From Ocean Teacher Library
Stakeholder Particpation in Marine Spatial PlanningContents |
TASK 1: DEFINING WHO SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN MSP
First, an important task is identifying the key stakeholders who should be involved in your MSP efforts. Depending on their interests, their ways of perceiving problems and opportunities concerning the MSP area and its resources, there are often many different stakeholders. Individuals, groups or organizations that should be considered for involvement in MSP include those that:
• Are or will be affected by MSP decisions;
• Are dependent on the resources of the management area where MSP decisions will be taken;
• Have or make legal claims or obligations over areas or resources within the management area;
• Conduct activities that affect areas or resources of the management area;
• Have special seasonal or geographic interests in the management area; and
• Have a special linterest in the management of the area (such as environmental NGOs and cultural advocacy groups).
Stakeholders are individuals, groups, or organizations that are (or will be) affected, involved or interested (positively or negatively) by MSP measures or actions in various ways.
Not all stakeholders are necessarily equally important or relevant where MSP is concerned. On a scale of importance, you might want to give some stakeholders more weight than others. Be sure, however, that you engage a final group of stakeholders that is well balanced (namely one that reflects the social/cultural, economic and ecological interests in the management area) and that you address the issue of entitlement to participate. Some stakeholders often hold considerable political and/or economic influence over particular areas or resources based on their historical dependence and association, institutional mandate, economic interest, or various other concerns. In some cases, you may need to form sub-groups (e.g. small-scale near-shore fisheries versus large- scale, industrial and spatially-flexible fisheries) to reflect your particular situation more accurately.
One practical way to assess stakeholders is through “stakeholder analysis”. Stakeholder analysis can assist, for example, in identifying who is likely to be supportive or potentially hostile to MSP. It can also provide insight in the interrelationships, current and (potential) future interests and expectations of certain stakeholders and exam- ine the question of how and to what extent they represent various segments of society.
You might also encounter stakeholder groups that do not have sufficient means, skills or knowledge to participate and represent their stake in the MSP initiative. If so, you could consider undertaking (or stimulating others to do so) efforts toward empowering such stakeholder groups to enhance their participation.
TASK 2: DEFINING WHEN TO INVOLVE STAKEHOLDERS
Second, you will need to define when stakeholders should be involved during appropriate steps of the MSP process. Ideally, stakeholder participation in MSP is accomplished early, often and in a sustained manner throughout the process. A number of fora might already exist that allow stakeholders to participate in the planning and management of the marine area. You will need to decide whether you can use these existing fora or you need new ones for the par- ticipation of stakeholders in your MSP efforts.
Not all stakeholders need to be involved all of the time. Different stakeholder groups, with varying levels of interest and entitlement, can take part in different steps of the MSP process. The most important steps when you should consider stakeholder participation include:
1. Pre-planning and planning for MSP
During the pre-planning and planning phases of MSP (see Step 3, Organizing the process, Step 5, Defining and analyzing existing conditions, and Step 6, Defining and analyzing future conditions), you will benefit from involving as many stakeholders as possible. This will allow you to collect information on a wide range of expectations, opportunities and conflicts that take place in the management area.
For example, throughout the development of its Ocean Management Plan, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (USA) organized 18 public hearings during which it consulted a broad range of stakeholders. The hearings were essentially open to all who were interested. The information derived from these hearings provided a broad basis for identifying the goals and objectives of its MSP initiative.
The development of the Belgian master plan for the North Sea took a new approach (after initial attempts failed) that started with a six- month period of continuous meetings and interviews with different sectors and interest groups. In this way, it was possible to collect as much spatial data and information as possible regarding concerns, expectations and opportunities for each sector. These data and information provided the basis for Belgium’s marine spatial plan development.
Generally, the greater the participation in the process of setting goals and objectives, the greater the stakeholder acceptance and legitimacy of the MSP plan is likely to be. The outcomes of the participation process should be made available to the stakeholders who should then also have a chance to review and verify the outcomes (or parts of it) of their participation.
2. MSP plan development
A core group of stakeholders should be engaged in the analysis and selection of the plan alternatives and the consequences of different alternatives on areas of their interest (see Step 7, Developing the marine spatial plan).
Belgium, Germany, and The Netherlands, for example, all made a draft MSP plan available for public consultation. The general public was then invited to comment on the proposed spatial management measures. Typically this period takes about three to six months and, in some cases, up to a year.
3. MSP plan implementation
Engaging stakeholders in the implementation of MSP measures can be rewarding as well (see Step 8, Implementing and enforcing the marine spatial plan). When stakeholders understand the benefits of taking action, and agree upon the management measures to be implemented, it is more likely they will take part in enforcing them too, at least to the extent of encouraging compliance.
4. Monitoring and evaluating MSP performance
Stakeholders should also be involved in evaluating the overall per- formance in achieving the goals and objectives of MSP plans and measures (see Step 9, Monitoring and evaluating performance).
Stakeholder participation during MSP plan evaluation should focus on analyzing results and outcomes and determining the level of achievement of objectives, as well as the effects of the plan itself.
The MSP plan for the Great Barrier Reef (Australia), for example, was re-evaluated and adapted from 1998 to 2003. This was a formal process guided by specific legislative requirements including public participation. The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority organized several formal opportunities for the general public to provide written comments, initially prior to the development of the draft zoning plan and subsequently commenting on the draft plan. Over these two phases, the Authority received 31,500 written public submissions that led to substantial changes to the final zoning plan compared to the draft plan.
TASK 3: DEFINING HOW TO INVOLVE STAKEHOLDERS
In addition to defining who should be involved and when, you will also need to identify how you will involve stakeholders during your MSP initiative. There are many different ways to involve stakeholders, ranging from ‘communication’ with no real participation, to ‘negotiation’ where decision-making power is shared among stakeholders. The figure below provides an overview of some possible ways to involve stakeholders during the MSP process.
Different levels of stakeholder participation imply different intensities of involvement, time, and costs:
• Communication: Authorities responsible for MSP want to convey a message to a target audience and obtain approval for what their message asserts, suggests, and decides. Communication does not involve the stakeholders in any active way;
• Information: Authorities responsible for MSP want to keep a target audience informed about their intentions, decisions and attempts to provide a basis of understanding, but don’t expect any particular reaction. Unlike communication, the information is intended to be objective and represents a way to empower stakeholders to react to decisions or take a position with full knowledge of the facts;
• Consultation: Authorities responsible for MSP collect the opin- ions of stakeholders you have consulted with no guarantee that the opinions expressed will be taken into account;
• Dialogue: A form of ‘horizontal’ interaction among stakeholders who are positioned as equals. There is no precise purpose other than to know and understand one another better. Dialogue is intended to create a sense of proximity and mutual understand- ing about the problems and solutions for a particular MSP area;
• Concertation: A form of ‘horizontal’ interaction among stake- holders who are positioned as equals. Unlike dialogue, the purpose is to develop a common position among a group of stakeholders that can be presented or defended before the au- thorities responsible for MSP. (Concertation is a French term re- ferring to musicians playing an instrument with the purpose of creating a common outcome, e.g. a concert); and
• Negotiation: A form of ‘horizontal’ interaction in which both stakeholders and the authorities responsible for MSP have equal powers for decision•making.
Adapted from Bouamrame M. (2006)
Just as it is not necessary to involve all stakeholders throughout every step in the MSP process (see above), it is similarly not necessary to involve stakeholders in exactly the same manner. During the pre- planning and planning steps, for example, it might be beneficial to stimulate ‘horizontal’ types of participation, allowing stakeholders to develop a common and shared opinion about their vision, require- ments, expectations, goals and objectives for the use of marine space. At the same time, however, information sessions can be put in place allowing stakeholders to obtain the best available information upon which to base their opinions and vision. Once a MSP plan has been developed by the responsible authorities, it will often be open for consultation during a certain period of time. For example, German authorities for MSP planning published drafts of MSP plans for the North Sea and Baltic Sea and made them available for public consultation over a period of four months. The United Kingdom made a draft of its Marine and Coastal Access Bill available for three months of pre-legislative consultation prior to introducing it to Parliament.
Subsections of this Article
No subsections available
Information about this article
Short title: Stakeholder Participation
Description: Who, When, and How?
Expertise level: beginner
Author: Cehler
Approval status: approved
Approved by: Cehler
Last change: 2011-2-24
Subsection of: Marine Spatial Planning
Contact
If you have any direct comments or suggestions for the author of this page then please feel free to send an email to the author (listed above). For discussions on this page please use the discussions page.,
