Advertisement

Maritime Studies

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 295–304 | Cite as

The transformation of the oceans and the future of marine social science

  • Peter Arbo
  • Maaike Knol
  • Sebastian Linke
  • Kevin St. Martin
Original Paper
  • 108 Downloads

Abstract

The oceans have become a juncture of great visions of blue growth as well as strong environmental concern. This paper discusses the essential role of the social sciences as the oceans increasingly emerge as a contested social arena. The marine social sciences have generated a vast knowledge about the development of fisheries and the implications of fisheries policies on coastal communities. We review this heritage and show that it makes the marine social sciences well qualified to address contemporary challenges raised by the increasing ambitions of exploiting and conserving the world’s oceans. However, with the current transformation of the oceans as sites of comprehensive industrialization, captured in the concept of blue growth, we argue that marine social scientists need to rethink their research objectives. This requires a reflection on the lessons learned from decades of engagement with fisheries and fisheries policy to understand and intervene in processes and practices of modernization, science-based management, and privatization of resources. We suggest how the marine social sciences can provide new knowledge and actively engage in current developments by studying emergent processes in the marine environment, and the institutions, practices, and discourses that shape them. The social sciences have a responsibility to contribute to growth and conservation issues, and are in the capacity to do so, through formulating governance alternatives, anticipating future trends, imagining desirable futures, and facilitating socially just processes and outcomes.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper emanated from a three-day workshop of the MARA research group (marine resource management and development) at the Norwegian College of Fishery Science (University of Tromsø—The Arctic University of Norway), October 2017. We thank the participants for inspiring contributions and acknowledge the constructive comments of two anonymous reviewers, which helped sharpen the focus of this paper. We appreciate the research group’s financial contribution to the writing process.

References

  1. Alexander, P. 1975. Innovation in a cultural vacuum: the mechanization of Sri Lanka fisheries. Human Organization 34 (4): 333–344.Google Scholar
  2. Apostle, R.A., G. Barrett, P. Holm, S. Jentoft, L. Mazany, B. McCay, and K.H. Mikalsen. 1998. Community, state, and market on the North Atlantic rim: challenges to modernity in the fisheries. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  3. Arbo, P., and B. Hersoug. 1997. The globalization of the fishing industry and the case of Finnmark. Marine Policy 21 (2): 121–142.Google Scholar
  4. Arbo, P., and P.T.T. Thủy. 2016. Use conflicts in marine ecosystem-based management—The case of oil versus fisheries. Ocean and Coastal Management 122: 77–86.Google Scholar
  5. Barbesgaard, M. 2018. Blue growth: savior or ocean grabbing? The  Journal of Peasant Studies 45 (1): 130–149.Google Scholar
  6. Barnes, J.A. 1954. Class and committees in a Norwegian island parish. Human Relations; Studies Towards the Integration of the Social Sciences 7 (1): 39–58.Google Scholar
  7. Barry, J. 2012. The politics of actually existing unsustainability: human flourishing in a climate-changed, carbon constrained world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Barth, F. 1966. The analytical importance of transaction. In Models of social organization, Occational Paper no. 23, 1–11. London: Royal Anthropological Institute.Google Scholar
  9. Bavinck, M., and J. Gupta. 2014. Legal pluralism in aquatic regimes: a challenge for governance. Current Opinion in Environment Sustainability 11: 78–85.Google Scholar
  10. Bavinck, M., R. Chuenpagdee, S. Jentoft, and J. Kooiman. 2013. Governability of fisheries and aquaculture: theory and applications. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Bavinck, M., S. Jentoft, and J. Scholtens. 2018. Fisheries as social struggle: a reinvigorated social science research agenda. Marine Policy 94: 46–52.Google Scholar
  12. Bennett, N.J., H. Govan, and T. Satterfield. 2015. Ocean grabbing. Marine Policy 57: 61–68.Google Scholar
  13. Bennett, N.J., R. Roth, S.C. Klain, K. Chan, P. Christie, D.A. Clark, G. Cullman, D. Curran, T.J. Durbin, G. Epstein, A. Greenberg, M.P. Nelson, J. Sandlos, R. Stedmann, T.L. Teel, R. Thomas, D. Veríssimo, and C. Wyborn. 2017. Conservation social science: Understanding and integrating human dimensions to improve conservation. Biological Conservation 205: 93–108.Google Scholar
  14. Berkes, F., J. Colding, and C. Folke. 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecological Applications 10 (5): 1251–1262.Google Scholar
  15. Beverton, R., and S. Holt. 1957. On the dynamics of exploited fish populations. In Fisheries Investigation Series 2. London: Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.Google Scholar
  16. Bonß, W. 2016. The notion of resilience: trajectories and social science perspective. In New perspectives on resilience in socio-economic spheres, ed. A. Maurer, 9–24. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  17. Boucquey, N., L. Fairbanks, K.St. Martin, L.M. Campbell, and B. McCay. 2016. The ontological politics of marine spatial planning: Assembling the ocean and shaping the capacities of ‘community’ and ‘environment’. Geoforum 75: 1–11.Google Scholar
  18. Brattland, C. 2013. Proving fishers right. Effects of the integration of experience-based knowledge in ecosystem-based management. Acta Borealia 30 (1): 39–59.Google Scholar
  19. Brox, O. 1966. Hva skjer i Nord-Norge? En studie i norsk utkantpolitikk. Oslo: Pax.Google Scholar
  20. Charnley, S., C. Carothers, T. Satterfield, A. Levine, M.R. Poe, K. Norman, J. Donatuto, S.J. Breslow, M.B. Mascia, P.S. Levin, X. Basurto, C.C. Hicks, C. García-Quijano, and K.St. Martin. 2017. Evaluating the best available social science for natural resource management decision-making. Environmental Science & Policy 73: 80–88.Google Scholar
  21. Clark, W.C., L. van Kerkhoff, L. Lebel, and G.C. Gallopin. 2016. Crafting usable knowledge for sustainable development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113 (17): 4570–4578.Google Scholar
  22. Crean, K. and D. Symes, eds. 1996. Fisheries management in crisis. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  23. Curtin, R., and R. Prellezo. 2010. Understanding marine ecosystem based management: a literature review. Marine Policy 34 (5): 821–830.Google Scholar
  24. Davoudi, S., K. Shaw, L.J. Haider, A.E. Quinlan, G.D. Peterson, C. Wilkinson, H. Fünfgeld, D. McEvoy, L. Porter, and S. Davoudi. 2012. Resilience: a bridging concept or a dead end? “Reframing” resilience: challenges for planning theory and practice interacting traps: resilience assessment of a pasture management system in Northern Afghanistan urban resilience: what does it mean in planning practice? Resilience as a useful concept for climate change adaptation? The politics of resilience for planning: a cautionary note. Planning Theory & Practice 13 (2): 299–333.Google Scholar
  25. Douvere, F. 2008. The importance of marine spatial planning in advancing ecosystem-based sea use management. Marine Policy 32 (5): 762–771.Google Scholar
  26. Ehler, C., and F. Douvere. 2009. Marine spatial planning, a step-by-step approach towards ecosystem-based management. In IOC manual and guides. Paris: Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man and the Biosphere Programme.Google Scholar
  27. Ehlers, P. 2016. Blue growth and ocean governance—how to balance the use and the protection of the seas. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs 15 (2): 187–203.Google Scholar
  28. Ernstson, H., and S. Sörlin. 2013. Ecosystem services as technology of globalization: on articulating values in urban nature. Ecological Economics 86: 274–284.Google Scholar
  29. European Commission. 2012. Blue growth: opportunities for marine and maritime sustainable growth. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Brussels, European Commission. COM(2012) 494 final. Google Scholar
  30. Eythórsson, E. 1996. Coastal communities and ITQ management. The case of Icelandic fisheries. Sociologia Ruralis 36 (2): 212–223.Google Scholar
  31. Finstad, B.-P. 2004. The frozen fillet: the fish that changed North Norway? International Journal of Maritime History 16 (1): 27–42.Google Scholar
  32. Fish, R.D. 2011. Environmental decision making and an ecosystems approach: some challenges from the perspective of social science. Progress in Physical Geography 35 (5): 671–680.Google Scholar
  33. Flannery, W., G. Ellis, G. Ellis, W. Flannery, M. Nursey-Bray, J.P.M. van Tatenhove, C. Kelly, S. Coffen-Smout, R. Fairgrieve, M. Knol, S. Jentoft, D. Bacon, and A.M. O’Hagan. 2016. Exploring the winners and losers of marine environmental governance/marine spatial planning: Cui bono?/“more than fishy business”: Epistemology, integration and conflict in marine spatial planning/marine spatial planning: Power and scaping/surely not all planning is evil?/marine spatial planning: A Canadian perspective/maritime spatial planning – “Ad utilitatem omnium”/marine spatial planning: “It is better to be on the train than being hit by it”/reflections from the perspective of recreational anglers and boats for hire/maritime spatial planning and marine renewable energy. Planning Theory & Practice 17 (1): 121–151.Google Scholar
  34. Folke, C. 2006. Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change 16 (3): 253–267.Google Scholar
  35. Gaillard, J.-C. 2010. Vulnerability, capacity and resilience: perspectives for climate and development policy. Journal of International Development 22 (2): 218–232.Google Scholar
  36. Gómez-Baggethun, E., R. De Groot, P.L. Lomas, and C. Montes. 2010. The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: from early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecological Economics 69 (6): 1209–1218.Google Scholar
  37. Gordon, H.S. 1954. The economic theory of a common-property resource: the fishery. Journal of Political Economy 62 (2): 124–142. Google Scholar
  38. Gray, T.S. 2005. Theorising about participatory fisheries governance. Participation in fisheries governance, 1–25. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  39. Hadjimichael, M. 2018. A call for a blue degrowth: unravelling the European Union's fisheries and maritime policies. Marine Policy 94: 158–164.Google Scholar
  40. Hall, P.A., and M. Lamont. 2013. Social resilience in the neoliberal era. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Hallenstvedt, A. 1982. Med lov og organisasjon: organisering av interesser og markeder i norsk fiskerinæring. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  42. Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162: 1243–1248.Google Scholar
  43. Hauge, K.H., K.N. Nielsen, and K. Korsbrekke. 2007. Limits to transparency—exploring conceptual and operational aspects of the ICES framework for providing precautionary fisheries management advice. ICES Journal of Marine Science 64 (4): 738–743.Google Scholar
  44. Haward, M. 2018. Plastic pollution of the world’s seas and oceans as a contemporary challenge in ocean governance. Nature Communications 9 (1): 667.Google Scholar
  45. Hersoug, B. 2005. Closing the Commons. Norwegian fisheries from open access to private property. Delft: Eburon.Google Scholar
  46. Hicks, C.C., A. Levine, A. Agrawal, X. Basurto, S.J. Breslow, C. Carothers, S. Charnley, S. Coulthard, N. Dolsak, J. Donatuto, C. Garcia-Quijano, M.B. Mascia, K. Norman, M.R. Poe, T. Satterfield, K.St. Martin, and P.S. Levin. 2016. Engage key social concepts for sustainability. Science 352 (6281): 38–40.Google Scholar
  47. Holden, M., and D. Garrod. 1996. The common fisheries policy: origin, evaluation and future. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  48. Holling, C.S. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4 (1): 1–23.Google Scholar
  49. Holm, P. 1995. The dynamics of institutionalization: transformation processes in Norwegian fisheries. Administrative Science Quarterly 40: 398–422.Google Scholar
  50. Holm, P. 1996. Fisheries management and the domestication of nature. Sociologia Ruralis 36 (2): 177–188.Google Scholar
  51. Holm, P. 2001. The invisible revolution: the construction of institutional change in the fisheries. Doctoral dissertation, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
  52. Hughes, T.P., D.R. Bellwood, C. Folke, R.S. Steneck, and J. Wilson. 2005. New paradigms for supporting the resilience of marine ecosystems. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20 (7): 380–386.Google Scholar
  53. Jay, S. 2018. The shifting sea: from soft space to lively space. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 20 (4): 450–467.Google Scholar
  54. Jentoft, S. 1989. Fisheries co-management: delegating government responsibility to fishermen's organizations. Marine Policy 13 (2): 137–154.Google Scholar
  55. Jentoft, S. 1993. Dangling lines. The fisheries crisis and the future of coastal communities: the Norwegian experience. St. John's, Newfoundland: Institute of Social and Economic Research.Google Scholar
  56. Jentoft, S. 2007. Limits of governability: institutional implications for fisheries and coastal governance. Marine Policy 31 (4): 360–370.Google Scholar
  57. Jentoft, S. 2014. Walking the talk: Implementing the international voluntary guidelines for securing sustainable small-scale fisheries. Maritime Studies 13 (1): 16.Google Scholar
  58. Jentoft, S. 2017. Small-scale fisheries within maritime spatial planning: knowledge integration and power. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 19 (3): 266–278.Google Scholar
  59. Jentoft, S., and B. McCay. 1995. User participation in fisheries management: lessons drawn from international experiences. Marine Policy 19 (3): 227–246.Google Scholar
  60. Jentoft, S., and C. Wadel. 1984. I samme båt: sysselsettingssystemer i fiskerinæringen. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  61. Jentoft, S., B.J. McCay, and D.C. Wilson. 1998. Social theory and fisheries co-management. Marine Policy 22 (4–5): 423–436.Google Scholar
  62. Johnsen, J.P., and B. Hersoug. 2014. Local empowerment through the creation of coastal space? Ecology and Society 19 (2): 60.Google Scholar
  63. Johnsen, J.P., and S. Jentoft. 2018. Transferable quotas in Norwegian fisheries. In Fisheries, quota management and quota transfer: Rationalization through bio-economics, ed. G.M. Winder. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  64. Kidd, S., and D. Shaw. 2014. The social and political realities of marine spatial planning: some land-based reflections. ICES Journal of Marine Science 71 (7): 1535–1541.Google Scholar
  65. Knol, M. 2010. Scientific advice in integrated ocean management: the process towards the Barents Sea plan. Marine Policy 34 (2): 252–260.Google Scholar
  66. Knol, M. 2011. Mapping ocean governance: from ecological values to policy instrumentation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 54 (7): 979–995.Google Scholar
  67. Knol, M. 2013. Making ecosystem-based management operational: Integrated monitoring in Norway. Maritime Studies 12: 5.Google Scholar
  68. Knott, C., and B. Neis. 2017. Privatization, financialization and ocean grabbing in New Brunswick herring fisheries and salmon aquaculture. Marine Policy 80: 10–18.Google Scholar
  69. Kolle, N., A.R. Nielsen, P. Christensen, and A. Døssland. 2017. Fish, Coast and Communities – A History of Norway. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
  70. Kooiman, J., M. Bavinck, S. Jentoft, and R. Pullin, eds. 2005. Fish for life: interactive governance for fisheries. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Kurien, J. 1978. Entry of big business into fishing: its impact on fish economy. Economic and Political Weekly 13 (36): 1557–1565.Google Scholar
  72. Lascoumes, P., and P. Le Galès. 2007. Introduction: understanding public policy through its instruments: from the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation. Governance: an international journal of policy, administration, and institutions 20 (1): 1–21.Google Scholar
  73. Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Lawson, R.M. 1977. New directions in developing small-scale fisheries. Marine Policy 1 (1): 45–51.Google Scholar
  75. Lillebø, A.I., C. Pita, J. Garcia Rodrigues, S. Ramos, and S. Villasante. 2017. How can marine ecosystem services support the blue growth agenda? Marine Policy 81 (Supplement C): 132–142.Google Scholar
  76. Linke, S., and S. Jentoft. 2014. Exploring the phronetic dimension of stakeholders' knowledge in EU fisheries governance. Marine Policy 47: 153–161.Google Scholar
  77. Lorenz, D.F., and C. Dittmer. 2016. Resilience in catastrophes, disasters and emergencies. In New perspectives on resilience in socio-economic spheres, ed. A. Maurer, 25–59. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  78. Mackinson, S., and D.C.K. Wilson. 2014. Building bridges among scientists and fishermen with participatory action research. In Social issues in sustainable fisheries management, eds. J. Urquhart, T. Acott, D. Symes, and M. Zhao, 121–139. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  79. Malinowski, B. 1922. Argonauts of the Western Pacific: an account of native enterprise and adventure in the archepelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  80. Mansfield, B. 2004. Neoliberalism in the oceans: “rationalization,” property rights, and the commons question. Geoforum 35 (3): 313–326.Google Scholar
  81. McCay, B.J., C.F. Creed, A.C. Finlayson, R. Apostle, and K. Mikalsen. 1995. Individual transferable quotas (ITQs) in Canadian and US fisheries. Ocean & Coastal Management 28 (1–3): 85–115.Google Scholar
  82. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington, DC: Island.Google Scholar
  83. Mulazzani, L., and G. Malorgio. 2017. Blue growth and ecosystem services. Marine Policy 85: 17–24.Google Scholar
  84. Nielsen, K. N. 2008. Science|Politics: Boundary construction in mandated science – The case of ICES’ advice on fisheries management. PhD thesis, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
  85. Norgaard, R.B. 2010. Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecological Economics 69 (6): 1219–1227.Google Scholar
  86. OECD. 2016. The ocean economy in 2030. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  87. Olsson, L., A. Jerneck, H. Thoren, J. Persson, and D. O’Byrne. 2015. Why resilience is unappealing to social science: theoretical and empirical investigations of the scientific use of resilience. Science Advances 1 (4): e1400217.Google Scholar
  88. Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  89. Redford, K.H., and W.M. Adams. 2009. Payment for ecosystem services and the challenge of saving nature. Conservation Biology 23 (4): 785–787.Google Scholar
  90. Reusch, T.B., J. Dierking, H.C. Andersson, E. Bonsdorff, J. Carstensen, M. Casini, M. Czajkowski, B. Hasler, K. Hinsby, K. Hyytiäinen, K. Johannesson, S. Jomaa, V. Jormalainen, H. Kuosa, S. Kurland, L. Laikre, B.R. MacKenzie, P. Margonski, F. Melzner, D. Oesterwind, H. Ojaveer, J.C. Refsgaard, A. Sandström, G. Schwarz, K. Tonderski, M. Winder, and M. Zandersen. 2018. The Baltic Sea as a time machine for the future coastal ocean. Science Advances 4 (5): eaar8195.Google Scholar
  91. Ricker, W.E. 1954. Stock and recruitment. Journal of the Fisheries Board of Canada 11 (5): 559–623.Google Scholar
  92. Robinson, R. 1996. Trawling: the rise and fall of the British trawl fishery. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.Google Scholar
  93. Röckmann, C., J. van Leeuwen, D. Goldsborough, M. Kraan, and G. Piet. 2015. The interaction triangle as a tool for understanding stakeholder interactions in marine ecosystem based management. Marine Policy 52: 155–162.Google Scholar
  94. Rockström, J., W. Steffen, K. Noone, Å. Persson, F.S. III Chapin, E. Lambin, T.M. Lenton, M. Scheffer, C. Folke, H. Schellnhuber, B. Nykvist, C.A. De Wit, T. Hughes, S. van der Leeuw, H. Rodhe, S. Sörlin, P.K. Snyder, R. Costanza, U. Svedin, M. Falkenmark, L. Karlberg, R.W. Corell, V.J. Fabry, J. Hansen, B. Walker, D. Liverman, K. Richardson, P. Crutzen, and J. Foley. 2009. Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society 14 (2): 32.Google Scholar
  95. Sander, G. 2018. Against all odds? Implementing a policy for ecosystem-based management of the Barents Sea. Ocean & Coastal Management 157: 111–123.Google Scholar
  96. Schaefer, M.B. 1957. Some considerations of population dynamics and economics in relation to the management of the commercial marine fisheries. Journal of the Fisheries Board of Canada 14 (5): 669–681.Google Scholar
  97. Schwach, V., D. Bailly, A.-S. Christensen, A.E. Delaney, P. Degnbol, W.L. Van Densen, P. Holm, H.A. McLay, K.N. Nielsen, M.A. Pastoors, S.A. Reeves, and D.C. Wilson. 2007. Policy and knowledge in fisheries management: a policy brief. ICES Journal of Marine Science 64 (4): 798–803.Google Scholar
  98. Scott, A. 1955. The fishery: the objectives of sole ownership. Journal of Political Economy 63 (2): 116–124.Google Scholar
  99. Sen, S., and J. Raakjaer Nielsen. 1996. Fisheries co-management: a comparative analysis. Marine Policy 20 (5): 405–418.Google Scholar
  100. Silver, J.J., N.J. Gray, L.M. Campbell, L.W. Fairbanks, and R.L. Gruby. 2015. Blue economy and competing discourses in international oceans governance. The Journal of Environment & Development 24 (2): 135–160.Google Scholar
  101. Soma, K., S.W.K. van den Burg, E.W.J. Hoefnagel, M. Stuiver, and C.M. van der Heide. 2018. Social innovation – a future pathway for blue growth? Marine Policy 87: 363–370.Google Scholar
  102. Song, A.M., J.P. Johnsen, and T.H. Morrison. 2018. Reconstructing governability: how fisheries are made governable. Fish and Fisheries 19 (2): 377–389.Google Scholar
  103. Sønvisen, S. A. 2013. Coastal communities and employment systems: Networks and communities in change. PhD thesis, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
  104. St. Martin, K. 2001. Making space for community resource management in fisheries. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 91 (1): 122–142.Google Scholar
  105. St. Martin, K., and M. Hall-Arber. 2008. The missing layer: geo-technologies, communities, and implications for marine spatial planning. Marine Policy 32 (5): 779–786.Google Scholar
  106. Steffen, W., W. Broadgate, L. Deutsch, O. Gaffney, and C. Ludwig. 2015. The trajectory of the Anthropocene: the great acceleration. The Anthropocene Review 2 (1): 81–98.Google Scholar
  107. Symes, D., ed. (1997). Property rights and regulatory systems in fisheries. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  108. Symes, D. 2006. Fisheries governance: a coming of age for fisheries social science? Fisheries Research 81 (2): 113–117.Google Scholar
  109. Symes, D., and E. Hoefnagel. 2010. Fisheries policy, research and the social sciences in Europe: challenges for the 21st century. Marine Policy 34 (2): 268–275.Google Scholar
  110. Tunstall, J. 1962. The fishermen. London: MacGibbon & Kee.Google Scholar
  111. United Nations. 2017. The first global integrated marine assessment: World Ocean Assessment I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Urquhart, J., T.G. Acott, D. Symes, and M. Zhao, eds. 2014. Social issues in sustainable fisheries management. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  113. van Leeuwen, J., and J. van Tatenhove. 2010. The triangle of marine governance in the environmental governance of Dutch offshore platforms. Marine Policy 34 (3): 590–597.Google Scholar
  114. van Tatenhove, J. 2011. Integrated marine governance: Questions of legitimacy. Maritime Studies 10 (1): 87–113.Google Scholar
  115. Walker, B., C.S. Holling, R. Carpenter, and A. Kinzig. 2004. Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society 9 (2): 5.Google Scholar
  116. Wilson, D.C. 2009. The paradoxes of transparency: science and the ecosystem approach to fisheries management in Europe. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  117. Winder, G., and R. Le Heron. 2017. Assembling a blue economy moment? Geographic engagement with globalizing biological-economic relations in multi-use marine environments. Dialogues in Human Geography 7 (1): 3–26.Google Scholar
  118. Wright, G. 2015. Marine governance in an industrialised ocean: a case study of the emerging marine renewable energy industry. Marine Policy 52: 77–84.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Arbo
    • 1
  • Maaike Knol
    • 1
  • Sebastian Linke
    • 2
  • Kevin St. Martin
    • 3
  1. 1.Norwegian College of Fishery ScienceUniversity of Tromsø - The Arctic University of NorwayTromsøNorway
  2. 2.School of Global StudiesUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden
  3. 3.Department of GeographyRutgers University, The State University of New JerseyNew BrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations