IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v53y2010i6p701-723.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

'A system that works for the sea'? Exploring Stakeholder Engagement in Marine Spatial Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Heather Ritchie
  • Geraint Ellis

Abstract

This paper aims to contribute to the current debate on Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) by exploring the issue of stakeholder engagement. MSP is an emergent policy field that is subject to an increasing body of research, yet the role, scope and nature of participatory engagement within the process remains a neglected topic. This paper briefly reviews the nature of the 'marine problem', to which MSP is seen to be the response and describes the emergence of MSP policy in the UK with specific emphasis on participatory aspects. Drawing on the experience of terrestrial planning it discusses the potential benefits of stakeholder engagement in MSP and highlights some of the key issues that need to be taken into account when shaping stakeholder input into the process. It then goes on to describe the findings from a series of interviews with key stakeholders in the Irish Sea Region, which suggest that we need to develop a more critical and deeper understanding of how various interests frame the 'marine problem', and how they see their role in shaping the form of the MSP process. This highlights the importance of encouraging stakeholder involvement in MSP, the need to develop a shared vision of a 'sea interest'. Priorities are then set for research to support this important policy agenda.

Suggested Citation

  • Heather Ritchie & Geraint Ellis, 2010. "'A system that works for the sea'? Exploring Stakeholder Engagement in Marine Spatial Planning," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(6), pages 701-723.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:53:y:2010:i:6:p:701-723
    DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2010.488100
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09640568.2010.488100
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640568.2010.488100?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. John F. Forester, 1999. "The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262561220, December.
    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. Ralph V Tafon, 2018. "Taking power to sea: Towards a post-structuralist discourse theoretical critique of marine spatial planning," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(2), pages 258-273, March.
    2. Ranger, S. & Kenter, J.O. & Bryce, R. & Cumming, G. & Dapling, T. & Lawes, E. & Richardson, P.B., 2016. "Forming shared values in conservation management: An interpretive-deliberative-democratic approach to including community voices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 344-357.
    3. Scarff, Gavin & Fitzsimmons, Clare & Gray, Tim, 2015. "The new mode of marine planning in the UK: Aspirations and challenges," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 96-102.
    4. Fred Saunders & Michael Gilek & Anda Ikauniece & Ralph Voma Tafon & Kira Gee & Jacek Zaucha, 2020. "Theorizing Social Sustainability and Justice in Marine Spatial Planning: Democracy, Diversity, and Equity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Flannery, Wesley & O’Hagan, Anne Marie & O’Mahony, Cathal & Ritchie, Heather & Twomey, Sarah, 2015. "Evaluating conditions for transboundary Marine Spatial Planning: Challenges and opportunities on the island of Ireland," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 86-95.
    6. Slater, Anne-Michelle & Irvine, Katherine N & Byg, Anja A. & Davies, Ian M. & Gubbins, Matt & Kafas, Andronikos & Kenter, Jasper & MacDonald, Alison & O'Hara Murray, Rory & Potts, Tavis & Tweddle, Jac, 2020. "Integrating stakeholder knowledge through modular cooperative participatory processes for marine spatial planning outcomes (CORPORATES)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    7. Richard Cowell & Susan Owens, 2010. "Revisiting … Governing Space: Planning Reform and the Politics of Sustainability," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 28(6), pages 952-957, December.
    8. Shucksmith, Rachel J. & Kelly, Christina, 2014. "Data collection and mapping – Principles, processes and application in marine spatial planning," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PA), pages 27-33.
    9. Meng-Tsung Lee & Chin-Cheng Wu & Ching-Hsien Ho & Wen-Hong Liu, 2014. "Towards Marine Spatial Planning in Southern Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-19, November.
    10. David Langlet & Aron Westholm, 2021. "Realizing the Social Dimension of EU Coastal Water Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    11. 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.
    12. Paola Gazzola & Maggie H Roe & Paul J Cowie, 2015. "Marine spatial planning and terrestrial spatial planning: reflecting on new agendas," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(5), pages 1156-1172, October.

    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. E. Melanie DuPuis & Brian J. Gareau, 2008. "Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1212-1229, December.
    2. Makena Coffman & Karen Umemoto, 2010. "The triple-bottom-line: framing of trade-offs in sustainability planning practice," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 597-610, October.
    3. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    4. Primmer, Eeva & Kyllonen, Simo, 2006. "Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 838-853, November.
    5. Liz Barry, 2022. "Community science and the design of climate governance," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-17, April.
    6. Davies-Colley, Christian & Smith, Willie, 2012. "Implementing environmental technologies in development situations: The example of ecological toilets," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-8.
    7. Ahmed Z. Khan & Frank Moulaert & Jan Schreurs & Konrad Miciukiewicz, 2014. "Integrative Spatial Quality: A Relational Epistemology of Space and Transdisciplinarity in Urban Design and Planning," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 393-411, August.
    8. Füg, Franz & Ibert, Oliver, 2020. "Assembling social innovations in emergent professional communities. The case of learning region policies in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 28(3), pages 541-562.
    9. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    10. Peter Munthe-Kaas, 2015. "Agonism and co-design of urban spaces," Urban Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 218-237, July.
    11. Peter Dithan Ntale & Jude Ssempebwa & Badiru Musisi & Genza Gyaviira Musoke & Kimoga Joseph & C. B. Mugimu & Ngoma Muhammed & Joseph Ntayi, 2020. "Gaps in the structuring of organizations in the graduate employment context in Uganda," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Corianne Payton Scally & J. Rosie Tighe, 2015. "Democracy in Action?: NIMBY as Impediment to Equitable Affordable Housing Siting," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 749-769, July.
    13. Derk Jan Stobbelaar, 2020. "Impact of Student Interventions on Urban Greening Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, July.
    14. Patricia Molina Costa, 2014. "From plan to reality: Implementing a community vision in Jackson Square, Boston," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 293-310, September.
    15. Ratka ÄŒolić & Ä orÄ‘e Milić & Jasna Petrić & NataÅ¡a ÄŒolić, 2022. "Institutional capacity development within the national urban policy formation process – Participants’ views," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 40(1), pages 69-89, February.
    16. Einsiedel, Edna F. & Boyd, Amanda D. & Medlock, Jennifer & Ashworth, Peta, 2013. "Assessing socio-technical mindsets: Public deliberations on carbon capture and storage in the context of energy sources and climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 149-158.
    17. Jongwng Ju & Jaecheol Kim, 2023. "Applying the Delphi Approach to Incorporate Voiceless Stakeholders in Community Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    18. repec:lib:000cis:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:26-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Maie Kiisel, 2013. "Local Community Participation in the Planning Process: A Case of Bounded Communicative Rationality," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 232-250, February.
    20. Deborah F. Shmueli, 2017. "Community Plan Making in the Face of Ethnic Conflict in Israel: Lessons for Collaborative Planning Processes," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 83(2), pages 131-144, April.
    21. Peter Wilshusen, 2009. "Social process as everyday practice: the micro politics of community-based conservation and development in southeastern Mexico," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(2), pages 137-162, May.

    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:taf:jenpmg:v:53:y:2010:i:6:p:701-723. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    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.