IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/marpol/v52y2015icp155-162.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The interaction triangle as a tool for understanding stakeholder interactions in marine ecosystem based management

Author

Listed:
  • Röckmann, Christine
  • van Leeuwen, Judith
  • Goldsborough, David
  • Kraan, Marloes
  • Piet, Gerjan

Abstract

Expectations about ecosystem based management (EBM) differ due to diverging perspectives about what EBM should be and how it should work. While EBM by its nature requires trade-offs to be made between ecological, economic and social sustainability criteria, the diversity of cross-sectoral perspectives, values, stakes, and the specificity of each individual situation determine the outcome of these trade-offs. The authors strive to raise awareness of the importance of interaction between three stakeholder groups (decision makers, scientists, and other actors) and argue that choosing appropriate degrees of interaction between them in a transparent way can make EBM more effective in terms of the three effectiveness criteria salience, legitimacy, and credibility. This article therefore presents an interaction triangle in which three crucial dimensions of stakeholder interactions are discussed: (A) between decision makers and scientists, who engage in framing to foster salience of scientific input to decision making, (B) between decision makers and other actors, to shape participation processes to foster legitimacy of EBM processes, and (C) between scientists and other actors, who collaborate to foster credibility of knowledge production. Due to the complexity of EBM, there is not one optimal interaction approach; rather, finding the optimal degrees of interaction for each dimension depends on the context in which EBM is implemented, i.e. the EBM objectives, the EBM initiator’s willingness for transparency and interaction, and other context-specific factors, such as resources, trust, and state of knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Röckmann, Christine & van Leeuwen, Judith & Goldsborough, David & Kraan, Marloes & Piet, Gerjan, 2015. "The interaction triangle as a tool for understanding stakeholder interactions in marine ecosystem based management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 155-162.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:52:y:2015:i:c:p:155-162
    DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2014.10.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X14002814
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.marpol.2014.10.019?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raakjær Nielsen, Jesper & Mathiesen, Christoph, 2003. "Important factors influencing rule compliance in fisheries lessons from Denmark," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 409-416, September.
    2. Huutoniemi, Katri & Klein, Julie Thompson & Bruun, Henrik & Hukkinen, Janne, 2010. "Analyzing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 79-88, February.
    3. Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy in earth system governance: A research framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1856-1864, September.
    4. Jones, P.J.S., 2009. "Equity, justice and power issues raised by no-take marine protected area proposals," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 759-765, September.
    5. Clark, William C., et al., 2010. "Toward a General Theory of Boundary Work: Insights from the CGIAR's Natural Resource Management Programs," Working Paper Series rwp10-035, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Hessels, Laurens K. & van Lente, Harro, 2008. "Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 740-760, May.
    7. Aarti Gupta, 2010. "Transparency in Global Environmental Governance: A Coming of Age?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 10(3), pages 1-9, August.
    8. Curtin, Richard & Prellezo, Raúl, 2010. "Understanding marine ecosystem based management: A literature review," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 821-830, September.
    9. Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy: An analytical challenge for earth system governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1854-1855, September.
    10. van Noordwijk, Meine & Dickson, Nancy M. & Catacutan, Delia & Guston, David & McNie, Elizabeth & Tomich, Thomas P. & Clark, William C., 2010. "Toward a General Theory of Boundary Work: Insights from the CGIAR’s Natural Resource Management Programs," Scholarly Articles 4450046, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    11. Jentoft, Svein & Chuenpagdee, Ratana, 2009. "Fisheries and coastal governance as a wicked problem," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 553-560, July.
    12. Cash, David & Clark, William & Alcock, Frank & Dickson, Nancy & Eckley, Noelle & Jager, Jill, 2002. "Salience, Credibility, Legitimacy and Boundaries: Linking Research, Assessment and Decision Making," Working Paper Series rwp02-046, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    13. Laurens K. Hessels & Harro van Lente, 2008. "Re-thinking knowledge production: a literature review and a research agenda," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-03, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.
    14. Ounanian, K. & Delaney, A. & Raakjær, J. & Ramirez-Monsalve, P., 2012. "On unequal footing: Stakeholder perspectives on the marine strategy framework directive as a mechanism of the ecosystem-based approach to marine management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 658-666.
    15. Kraan, Marloes & Hendriksen, Astrid & van Hoof, Luc & van Leeuwen, Judith & Jouanneau, Charlène, 2014. "How to dance? The tango of stakeholder involvement in marine governance research," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PB), pages 347-352.
    16. Ragnar Lofstedt & Frederic Bouder & Jamie Wardman & Sweta Chakraborty, 2011. "The changing nature of communication and regulation of risk in Europe," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 409-429, April.
    17. Espinosa-Romero, Maria J. & Chan, Kai M.A. & McDaniels, Timothy & Dalmer, Denise M., 2011. "Structuring decision-making for ecosystem-based management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 575-583, September.
    18. Eugene B. Skolnikoff, 2008. "The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics – By Roger A. Pielke, Jr," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 25(1), pages 71-73, January.
    19. de Vos, Birgit I. & Mol, Arthur P.J., 2010. "Changing trust relations within the Dutch fishing industry: The case of National Study Groups," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 887-895, September.
    20. Andreas Klinke & Marion Dreyer & Ortwin Renn & Andrew Stirling & Patrick Van Zwanenberg, 2006. "Precautionary Risk Regulation in European Governance," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 373-392, June.
    21. Raakjaer, Jesper & Leeuwen, Judith van & Tatenhove, Jan van & Hadjimichael, Maria, 2014. "Ecosystem-based marine management in European regional seas calls for nested governance structures and coordination—A policy brief," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PB), pages 373-381.
    22. Richard G. Peters & Vincent T. Covello & David B. McCallum, 1997. "The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 43-54, February.
    23. Röckmann, Christine & Ulrich, Clara & Dreyer, Marion & Bell, Ewen & Borodzicz, Edward & Haapasaari, Päivi & Hauge, Kjellrun Hiis & Howell, Daniel & Mäntyniemi, Samu & Miller, David & Tserpes, George &, 2012. "The added value of participatory modelling in fisheries management – what has been learnt?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 1072-1085.
    24. de Vos, Birgit I. & van Tatenhove, Jan P.M., 2011. "Trust relationships between fishers and government: New challenges for the co-management arrangements in the Dutch flatfish industry," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 218-225, March.
    25. Mahon, Robin & Fanning, Lucia & McConney, Patrick, 2009. "A governance perspective on the large marine ecosystem approach," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 317-321, March.
    26. Tallis, Heather & Levin, Phillip S. & Ruckelshaus, Mary & Lester, Sarah E. & McLeod, Karen L. & Fluharty, David L. & Halpern, Benjamin S., 2010. "The many faces of ecosystem-based management: Making the process work today in real places," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 340-348, March.
    27. Murawski, Steven A., 2007. "Ten myths concerning ecosystem approaches to marine resource management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 681-690, November.
    28. van Leeuwen, Judith & van Hoof, Luc & van Tatenhove, Jan, 2012. "Institutional ambiguity in implementing the European Union Marine Strategy Framework Directive," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 636-643.
    29. Kevin Currey & Susan Clark, 2010. "Roger A. Pielke, Jr., The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 43(1), pages 95-98, March.
    30. Pomeroy, Robert & Douvere, Fanny, 2008. "The engagement of stakeholders in the marine spatial planning process," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 816-822, September.
    31. Cecilia Ferreyra & Phil Beard, 2007. "Participatory evaluation of collaborative and integrated water management: Insights from the field," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(2), pages 271-296.
    32. Jentoft, Svein, 2000. "Legitimacy and disappointment in fisheries management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 141-148, March.
    33. Mikalsen, Knut H. & Jentoft, Svein, 2001. "From user-groups to stakeholders? The public interest in fisheries management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 281-292, July.
    34. Verweij, M.C. & van Densen, W.L.T. & Mol, A.J.P., 2010. "The tower of Babel: Different perceptions and controversies on change and status of North Sea fish stocks in multi-stakeholder settings," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 522-533, May.
    35. Stelzenmüller, Vanessa & Vega Fernández, Tomás & Cronin, Katherine & Röckmann, Christine & Pantazi, Maria & Vanaverbeke, Jan & Stamford, Tammy & Hostens, Kris & Pecceu, Ellen & Degraer, Steven & Buhl-, 2015. "Assessing uncertainty associated with the monitoring and evaluation of spatially managed areas," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 151-162.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dick, Jan & Turkelboom, Francis & Woods, Helen & Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Bezák, Peter & Mederly, Peter & Leone, Michael & Verheyden, Wim & Kelemen, Eszter & H, 2018. "Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 552-565.
    2. Gonzalo Rodríguez-Rodríguez & Hugo M. Ballesteros & Helena Martínez-Cabrera & Raúl Vilela & María Grazia Pennino & José María Bellido, 2021. "On the Role of Perception: Understanding Stakeholders’ Collaboration in Natural Resources Management through the Evolutionary Theory of Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-11, March.
    3. Sander Van den Burg & Marian Stuiver & Jenny Norrman & Rita Garção & Tore Söderqvist & Christine Röckmann & Jan-Joost Schouten & Ole Petersen & Raul Guanche García & Pedro Diaz-Simal & Mark De Bel & L, 2016. "Participatory Design of Multi-Use Platforms at Sea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Shephard, Samuel & van Hal, Ralf & de Boois, Ingeborg & Birchenough, Silvana N.R. & Foden, Jo & O’Connor, Joey & Geelhoed, Steve C.V. & Van Hoey, Gert & Marco-Rius, Francisco & Reid, David G. & Schabe, 2015. "Making progress towards integration of existing sampling activities to establish Joint Monitoring Programmes in support of the MSFD," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 105-111.
    5. Livia Fritz & Claudia R. Binder, 2018. "Participation as Relational Space: A Critical Approach to Analysing Participation in Sustainability Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-29, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. van Leeuwen, Judith & Raakjaer, Jesper & van Hoof, Luc & van Tatenhove, Jan & Long, Ronán & Ounanian, Kristen, 2014. "Implementing the Marine Strategy Framework Directive: A policy perspective on regulatory, institutional and stakeholder impediments to effective implementation," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PB), pages 325-330.
    2. van Hoof, Luc, 2015. "Fisheries management, the ecosystem approach, regionalisation and the elephants in the room," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 20-26.
    3. Raakjær, Jesper & van Tatenhove, Jan, 2014. "Marine governance of European Seas: Introduction," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PB), pages 323-324.
    4. Brennan, Jonathon & Fitzsimmons, Clare & Gray, Tim & Raggatt, Laura, 2014. "EU marine strategy framework directive (MSFD) and marine spatial planning (MSP): Which is the more dominant and practicable contributor to maritime policy in the UK?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 359-366.
    5. Hendriksen, Astrid & Jouanneau, Charlène & Koss, Rebecca & Raakjaer, Jesper, 2014. "Fishing for opinions: Stakeholder views on MSFD implementation in European Seas," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PB), pages 353-363.
    6. Teresa Kramarz & Susan Park, 2016. "Accountability in Global Environmental Governance: A Meaningful Tool for Action?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(2), pages 1-21, May.
    7. Peter Arbo & Thuy Pham Thi Thanh, 2014. "The missing link in marine ecosystem-based management," ERSA conference papers ersa14p248, European Regional Science Association.
    8. Heikki Tuomenvirta & Hilppa Gregow & Atte Harjanne & Sanna Luhtala & Antti Mäkelä & Karoliina Pilli-Sihvola & Sirkku Juhola & Mikael Hildén & Pirjo Peltonen-Sainio & Ilkka T. Miettinen & Mikko Halonen, 2019. "Identifying Policy Actions Supporting Weather-Related Risk Management and Climate Change Adaptation in Finland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-15, July.
    9. Jouanneau, Charlène & Raakjær, Jesper, 2014. "‘The Hare and the Tortoise’: Lessons from Baltic Sea and Mediterranean Sea governance," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PB), pages 331-338.
    10. Louis Celliers & Dianne Scott & Mvuselelo Ngcoya & Susan Taljaard, 2021. "Negotiation of knowledge for coastal management? Reflections from a transdisciplinary experiment in South Africa," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    11. de Vos, B.I. & Döring, R. & Aranda, M. & Buisman, F.C. & Frangoudes, K. & Goti, L. & Macher, C. & Maravelias, C.D. & Murillas-Maza, A. & van der Valk, O. & Vasilakopoulos, P., 2016. "New modes of fisheries governance: Implementation of the landing obligation in four European countries," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-8.
    12. Francesco Giovanni Avallone & Alberto Quagli & Paola Ramassa, 2022. "Interdisciplinary research by accounting scholars: An exploratory study," FINANCIAL REPORTING, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2022(2), pages 5-34.
    13. Leimona, Beria & Lusiana, Betha & van Noordwijk, Meine & Mulyoutami, Elok & Ekadinata, Andree & Amaruzaman, Sacha, 2015. "Boundary work: Knowledge co-production for negotiating payment for watershed services in Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 45-62.
    14. Raasch, Christina & Lee, Viktor & Spaeth, Sebastian & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2013. "The rise and fall of interdisciplinary research: The case of open source innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1138-1151.
    15. Kraan, Marloes & Hendriksen, Astrid & van Hoof, Luc & van Leeuwen, Judith & Jouanneau, Charlène, 2014. "How to dance? The tango of stakeholder involvement in marine governance research," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PB), pages 347-352.
    16. Adam Bumpus & Thu-Ba Huynh & Sophie Pascoe, 2019. "Making REDD+ Transparent: Opportunities for MobileTechnology," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 19(4), pages 85-117, November.
    17. Park, Mi Sun & Lee, Hyowon, 2019. "Accountability and reciprocal interests of bilateral forest cooperation under the global forest regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 32-44.
    18. Julia Olmos‐Peñuela & Paul Benneworth & Elena Castro‐Martínez, 2015. "Exploring the factors related with scientists’ willingness to incorporating external knowledge," CHEPS Working Papers 201504, University of Twente, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS).
    19. A. E. Rodríguez Salazar & M. A. Domínguez-Crespo & A. M. Torres-Huerta & A. I. Licona-Aguilar & A. Nivón-Pellón & V. N. Orta-Guzmán, 2021. "Analysis of the Dynamical Capabilities into the Public Research Institutes to Their Strategic Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-22, June.
    20. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:52:y:2015:i:c:p:155-162. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.