Mechanisms of power in Marine Spatial Planning processes Paulina Ramírez-Monsalve & Jan P.M. van Tatenhove
In the EU setting, Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) is portrayed as providing a framework for arbitrating between competing human activities and managing their impact on the marine environment. However, MSP cannot be considered a neutral or objective instrument to decide about conflicting claims between different maritime sectors and activities. MSP is a complicated process –far from neutral, and the power struggles between stakeholders and between stakeholders and planning authorities need to be explicitly addressed before marine space use can be effectively and justly planned. Having as starting point a desk study of the relevant literature, this paper aims to elaborate on a typology of power which gives insight in the mechanisms of power used by stakeholders and planning authorities in marine spatial planning arrangements. Having an awareness and an understanding of the dynamics of power in marine planning processes could contribute to an understanding of democratic decision-making processes and the distribution of benefits (equity) derived from marine resources. MSP should indeed provide opportunities for the “weak” stakeholders, instead of providing opportunities for the already powerful stakeholders to secure their interests.
Use of participant involvement tools and methods in MSP – experiences from the Baltic Sea Region Søren Qvist Eliasen, Andrea Morf, Lise Schrøder, Hanna Luhtala & Kira Gee.
In Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) processes, stakeholder involvement is increasingly seen as important for various reasons. The EU even considers stakeholders being at the heart of MSP. Stakeholders contribute with their specific knowledge and needs and give input for prioritising and identification of future needs. Stakeholder involvement also legitimises planning processes and decisions made and is thereby a part of good governance and social sustainability. Stakeholder involvement is though a delicate matter; why involve stakeholders and when – e.g. at which stages at the planning process? In line with the categorisation in the ladder of participation, we can then ask what type of involvement for which purpose, who to involve and finally how to do the involvement in practice. Planning processes vary from local to cross-border, consequently, the scope and breadth of stakeholder involvement varies considerably. This article will evaluate experiences of stakeholder involvement from ongoing MSP processes in several Baltic Sea Countries, particularly in the PanBalticScope and the BONUS BASMATI projects. The empirical basis is surveys among national civil servants responsible for the MSP processes and stakeholder involvement, individual follow up interviews and observation from stakeholder events. This provides a basis for critical overview of when stakeholders have been involved in the planning processes, at which stages and with which purpose, referring to an analytic framework of the ladder of MSP participation. The data further provides information about specific tools and methods used in the processes and an early evaluation of these. A specific focus is on the use, acceptance and limitations (technical, user-acceptance, legal restrictions etc.) of Spatial Decision Support Tools. As such the article provides an overview of practical experiences with stakeholder involvement in the Baltic Sea Region and experiences of which tools and methods worked well and what were experienced obstacles in planning processes.
Actor Engagement and Exploring Stakeholders Perspectives in Transnational Marine Spatial Planning Malena Ripken, Xander Keijser, Thomas Klenke & Igor Mayer
Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) has become increasingly important in recent years and, as such, has attained significant interest among the international community. MSP and related marine policy and governance have been characterized by a diversity of approaches and a lack of transnational cooperation. Nevertheless, MSP can and should be considered a societal process to balance conflicting interests of maritime stakeholders and the marine environment. The identification of mismatches and synergies, with the goal of creating a coherent and coordinated process at European Sea basins, is therefore essential. Various normative frameworks on EU, as well as national and regional levels have characterized the North Sea for many years. The ‘Q Methodology’ combines quantitative and qualitative research characteristics, exploring and identifying ‘viewpoints’ of actors. This study used the ‘Q Methodology’ approach to elicit qualitative subjective data from respondents about their values as means of producing statistically valid results. Additionally, the ‘Living Q’ method has been developed as a dialogue approach to systematically expand actors’ awareness in regards to their viewpoints in an interactive, communicative and playful environment. Furthermore, it has been developed as an advancement of the ‘Q Methodology’. With the participation and cooperation of international expert’s groups from European sea basins, we were able to successfully implement and observe the pillars of the ‘Living Q’ method in action. Results from these ‘Living Q’ exercises demonstrate that this method is capable of fostering communication and interaction among participating actors, while at the same time potentially generating added value to planning processes by stakeholder/actor interaction in a collaborative setting.
