Suchergebnisse

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are an increasingly important tool for sustainable marine governance. However, their effectiveness is improved if designed to consider how people value and interact with coasts and marine resources designated for protection. This research critically examines the different perceptions of stakeholders towards the rezoning of Africa's oldest MPA, the Tsitsikamma National Park (TNP) MPA. In South Africa, MPAs created prior to 1994 under the Apartheid regime disregarded local communities' rights to the coast and in some cases removed or restricted access, with no consultation. In December 2016 the TNP MPA was rezoned from a 'no-take' MPA to a partially open protected area with the aim of readdressing historical exclusion and to provide managed access and benefits to adjacent communities. This thesis explores the perceptions of different stakeholders to the rezoning process and the underlying values, worldviews and beliefs that influence these perceptions. The research also examines the nature of participation in the rezoning process, including issues of representation, trust and legitimacy. Data collection is based primarily on 55 semi structured key informant interviews from the nine different communities adjacent to the Tsitsikamma MPA, scientists, NGO and government officials, as well as a focus group with eight representatives from South African National Parks. Data sources are supplemented with census and mapping information, field observations and a participatory film project. Findings from this research identified and examined the diverse perceptions of stakeholders about the re-zoning and highlighted how different groups have very different perceptions about the benefits of the rezoning for either marine conservation objectives or community economic, livelihood and wellbeing aspirations. What emerged clearly was that perceptions are influenced by values, worldviews and beliefs and that failure to recognize and incorporate these perceptions in planning, discussions and decision-making leads to ongoing contestation and conflict. The research thus highlights the challenge of balancing community rights and needs with conservation goals in a rapidly changing marine context, and highlights that understanding different perceptions and values that underlie these perceptions and providing the space to allow these different views to be shared is important for collaborative governance of MPAs in South Africa. Based on an enhanced understanding of perceptions, recommendations are made regarding the importance of recognizing and incorporating perceptions in planning and decision-making and promoting greater participation in governance.

In this perspective paper, we aim to provide insights that can help academic institutions and transdisciplinary doctoral programs position themselves within a changing research landscape and prepare for future disruption. We are a group of eight first-year, transdisciplinary doctoral students at the University of Waterloo, representing diverse disciplinary perspectives and gender and cultural experiences. In the process of orienting ourselves as sustainability researchers, we conducted collaborative workshops to critically examine our intellectual and disciplinary positionality by reflecting on the question: What will a PhD look like in the future? Amid this process, the coronavirus pandemic happened, causing a major disruption to our research activity and personal lives. What began as a reflective process on doctoral research shifted toward a more substantive and far reaching discussion about disruption and academia. Through our workshops we identified four emerging trends in the domain of sustainability scholarship that are shaping the future of the academic experience: shifts from disciplinarity to transdisciplinarity; researchers as knowledge holders to knowledge brokers; researcher competencies as bounded to boundary-less; and metrics of success as citation impact to societal impact. We also identified three broad trends in the context of academia that were accelerated by the coronavirus pandemic and may be exacerbated by future disruptions: (1) increasing virtualization of research and teaching; (2) increasing need for flexibility of academic structures and processes; and (3) growing economic and socio-political uncertainty. We offer concrete recommendations that encourage doctoral students and programs to play a more fundamental role in solving complex challenges in a disrupted academic and social landscape. We conclude with our vision of the PhD student of the future as one who thrives in transdisciplinary settings, links society and science through knowledge brokering, spans boundaries between multiple epistemologies to communicate and collaborate through uncertainty, and prioritizes societal impact.

In recent decades, scientists and practitioners have increasingly focused on identifying and codifying the best ways to manage activities in marine systems, leading to the development and implementation of concepts such as the social-ecological systems approach, ecosystem-based management, integrated management, marine spatial planning, participatory co-management, and the precautionary approach. To date, these concepts appear as separate entities: they have parallel literature streams; have been applied most often individually in attempts to improve governance and management; and in many ways, seem to be competing for attention. This patchwork of approaches may be hindering effective ocean governance. We propose that desirable features from these frameworks could be woven together to form the basis of more effective and equitable ocean governance arrangements across contexts, sectors, and scales. This article synthesizes the efforts of an IMBeR (Integrated Marine Biosphere Research Project) conference session and working group, that brought together experts in these diverse concepts with the objective of producing a synthesis of how they could be more effectively integrated for improved ocean sustainability outcomes. We reviewed and compared the concepts in terms of (a) the need to achieve a comprehensive suite of sustainability objectives, (b) similarities and differences in their scope, and (c) their place in practical management, policy and regulation. Achieving greater cross-sectoral integration, or a more holistic perspective on management for sustainability is at the core of each concept. All deal with aspects of governance and most, with improved participation in governance. The major differences in the origin and historical application of each concept are reflected in the degree of implicit or explicit focus given to different objectives of sustainability. Overall, the concepts are especially strong for ecological and institutional or governance considerations, moderately strong for economic aspects, and weakest for the social-cultural pillar of full spectrum sustainability. There is no panacea, and no emergent hierarchy among concepts. Some concepts fit better with top-down legislation-based efforts, others with more bottom-up stakeholder driven efforts. The selection of the core concepts for a situation will depend in a large part on which concepts are specified, or demand focus, in the legal and policy context of the situation (or area) of interest. No matter how influential or dominant a single concept might be, pragmatically, different concepts will be used in different areas, and there may always be the need for a combination of concepts and objectives woven together to achieve a cohesive quilt of sustainability. ; Peer reviewed

Substantial efforts and investments are being made to increase the scale and improve the effectiveness of marine conservation globally. Though it is mandated by international law and central to conservation policy, less attention has been given to how to operationalize social equity in and through the pursuit of marine conservation. In this article, we aim to bring greater attention to this topic through reviewing how social equity can be better integrated in marine conservation policy and practice. Advancing social equity in marine conservation requires directing attention to: recognition through acknowledgment and respect for diverse peoples and perspectives; fair distribution of impacts through maximizing benefits and minimizing burdens; procedures through fostering participation in decision-making and good governance; management through championing and supporting local involvement and leadership; the environment through ensuring the efficacy of conservation actions and adequacy of management to ensure benefits to nature and people; and the structural barriers to and institutional roots of inequity in conservation. We then discuss the role of various conservation organizations in advancing social equity in marine conservation and identify the capacities these organizations need to build. We urge the marine conservation community, including governments, non-governmental organizations and donors, to commit to the pursuit of socially equitable conservation.