329
17 Working with Principles and Visions
Final Re fl ections
The Group Process Methodology
The suite of group process methods described in this paper generated a considerable
amount of information from a large number of people in a relatively short period. A
weakness of the process was that there was inadequate time for synthesis of the outputs
on the fi nal day. Therefore, the synthesis of the visions into an overall vision and the
synthesis of the strategic direction map both took place after the symposium and were
then shared with participants. This led some participants to conclude that the process
had not reached a satisfactory ‘closure point’ during the symposium. This was more the
case for participants who were unfamiliar with such methods and who expected the
symposium to lead to conclusive recommendations for implementation.
Upon re fl ection, these expectations could probably have been tempered by
sharing a clearer description of the process and expected outcomes before and
during the process. This would have included an even greater emphasis on the
symposium’s role in the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem Project and the
long-term process of developing regional ocean governance in the Wider
Caribbean (Fanning et al. 2009, 2011 ) . Had stakeholders appreciated the fact
that the symposium was not an isolated event, but part of an ongoing process of
enhancing ocean governance in the Wider Caribbean Region that may take a
decade or longer to provide signi fi cant results, they may have been better
equipped to make their input.
It is also important to be aware that the outcome of the process is dependent upon
the information provided to participants in the building blocks session. While all
participants are knowledgeable about marine ecosystems and their management in
terms of their particular role or experience, the information provided sets the context for the process, and in some ways sets boundaries for its outcomes. This is
necessary if a useful product is to be obtained within a speci fi c time frame and budget, but must be borne in mind in interpreting the product.
Implications for Governability
Notwithstanding the process’s design issues, the organizers maintain that the prioritization of principles process and the four separate group processes generated useful
outputs that re fl ected the consensus of the participants. It also appears that the
sequence of processes produced an overall result that can serve as a planning foundation for, or at least a basis for discussion of the principles and visions that might
underlie an ecosystem approach to living marine resources in the Wider Caribbean
Region. In broad terms, the overall process would appear to provide a means to both
determine the extent of, and to work towards improving, governability at the scale
of a large marine ecosystem.
17 Working with Principles and Visions
Final Re fl ections
The Group Process Methodology
The suite of group process methods described in this paper generated a considerable
amount of information from a large number of people in a relatively short period. A
weakness of the process was that there was inadequate time for synthesis of the outputs
on the fi nal day. Therefore, the synthesis of the visions into an overall vision and the
synthesis of the strategic direction map both took place after the symposium and were
then shared with participants. This led some participants to conclude that the process
had not reached a satisfactory ‘closure point’ during the symposium. This was more the
case for participants who were unfamiliar with such methods and who expected the
symposium to lead to conclusive recommendations for implementation.
Upon re fl ection, these expectations could probably have been tempered by
sharing a clearer description of the process and expected outcomes before and
during the process. This would have included an even greater emphasis on the
symposium’s role in the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem Project and the
long-term process of developing regional ocean governance in the Wider
Caribbean (Fanning et al. 2009, 2011 ) . Had stakeholders appreciated the fact
that the symposium was not an isolated event, but part of an ongoing process of
enhancing ocean governance in the Wider Caribbean Region that may take a
decade or longer to provide signi fi cant results, they may have been better
equipped to make their input.
It is also important to be aware that the outcome of the process is dependent upon
the information provided to participants in the building blocks session. While all
participants are knowledgeable about marine ecosystems and their management in
terms of their particular role or experience, the information provided sets the context for the process, and in some ways sets boundaries for its outcomes. This is
necessary if a useful product is to be obtained within a speci fi c time frame and budget, but must be borne in mind in interpreting the product.
Implications for Governability
Notwithstanding the process’s design issues, the organizers maintain that the prioritization of principles process and the four separate group processes generated useful
outputs that re fl ected the consensus of the participants. It also appears that the
sequence of processes produced an overall result that can serve as a planning foundation for, or at least a basis for discussion of the principles and visions that might
underlie an ecosystem approach to living marine resources in the Wider Caribbean
Region. In broad terms, the overall process would appear to provide a means to both
determine the extent of, and to work towards improving, governability at the scale
of a large marine ecosystem.