IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

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


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


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

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    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. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Aarti Gupta, 2010. "Transparency in Global Environmental Governance: A Coming of Age?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 10(3), pages 1-9, August.
    7. Curtin, Richard & Prellezo, Raúl, 2010. "Understanding marine ecosystem based management: A literature review," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 821-830, September.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Jentoft, Svein & Chuenpagdee, Ratana, 2009. "Fisheries and coastal governance as a wicked problem," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 553-560, July.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. 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.
    22. 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.
    23. 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.
    24. Murawski, Steven A., 2007. "Ten myths concerning ecosystem approaches to marine resource management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 681-690, November.
    25. 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.
    26. 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.
    27. 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.
    28. 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.
    29. Jentoft, Svein, 2000. "Legitimacy and disappointment in fisheries management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 141-148, March.
    30. 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.
    31. 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.
    32. 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 are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. repec:eee:ecoser:v:29:y:2018:i:pc:p:552-565 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. 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, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, January.
    3. 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.
    4. repec:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:2:p:127:d:63129 is not listed on IDEAS


    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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.