Suchergebnisse

Die Biowissenschaften haben in den letzten Jahren einen regelrechten - insbesondere medialen - Boom erfahren. Im Zuge dieses Interesses erlebten auch andere biologische Konzepte wie das der Soziobiologie neue Aufmerksamkeit, obwohl ihre wissenschaftliche Diskussion bereits 20 Jahre zuvor stattfand.Die Studie analysiert erstmalig den Zusammenhang zwischen der internationalen wissenschaftlichen Diskussion und der medialen Darstellung der Soziobiologie in Deutschland. Entgegen dem traditionellen Popularisierungsmodell zeigt dieser Fall, dass Wissenschaft in den Medien keine Abbildung der akademischen Diskussion ist, sondern von kulturellen Rahmenbedingungen geprägt wird.

Der Beitrag untersucht zunächst aus einer theoretischen Perspektive, wie die Rolle wissenschaftlichen Wissens in internationalen Umweltregimen innerhalb verschiedener sozialwissenschaftlicher Disziplinen konzeptualisiert wird. Er geht der grundlegenden Frage nach, ob und in welcher Weise Wissenschaft umweltpolitische Regime beeinflussen oder gar steuern kann. Der Verfasser wirft dabei einen Blick auf die Disziplin der Internationalen Beziehungen (IB) und exploriert deren Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten mit Konzepten der "Science and Technology Studies" (STS) zur Ko-Produktion von Wissenschaft und Politik. Ziel dieser vergleichenden Analyse ist die Klärung der Frage, was die STS zu den theoretischen Arbeiten der IB und deren Konzeption von wissenschaftlicher Expertise in politischen Prozessen beitragen kann. Vor diesem Hintergrund wird die Implementierung von Wissenschaft im politischen System des europäischen Fischereisektors betrachtet. Eine Beschreibung des Verhandlungsprozesses zur Quotenregelung von Ostseedorsch illustriert beispielhaft die vorangegangenen theoretischen Erörterungen. (ICE2)

AbstractSmall‐scale fisheries and coastal communities experienced dramatic downward trends over recent decades impacting rural development on European coastlines. Fisheries governance in the European Union (EU) follows exogenous top‐down regulations steering fishing practices through detailed regulations. In contrast, the EU's structural funding system of Fisheries Local Action Groups (FLAGs) involves an endogenous approach consisting of more participatory bottom‐up processes. This article explores these approaches by investigating the capacity of Swedish FLAGs to support small‐scale fisheries and coastal communities. Using document analyses and interviews, we show that, in principle, the FLAG approach has the capacity to support local fisheries developments and to foreground small‐scale fisheries interests in combination with community interests. However, the unique Swedish FLAG experience reveals a diminished scope for including small‐scale fisheries' and coastal communities' interests on a structural basis. The Swedish FLAG experience, we conclude, mirrors a path‐dependent trajectory of marginalisation and disempowerment of local fisheries interests hampering the potential of endogenous development.

Globally, the EU plays a leading role in combating illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing activities. Specifically, the EU exercises normative power to influence regulatory strategies and governing frameworks in third countries. In 2015, the EU issued Thailand a yellow card, indicating that economic sanctions would be implemented unless IUU fishing practices were eliminated. Concurrently, revelations about 'modern slavery' in Thailand's fishing industry had received international attention, through media and NGOs, exposing slavery-like practices among migrant fishworkers. Conventionally, the EU's IUU policy addresses only issues of catch and environmental sustainability. This paper explores how an initial bilateral dialogue was bifurcated into two dialogues: a Fishery Dialogue and a Labour Dialogue. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with involved actors, expert opinions, field-visits and secondary documents, we ask: How were labour issues integrated into the bilateral dialogue, and what consequences emerged from the IUU policy for Thai fisheries management? Tracing the bilateral dialogue between EU and Thai governments, we argue that Thailand's fisheries reform was a result of both fisheries' sustainability concerns and the kind of labour rights valued by the EU. Our Normative Power Europe approach shows how norms of labour rights shaped the reform through policies and implementation. We maintain that this unique case-study reveals how the EU incorporates a broad-based normative approach that goes beyond catch sustainability.

The protection of the Baltic Sea ecosystem is exacerbated by the social, environmental and economic complexities of governing European fisheries. Increased stakeholder participation and knowledge integration are suggested to improve the EU's Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), suffering from legitimacy, credibility and compliance problems. As a result, the CFP was revised in 2002 to involve fisheries representatives, NGOs and other stakeholders through so called Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) in the policy process. We address the RAC's task to incorporate stakeholder knowledge into the EU's fisheries governance system in empirical and theoretical perspectives. Drawing on a four-stage governance concept we subsequently suggest that a basic problem is a mismatch between participation purpose (knowledge inclusion) and the governance stage at which RACs are formally positioned (evaluation of management proposals). We conclude that, if the aim is to broaden the knowledge base of fisheries management, stakeholders need to be included earlier in the governance process.

How science and policy interact has been a major research focus in the International Relations (IR) tradition, using the epistemic community (EC) concept, as well as in the alternative perspective of Science and Technology Studies (STS). Should science be autonomous and as apolitical as possible in order to 'speak truth to power', as suggested by EC or should the inevitable entanglement of science and politics be accepted and embraced so as to make advice more conducive to negotiating the explicit travails of political decision-making as suggested by STS? With this point of departure, we compare similarities and differences between science–policy interactions in the issue areas of eutrophication and fisheries management of the Baltic Sea. To examine how knowledge is mobilised, the concepts of 'uncertainty' and 'coherence' are developed, drawing on both EC and STS thinking. We then reflect on the explanatory value of these approaches in both cases and discuss how a separation of science and policy-making in the pursuit of achieving scientific consensus leads to ineffectual policies. Drawing on STS thinking, we urge for a re-conceptualisation of coherence in order to accommodate a more reflexive practice of science–policy interactions.

Chapter 1. Bridging the Ggap. Experiments in the Heart of the Transition Zone (Mackinson and Holm) -- Chapter 2. Knowledge for Fisheries Governance. Participation, Integration and Institutional Reform (Linke et al) -- Chapter 3. Fishermen and Scientists in the Same Boat. A Story of Collaboration in the UK South Devon Crab Fishery (Pearson, et al.) -- Chapter 4. Getting Choosy About Whitefish in Lake Vättern. Using Participatory Approaches to Improve Fisheries Selectivity (Sandström, et al.) -- Chapter 5. Understanding Fishermen-Scientist Collaboration in Galician Small-Scale Fisheries (NW Spain). Validating a Methodological Toolbox Through a Process-Oriented Approach (Vidal, et al.) -- Chapter 6. Information is the Jam of the Western Baltic Herring Sandwich. Bridging Gaps Between Policy, Stakeholders and Science (Clausen, et al.) -- Chapter 7. Aiming for By-Catch. Collaborative Monitoring of Rare and Migratory Species in the Wadden Sea (Wätjen and Ramírez-Monsalve) -- Chapter 8. The Italian Job. Navigating the (Im)perfect Storm of Participatory Fisheries Research in the Northern Adriatic Sea (Raicevich, et al.) -- Chapter 9. Trapped in the TAC Machine. Making a Fisheries Based Indicator System for Coastal Cod in Steigen, Norway (Holm, et al.) -- Chapter 10. When Fishermen Take Charge. The Development of a Management Plan for the Red Shrimp Fishery in Mediterranean Spain (Bjørkan, et al.) -- Chapter 11. Does Slow-Burn Collaboration Deliver Results? Towards Collaborative Development Multiannual Multispecies Management Plans in North Sea Mixed Demersal Fisheries (Mackinson, et al.) -- Chapter 12. Action Research in Tropical Tuna Purse Seine Fisheries. Thoughts and Perspectives (Airaud, et al.) -- Chapter 13. From Planning for Society to Planning with Society. Integration of Coastal Fisheries into the Maritime Spatial Planning (Aps, et al.) -- Chapter 14. Implementing the Landing Obligation. An Analysis of the Gap Between Fishers and Policy Makers in the Netherlands (Kraan and Verweij) -- Chapter 15. Taking the Initiative on Maltese Trawl Industry Management. Industry and Science Collaboration on Identifying Nursery and Spawning Areas for Trawl Fisheries Target Species (Martin) -- Chapter 16. People, Sharks and Science. What can it take for Industry-led Research to make a Difference to the Management of Elasmobranchs of Conservation Concern in UK waters? (Hetherington and Bendall) -- Chapter 17. Bridging Gaps, Reforming Fisheries (Holm, et al.) -- Chapter 18. Conclusion (Mackinson, et al.). .