IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/marxiv/nrk2d.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Lyme Bay marine protected area: a governance analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Singer, Rebecca
  • Jones, Peter JS Dr

Abstract

The Marine Protected Area Governance (MPAG) framework can be used to analyse MPA governance by moving away from conceptual discussions to focus on particular governance approaches leading to effectiveness. The framework was applied to the Lyme Bay MPA, southwest England, the site of a controversial fisheries closure, which has subsequently been proposed as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC), as well the location for an NGO-led project focusing on stakeholder engagement. This paper examines a broad range of perspectives on the governance of this MPA, via semi-structured interviews with representatives of different interest groups and document analyses. The MPAG framework found a governance structure with a diversity of incentives, providing for bottom-up stakeholder engagement and awareness-raising coupled with strong top-down legislative structures. Although the fisheries closure and subsequent SAC restrictions have provided the main mechanisms for protecting biodiversity, an NGO-led project has provided a complement to the legislative framework and helped to facilitate a mechanism for adaptive co-management. However, the site is predicted to be subject to external pressures from changes in legislation, state resource restrictions and reduced NGO involvement, which will test the resilience of the structure and whether such a diversity of incentives provides sufficient resilience to maintain MPA effectiveness in the face of these pressures.

Suggested Citation

  • Singer, Rebecca & Jones, Peter JS Dr, 2018. "Lyme Bay marine protected area: a governance analysis," MarXiv nrk2d, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:marxiv:nrk2d
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/nrk2d
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5d8364a2305a6800160ad552/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/nrk2d?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hattam, C.E. & Mangi, S.C. & Gall, S.C. & Rodwell, L.D., 2014. "Social impacts of a temperate fisheries closure: understanding stakeholders' views," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 269-278.
    2. Fleming, D.M. & Jones, P.J.S., 2012. "Challenges to achieving greater and fairer stakeholder involvement in marine spatial planning as illustrated by the Lyme Bay scallop dredging closure," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 370-377.
    3. De Santo, Elizabeth M., 2016. "Assessing public “participation” in environmental decision-making: Lessons learned from the UK Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ) site selection process," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 91-101.
    4. Emma V Sheehan & Timothy F Stevens & Sarah C Gall & Sophie L Cousens & Martin J Attrill, 2013. "Recovery of a Temperate Reef Assemblage in a Marine Protected Area following the Exclusion of Towed Demersal Fishing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Rodwell, Lynda D. & Lowther, Jason & Hunter, Charlotte & Mangi, Stephen C., 2014. "Fisheries co-management in a new era of marine policy in the UK: A preliminary assessment of stakeholder perceptions," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 279-286.
    6. Stevens, T.F. & Sheehan, E.V. & Gall, S.C. & Fowell, S.C. & Attrill, M.J., 2014. "Monitoring benthic biodiversity restoration in Lyme Bay marine protected area: Design, sampling and analysis," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 310-317.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Peckett, Frances J. & Glegg, Gillian A. & Rodwell, Lynda D., 2014. "Assessing the quality of data required to identify effective marine protected areas," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 333-341.
    2. 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.
    3. Tim S. Gray & Thomas L. Catchpole, 2021. "The Relation between Fisheries–Science Partnerships and Co-Management: A Case Study of EU Discards Survival Work," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-19, March.
    4. Antonio Di Cintio & Federico Niccolini & Sara Scipioni & Fabio Bulleri, 2023. "Avoiding “Paper Parks”: A Global Literature Review on Socioeconomic Factors Underpinning the Effectiveness of Marine Protected Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-19, March.
    5. Hattam, C.E. & Mangi, S.C. & Gall, S.C. & Rodwell, L.D., 2014. "Social impacts of a temperate fisheries closure: understanding stakeholders' views," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 269-278.
    6. Nguyen, Minh-Hoang & Vuong, Quan-Hoang, 2020. "Evaluation of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets: The international collaboration trilemma in interdisciplinary research," OSF Preprints 84j76, Center for Open Science.
    7. Daniela Marzo & Iacopo Cavallini & Luisa Scaccia & Paolo Guidetti & Antonio Di Franco & Antonio Calò & Federico Niccolini, 2023. "Drivers of Small-Scale Fishers’ Acceptability across Mediterranean Marine Protected Areas at Different Stages of Establishment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-17, June.
    8. Gormley, Kate S.G. & Hull, Angela D. & Porter, Joanne S. & Bell, Michael C. & Sanderson, William G., 2015. "Adaptive management, international co-operation and planning for marine conservation hotspots in a changing climate," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 54-66.
    9. Rasheed, A. Rifaee, 2020. "Marine protected areas and human well-being – A systematic review and recommendations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    10. Nikoleta Jones & James McGinlay & Andreas Kontoleon & Victoria A. Maguire-Rajpaul & Panayiotis G. Dimitrakopoulos & Vassilis Gkoumas & Jan Åge Riseth & Kalev Sepp & Frank Vanclay, 2022. "Understanding Public Support for European Protected Areas: A Review of the Literature and Proposing a New Approach for Policy Makers," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, May.
    11. Xia Liu & Yejun Xu & Yao Ge & Weike Zhang & Francisco Herrera, 2019. "A Group Decision Making Approach Considering Self-Confidence Behaviors and Its Application in Environmental Pollution Emergency Management," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-15, January.
    12. Lu Feng & Qimei Wu & Weijun Wu & Wenjie Liao, 2020. "Decision-Maker-Oriented VS. Collaboration: China’s Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-24, February.
    13. Stevens, T.F. & Sheehan, E.V. & Gall, S.C. & Fowell, S.C. & Attrill, M.J., 2014. "Monitoring benthic biodiversity restoration in Lyme Bay marine protected area: Design, sampling and analysis," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 310-317.
    14. Rees, Siân E. & Mangi, Stephen C. & Hattam, Caroline & Gall, Sarah C. & Rodwell, Lynda D. & Peckett, Frankie J. & Attrill, Martin J., 2015. "The socio-economic effects of a Marine Protected Area on the ecosystem service of leisure and recreation," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 144-152.
    15. Hynes, Stephen & Gerritsen, Hans & Breen, Benjamin & Johnson, Mark, 2015. "Fishing site choice modelling using Vessel Monitoring System data," Working Papers 262592, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:osf:marxiv:nrk2d. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://marxiv.org .

    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.