regime based on strategic vision, participation, and consensus building, while
Grafton and Kompas (2005) called for a governance system that uses
socio-economic criteria in the development of management goals as well as the
physical design of the conservation areas themselves. With regard to the complexities implicit in larger-scale, social-ecological systems (SESs), Norgaard et al.
(2009) reported on the lack of clarity from policy-makers and lawmakers concerning setting objectives and accountability. Further, these authors cautioned that
because professionals often participate more as individuals than as representatives,
the knowledge lines are very fuzzy among different groups thus broader representative views may not always be captured. Also, because adaptive management
often does not go beyond theory and demonstration of successes in practice in
marine sustainable multi-use management are limited for aquaculture, especially
where there is a multiplicity of perspectives confounding interpretation, then initiatives to strengthen interactions among scientists, policy-makers, stakeholders,
and the public could help improve benefits associated with adoption of adaptive
management for the offshore aquaculture sector.
Thus arguably marine governance is in a nascent stage, and even more so in
regard of endorsing offshore aquaculture in a multi-use setting. Thus, for any
offshore aquaculture initiative, ocean governance will set the stage in influencing
the rate of development for this industry. Governance effectiveness, as defined
herein, is influenced by a set of fundamental objectives, followed by a suite of
policies, laws and institutions that exist on multiple levels (e.g. local, national and
international). Therefore, to debate our hypothesis stated earlier, this section
illustrates the importance of having a governance framework to facilitate
decision-making. It illustrates this through marine governance research done to
support sustainable marine resources management in the Caribbean, using a policy
cycle based approach (Fanning et al. 2007; Turner et al. 2014). An adaptive governance framework was useful in helping different countries to identify their
strengths and weaknesses in governance structures which can be achieved using a
policy cycle exercise to analyse existing arrangements for offshore aquaculture
(Fanning et al. 2007). The Regional Ocean Governance Framework (ROGF)
developed for the Wider Caribbean for the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem
(CLME) by Mahon et al. (2012) illustrates the conceptual ‘architecture’ to guide
identification at multiple scales and multiple levels and when populated with relevant data shows who are and who are not involved in the multi-use policy processes. Figure 7.1 helps visualise hypothetically linkages vertically (local, national,
sub-regional, regional and global) and horizontally (e.g., between sectors such as
offshore aquaculture and offshore renewable energy) of governance.
Policy cycles occur at several levels from local, national, sub-regional, regional
and global (Fig. 7.1). Within each of these levels there may be many policy cycles.
The concept underpinning the policy cycle (Fig. 7.2) is that to achieve effective
governance, there must be a complete policy process for decision-making at any
level (Fig. 7.1). For an efficient system of governance, the policy cycles need to be
complete and there needs to be communication, not only between the different
154
G. Krause and S.M. Stead
Grafton and Kompas (2005) called for a governance system that uses
socio-economic criteria in the development of management goals as well as the
physical design of the conservation areas themselves. With regard to the complexities implicit in larger-scale, social-ecological systems (SESs), Norgaard et al.
(2009) reported on the lack of clarity from policy-makers and lawmakers concerning setting objectives and accountability. Further, these authors cautioned that
because professionals often participate more as individuals than as representatives,
the knowledge lines are very fuzzy among different groups thus broader representative views may not always be captured. Also, because adaptive management
often does not go beyond theory and demonstration of successes in practice in
marine sustainable multi-use management are limited for aquaculture, especially
where there is a multiplicity of perspectives confounding interpretation, then initiatives to strengthen interactions among scientists, policy-makers, stakeholders,
and the public could help improve benefits associated with adoption of adaptive
management for the offshore aquaculture sector.
Thus arguably marine governance is in a nascent stage, and even more so in
regard of endorsing offshore aquaculture in a multi-use setting. Thus, for any
offshore aquaculture initiative, ocean governance will set the stage in influencing
the rate of development for this industry. Governance effectiveness, as defined
herein, is influenced by a set of fundamental objectives, followed by a suite of
policies, laws and institutions that exist on multiple levels (e.g. local, national and
international). Therefore, to debate our hypothesis stated earlier, this section
illustrates the importance of having a governance framework to facilitate
decision-making. It illustrates this through marine governance research done to
support sustainable marine resources management in the Caribbean, using a policy
cycle based approach (Fanning et al. 2007; Turner et al. 2014). An adaptive governance framework was useful in helping different countries to identify their
strengths and weaknesses in governance structures which can be achieved using a
policy cycle exercise to analyse existing arrangements for offshore aquaculture
(Fanning et al. 2007). The Regional Ocean Governance Framework (ROGF)
developed for the Wider Caribbean for the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem
(CLME) by Mahon et al. (2012) illustrates the conceptual ‘architecture’ to guide
identification at multiple scales and multiple levels and when populated with relevant data shows who are and who are not involved in the multi-use policy processes. Figure 7.1 helps visualise hypothetically linkages vertically (local, national,
sub-regional, regional and global) and horizontally (e.g., between sectors such as
offshore aquaculture and offshore renewable energy) of governance.
Policy cycles occur at several levels from local, national, sub-regional, regional
and global (Fig. 7.1). Within each of these levels there may be many policy cycles.
The concept underpinning the policy cycle (Fig. 7.2) is that to achieve effective
governance, there must be a complete policy process for decision-making at any
level (Fig. 7.1). For an efficient system of governance, the policy cycles need to be
complete and there needs to be communication, not only between the different
154
G. Krause and S.M. Stead