Suchergebnisse

Human health risks in dealing with floods in a river basin in South-Western Finland are analysed as an example of scientific and practical challenges in systemic adaptation to climate change and in integrated governance of water resources. The analysis is based on case reports and plans, on literature studies and on conceptual models of risks and risk management. Flood risks in the Northern European study area are aggravated by melt- and storm-water runoff, ice jams and coastal flooding. Flood risk assessment is linked with management plans based on EU directives as applied in the case area. National risk management policies and procedures of increasing scope and depth have been devised for climate change, water resources and overall safety, but an integrated approach to health risks is still largely missing. The same is true of surveys of perceived flood risks, and participatory deliberation and collaborative planning procedures for flood risk management in the case area, specifically for adaptive lake regulation. Health impacts, risks and benefits, socio-economic and systemic risks, and over-arching prevention, adaptation and compensation measures are not fully included. We propose a systematic framework for these extensions. Particular attention needs to be given to health risks due to flooding, e.g. from water contamination, moist buildings, mental stress and infrastructure damage and also from management actions. Uncertainties and ambiguities about risks present continuing challenges. It is concluded that health aspects of flooding are complex and need to be better included in assessment and control, to develop more integrated and adaptive systemic risk governance.

The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks. ; publishedVersion ; Peer reviewed

The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks. ; The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. ...

The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks.

The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks. ; Peer reviewed

The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks. ; Peer reviewed