Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article considers how remoteness, rurality, and local initiatives combine to enable community responses to the threat of fisheries enclosure. Centred on two case studies from a wider portfolio of six cases in Northern Jutland, Denmark and New England, USA, the article presents a narrative of these places based on semi‐structured interviews and participant observation. Thorupstrand, Denmark and Cutler, Maine, USA exemplify communities fighting to retain access to fisheries under enclosure and recognition of this threat. Lacking alternatives due to their geographic and infrastructural isolation, the two cases typify existential fisheries dependence, indicating that they would not be on the map without fishing to sustain them.Their precarious positions compelled many in the communities to act and preserve the fishing industry and culture. Although Thorupstrand and Cutler diverge in their approaches to maintaining fishing access, they collectively speak to the overlooked connection between fisheries management and rural places.

Intro -- Preface -- Contents -- Notes on Contributors -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- List of Boxes -- Part I: Introduction -- 1: Researching People and the Sea-Setting the Scene -- 1.1 Setting the Scene -- 1.2 Methodological Challenges: Key Questions and Themes -- 1.3 Introducing the Book Chapters -- 1.3.1 Experiences from the Field: Adapting Methods, Practices and Reflexivity -- 1.3.2 Windows into Particular Methods: Innovations and Traditions -- 1.3.3 Translating Across Disciplines and Policy -- 1.4 Final Remarks -- References -- Part II: Experiences from the Field: Adapting Methods, Practices and Reflexivity -- 2: Naked Methodology: Baring It All for a Realistic Account of Marine Social Science -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Evolution from Mixed Methods to Qualitative Macroethnography -- 2.2.1 The Initial Mixed Methods Research Design -- 2.2.2 Applying the FSA: Realizations in the Field -- 2.2.3 Rather Than Saw Off Your Foot, Get New Shoes: Adopting a Multi-case Ethnographic Approach -- 2.3 Post-hoc Reflections -- 2.3.1 Pressure to Prove Methodological Bilingualism -- 2.3.2 Methodological Bricolage -- 2.3.3 Concealing Imperfections Obscures Insights -- 2.3.4 A Reflexive Approach to Researching Coastal Communities -- 2.4 Conclusion -- References -- 3: Attending to the Rhythms of the Sea, Place and Gendered Cultures in Interviewing Fishers and Fishing Families -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 Getting Access and Fitting in with the Rhythms of Fishing -- 3.3 Interview Emplacements and Social Dynamics -- 3.4 Getting Access to the Stories of Women -- 3.5 Fishing Families and Group Interview Dynamics -- 3.6 Sensitive Topics and Ethical Interviewing -- 3.7 Positionality and Outsiderness -- 3.8 Conclusion -- References -- 4: Towards an Ethic of Care Within Fisheries Social Research -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Background.

This article analyses three different cases of assisted marine restoration in Europe to understand how governance and legal aspects enable or constrain marine restoration in practice. The aim of this article is to enhance understanding of the enabling and constraining conditions of the governance of marine ecological restoration. To understand the governance of marine restoration, we use the concepts of governance arrangement and institutionalization. A marine restoration governance arrangement consists of different coalitions of public and private actors, who—through their different ways of conceptualizing and understanding the problem (discourses)—try to influence and design the marine restoration activities and initiatives, the managing of often shared, limited resources, and defining rules of the game (on different levels). Institutionalization refers to the production and reproduction of governance arrangements. This article gives insight in the governance arrangements of three cases: artificial habitat as in the Rigs‐to‐Reefs debate, in the context of North Sea oil and gas decommissioning, and restoration of key sedimentary and hard natural habitats of the fan mussel (Pinna nobilis) and red coral (Corallium rubrum) cases in the Mediterranean. The analysis shows how discourses shape the arrangements that currently govern the decommissioning of obsolete oil and gas structures in the North Sea, and the protection and management of two emblematic and endangered species in the Mediterranean. Based on the analysis we formulated enabling and constraining conditions for the institutionalization of "active restoration" governance arrangements, resulting in recommendations for how to strengthen restoration in policies and legislation. ; This article analyses three different cases of assisted marine restoration in Europe to understand how governance and legal aspects enable or constrain marine restoration in practice. The aim of this article is to enhance understanding of the enabling and constraining conditions of ...

Coastal and marine cultural heritage (CMCH) is at risk due to its location and its often indefinable value. As these risks are likely to intensify in the future, there is an urgent need to build CMCH resilience. We argue that the current CMCH risk management paradigm narrowly focuses on the present and preservation. This tends to exclude debates about the contested nature of resilience and how it may be achieved beyond a strict preservationist approach. There is a need, therefore, to progress a broader and more dynamic framing of CMCH management that recognises the shift away from strict preservationist approaches and incorporates the complexity of heritage's socio-political contexts. Drawing on critical cultural heritage literature, we reconceptualise CMCH management by rethinking the temporality of cultural heritage. We argue that cultural heritage may exist in four socio-temporal manifestations (extant, lost, dormant, and potential) and that CMCH management consists of three broad socio-political steering processes (continuity, discontinuity, and transformation). Our reconceptualisation of CMCH management is a first step in countering the presentness trap in CMCH management. It provides a useful conceptual framing through which to understand processes beyond the preservationist approach and raises questions about the contingent and contested nature of CMCH, ethical questions around loss and transformation, and the democratisation of cultural heritage management.

Coastal and marine cultural heritage (CMCH) is at risk due to its location and its often indefinable value. As these risks are likely to intensify in the future, there is an urgent need to build CMCH resilience. We argue that the current CMCH risk management paradigm narrowly focuses on the present and preservation. This tends to exclude debates about the contested nature of resilience and how it may be achieved beyond a strict preservationist approach. There is a need, therefore, to progress a broader and more dynamic framing of CMCH management that recognises the shift away from strict preservationist approaches and incorporates the complexity of heritage's socio-political contexts. Drawing on critical cultural heritage literature, we reconceptualise CMCH management by rethinking the temporality of cultural heritage. We argue that cultural heritage may exist in four socio-temporal manifestations (extant, lost, dormant, and potential) and that CMCH management consists of three broad socio-political steering processes (continuity, discontinuity, and transformation). Our reconceptualisation of CMCH management is a first step in countering the presentness trap in CMCH management. It provides a useful conceptual framing through which to understand processes beyond the preservationist approach and raises questions about the contingent and contested nature of CMCH, ethical questions around loss and transformation, and the democratisation of cultural heritage management.