending on their experience and familiarity with the location.…”

Section: Review Of Research Articles and Academic Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Planning and licensing for marine aquaculture

Falconer

Cutajar

Krupandan

et al. 2023

Reviews in Aquaculture

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine aquaculture has the potential to increase its contribution to the global food system and provide valuable ecosystem services, but appropriate planning, licensing and regulation systems must be in place to enable sustainable development. At present, approaches vary considerably throughout the world, and several national and regional investigations have highlighted the need for reforms if marine aquaculture is to fulfil its potential. This article aims to map and evaluate the challenges of planning and licensing for growth of sustainable marine aquaculture. Despite the range of species, production systems and circumstances, this study found a number of common themes in the literature; complicated and fragmented approaches to planning and

show abstract

Section: Review Of Research Articles and Academic Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of Research Articles and Academic Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of Research Articles and Academic Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of Research Articles and Academic Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Planning and licensing for marine aquaculture

Falconer

Cutajar

Krupandan

et al. 2023

Reviews in Aquaculture

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research has primarily examined the post hoc substantive tradeoffs between conservation or ecosystem services and development or well-being that arise from conservation development initiatives, many explored as case studies and at the local scale (Gill et al, 2019;Howe et al, 2014). Relatively little research has interrogated the uptake of trade-off thinking and tools in conservation development decision-making a priori, including whether and when process and substantive trade-offs are identified and how they are managed by practitioners (Mikkelsen et al, 2022;Wiréhn et al, 2020). In this article, we explore the perspectives and experiences of practitioners conservation development, decision-making, justice, marine governance, trade-offs the coastal marine environment is under immense pressure from multiple and competing human needs and uses, including fisheries, settlement expansion, tourism, conservation, science and recreation (Burke et al, 2006;Christie et al, 2016;Fidelman et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Practitioner approaches to trade‐off decision‐making in marine conservation development

Fortnam,

Chaigneau,

Evans

et al. 2023

People and Nature

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mounting evidence suggests that win‐wins are elusive and trade‐offs are the norm in marine conservation development practice. The status quo involves trade‐offs, and any change brought to ecosystems, economies and societies will alter the distribution of costs and benefits, creating other winners and losers among ecosystem services, sectors and people. While studies are increasingly acknowledging the prevalence of trade‐offs, this article analyses how practitioners working for conservation development agencies consider, facilitate and make trade‐off decisions a priori and post hoc when designing and implementing marine conservation development programmes in Southeast Asia. We find that these practitioners recognize both substantive trade‐offs, which are diverse social and ecological trade‐offs resulting from their programmes, and process trade‐offs, related to how they design programmes, including between their prioritization of different locations; between strategic relationships; and between the efficacy, equity and sustainability of projects. Existing decision support tools only capture a limited range of substantive (mainly ecological) trade‐offs, however, and are not widely used. Typically, social trade‐offs are not systematically assessed. Instead, they are implicitly identified by participants and beneficiaries voicing their concerns during consultation processes. Importantly, whether a trade‐off is then deemed acceptable is not determined through transparent assessment of trade‐offs and principles of equity or justice but by the uneven political power of stakeholders to project their values in decision‐making processes. The article concludes that practitioners should facilitate inclusive, transparent and systematic identification and deliberation of the social acceptability of multidimensional trade‐offs, and formulate response options to avoid or minimize adverse consequences. Tackling trade‐offs in this way has the potential to make invisible trade‐offs visible and improve the sustainability and legitimacy of marine conservation development programmes while promoting the interests of the most marginalized in efforts to achieve the sustainable development goals. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

show abstract