Bringing ‘Deep Knowledge’ of Fisheries into Marine Spatial Planning

In marine spatial planning (MSP), the production of knowledge about marine-based activities is fundamental because it informs the process through which policies delineating the use of space are created and maintained. This paper revises our view of knowledge—developed during the mapping and planning processes—as the undisputed factual basis on which policy is developed. Rather, it argues that the construction, management, validation, and marginalisation of different types of knowledge stemming from different stakeholders or disciplinary approaches is at the heart of policy and planning processes. Using the case of fisheries-generated knowledge in the implementation of MSP, we contend that the fisheries data informing the MSP process are still very much streamlined to classical bio-economic metrics. Such metrics fall short of describing the plural and complex knowledges that comprise fisheries, such as localised social and cultural typologies, as well as the scale and dynamics, hence, providing incomplete information for the decision-making process of MSP. In this paper, we provide a way to move towards what we conceptualize as ‘Deep Knowledge’ and propose a model that brings together of the existing datasets and integrates socio-cultural data as well as complex spatiotemporal elements, to create dynamic rather than static datasets for MSP. We furthermore argue that the process of knowledge production and the building of the parameters of such datasets, should be based on effective stakeholder participation, whose futures depend on the plans that eventually result from MSP. Finally, we recommend that the ‘Deep Knowledge’ model is adopted to inform the process of knowledge production currently being undertaken in the diverse countries engaging in the MSP process. This will result in policies that truly reflect and address the complexities that characterise fisheries, and which are legitimized through a process of knowledge co-production.

[1]  Noel Healy,et al.  Exclusion and non-participation in Marine Spatial Planning , 2018 .

[2]  Michel Ferrary,et al.  Les réseaux sociaux à l'aune de la théorie de l'acteur-réseau , 2006 .

[3]  Sophie Bertrand,et al.  Scale-invariant movements of fishermen: the same foraging strategy as natural predators. , 2007, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[4]  O. R. Eigaard,et al.  Bottom trawl fishing footprints on the world’s continental shelves , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[5]  Yvonne Rydin,et al.  Re-Examining the Role of Knowledge Within Planning Theory , 2007 .

[6]  J. Crampton Maps as social constructions: power, communication and visualization , 2001 .

[7]  M. Lopez,et al.  What makes them follow the rules? Empirical evidence from turtle egg harvesters in Costa Rica , 2013 .

[8]  Daniel Pauly,et al.  MAJOR TRENDS IN SMALL-SCALE MARINE FISHERIES, WITH EMPHASIS ON DEVELOPING. COUNTRIES, AND SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR THE SOCIAL SCIENCES , 2006 .

[9]  Exploring fishing dependence in gulf coast communities , 2010 .

[10]  Minghua Zhao,et al.  Introduction: Social and cultural impacts of marine fisheries , 2013 .

[11]  C. Geertz Thick Description: Towards an Interpretive Theory of Culture , 1973 .

[12]  J. Krygier,et al.  An Introduction to Critical Cartography , 2005 .

[13]  B. Morales-Nin,et al.  Small-scale coastal fisheries in European Seas are not what they were: Ecological, social and economic changes , 2016, Marine Policy.

[14]  S. Jentoft,et al.  Exploring the phronetic dimension of stakeholders' knowledge in EU fisheries governance , 2014 .

[15]  Sarah Coulthard,et al.  More than just access to fish: The pros and cons of fisher participation in a customary marine tenure (Padu) system under pressure , 2011 .

[16]  Patrik Jonsson,et al.  Competition for marine space: modelling the Baltic Sea fisheries and effort displacement under spatial restrictions , 2015 .

[17]  Fabrizio Natale,et al.  Defining small-scale fisheries in the EU on the basis of their operational range of activity The Swedish fleet as a case study , 2015 .

[18]  Svein Jentoft,et al.  Small-scale fisheries within maritime spatial planning: knowledge integration and power , 2017 .

[19]  J. A. Fernandes,et al.  Conflict analysis and reallocation opportunities in the framework of marine spatial planning: A novel, spatially explicit Bayesian belief network approach for artisanal fishing and aquaculture , 2018, Marine Policy.

[20]  Sara Irina Fabrikant,et al.  Geovisualization of Dynamics, Movement and Change: Key Issues and Developing Approaches in Visualization Research , 2008, Inf. Vis..

[21]  R. Chuenpagdee,et al.  Aligning the sustainable development goals to the small-scale fisheries guidelines: A case for EU fisheries governance , 2019, Marine Policy.

[22]  B. Trouillet Aligning with dominant interests: The role played by geo-technologies in the place given to fisheries in marine spatial planning , 2019 .

[23]  N. Stenseth,et al.  What is blue growth? The semantics of “Sustainable Development” of marine environments , 2018 .

[24]  A. Begossi,et al.  Fisheries, tourism, and marine protected areas: Conflicting or synergistic interactions? , 2015 .

[25]  Maria Hadjimichael,et al.  A call for a blue degrowth: Unravelling the European Union's fisheries and maritime policies , 2018, Marine Policy.

[26]  T. Schulze,et al.  Integration of fisheries into marine spatial planning: Quo vadis? , 2017 .

[27]  Matthieu Noucher,et al.  Mises en chiffres, mises en cartes, mises en ordre du monde: Pour des approches critiques des métrologies de l’espace , 2019 .

[28]  A. D. Vethaak,et al.  Seasonal variability in irradiance affects herbicide toxicity to the marine flagellate Dunaliella tertiolecta , 2014, Front. Mar. Sci..

[29]  James N. Sanchirico,et al.  Marine spatial planning in practice , 2013 .

[30]  Bernd Resch,et al.  Web-based 4D visualization of marine geo-data using WebGL , 2014 .

[31]  S. Jentoft,et al.  Values, images, and principles: What they represent and how they may improve fisheries governance , 2013 .

[32]  D. Macmillan,et al.  ‘Re-grabbing’ marine resources: a blue degrowth agenda for the resurgence of small-scale fisheries in Malta , 2019, Sustainability Science.

[33]  Peter J S Jones,et al.  Marine spatial planning in reality: Introduction to case studies and discussion of findings , 2016 .

[34]  Stefanie Dühr,et al.  Exploring cartographic representations for spatial planning in Europe , 2007 .

[35]  R. Ackoff From Data to Wisdom , 2014 .

[36]  Robert E. Roth,et al.  Interactive maps: What we know and what we need to know , 2013, J. Spatial Inf. Sci..

[37]  Jonathan Corcoran,et al.  Mapping and measuring place attachment , 2015 .

[38]  Cam Campbell,et al.  The digital workshop: exploring the use of interactive and immersive visualisation tools in participatory planning. , 2009, Journal of environmental management.

[39]  Katsanevakis Stylianos Marios,et al.  Invading the Mediterranean Sea: human-shaped biodiversity patterns , 2014 .

[40]  Timothy F. Smith,et al.  Science into policy? Discourse, coastal management and knowledge , 2014 .

[41]  R. Pomeroy,et al.  The engagement of stakeholders in the marine spatial planning process , 2008 .

[42]  Ol'ga Stepanova,et al.  The relevance of environmental conflict research for coastal management. A review of concepts, approaches and methods with a focus on Europe , 2013 .

[43]  D. Macmillan,et al.  The Contested Commons: The Failure of EU Fisheries Policy and Governance in the Mediterranean and the Crisis Enveloping the Small-Scale Fisheries of Malta , 2018, Front. Mar. Sci..

[44]  Peter J S Jones,et al.  Equity, justice and power issues raised by no-take marine protected area proposals , 2009 .

[45]  M. Coll,et al.  Invading the Mediterranean Sea: biodiversity patterns shaped by human activities , 2014, Front. Mar. Sci..

[46]  I. Ertör,et al.  Political lessons from early warnings: Marine finfish aquaculture conflicts in Europe , 2015 .

[47]  D. Macmillan,et al.  Fishing in a congested sea: What do marine protected areas imply for the future of the Maltese artisanal fleet? , 2017 .

[48]  K. Martin,et al.  The missing layer: Geo-technologies, communities, and implications for marine spatial planning , 2008 .

[49]  Bertram C. Bruce,et al.  Reconceptualizing the role of the user of spatial data infrastructure , 2008 .

[50]  Kilian M. Stehfest,et al.  Mapping fisheries for marine spatial planning: gear-specific vessel monitoring system (VMS), marine conservation and offshore renewable energy , 2014 .

[51]  Andrew A. Rosenberg,et al.  Cumulative Human Impacts on Mediterranean and Black Sea Marine Ecosystems: Assessing Current Pressures and Opportunities , 2013, PloS one.

[52]  M. J. Kraak,et al.  Cartography: Visualization of Geospatial Data , 1996 .

[53]  M. Haklay Neogeography and the Delusion of Democratisation , 2013 .

[54]  L. J. Carton,et al.  Map making and map use in a multi-actor context: Spatial visualizations and frame conflicts in regional policymaking in the Netherlands , 2007 .

[55]  J. Pascual-Fernández,et al.  Marine Protected Areas in the Canary Islands – Improving Their Governability , 2013 .

[56]  P. May,et al.  Compensation for environmental services from artisanal fisheries in SE Brazil: Policy and technical strategies , 2011 .

[57]  Qinhua Fang,et al.  Zoning for a multiple-use marine protected area using spatial multi-criteria analysis: The case of the Sheik Seid Marine National Park in Eritrea , 2016 .

[58]  Regional marine spatial planning – The data collection and mapping process , 2014 .

[59]  Marine spatial planning: risk or opportunity for fisheries in the North Sea? , 2014 .

[60]  B. Trouillet,et al.  More than maps: Providing an alternative for fisheries and fishers in marine spatial planning. , 2019, Ocean & Coastal Management.

[61]  M. Ntona,et al.  Regulating oceanic imaginaries: the legal construction of space, identities, relations and epistemological hierarchies within marine spatial planning , 2020, Maritime Studies.