42
In the fifth stage, additional analysis on the chosen parameters was conducted in order to rank
the actors using two parameters R i , and NS, to profile each one, define the key actors, and to help
interpret the influence/dependence map as well as the rest of the results.
In order to highlight the difference between the actors‟ actions and the activities‟ hypothetical
frame, we chose to conduct two parallel studies on MACTOR with the same sets of actors, and
objectives, yet with different input matrices. Therefore, from this point on, we‟ll be talking about
“MSP in theory”, “Real MSP”, and the “comparison” between these two which is calculated by
subtraction (for better illustration of the differences) at various stages of the methodology, and
the discussion. Furthermore, figure 10 summarizes the whole actor mapping methodology.
1.2. Input data
1.2.1. Common data
1.2.1.1. List of Actors:
A list of 40 actors was defined. Actors were selected combining stakeholders at the National,
regional, and local level. The selection of these actors was based on their implication in the
studied problematic, their level of power, scope of action, and their backgrounds. These actors
were grouped into 05 categories: administration, local authorities, scientists, economic
operators, and socio-professional organisations.
The choice of categories was based on experts‟ opinion, and literature search. We tried covering
every type of actors that usually affects the studied system at different levels, and backgrounds,
so that the final list is representative of the system. Although 40 is quite a big number for the
MACTOR standards, efforts were made to reach this number. We limited the number of actors
according to their relative weight regarding the problematic, so the 3 or 4 most influent actors of
each category were included in the final list in order not to put any category at disadvantage over
the others. The final list consists of the following stakeholders:
1. Ministry in charge of Environment (ME)
2. Ministry of fishing, and fishery products (MFFP)
3. Ministry of the interior, local authorities, and
territorial planning (MICLAT or MILGA)
4. Ministry of tourism, and handicraft (MTH)
5. Ministry of industry, and mines (MIM)
6. Ministry of finance (MF)
7. Environment department of Annaba (EDA)
8. Environment department of Skikda (EDS)
9. Department of fishing, and aquaculture of
Annaba (DFAA)
10. Department of fishing, and aquaculture of Skikda
(DFAS)
11. Department of tourism, and handicraft of
Annaba (DTHA)
12. Department of training, and vocational education
(DTVE)
13. National coastal commission of Annaba (NCCA)
14. National coast guard service (NCGS)
15. Wilaya of Annaba (WA)
16. Wilaya of Skikda (WS)
17. Municipalities of the Edough region (MER)
18. Fishermen (F)
19. Small trades (ST)
20. Trawler fleets owners (TFO)
21. Sardine fleets owners (SFO)
22. Proxies (P)
23. Aquaculture farms (AF)
24. Fishing port of Chetaibi (FPC)
25. Mixed use port of Annaba (MUPA)
26. Fishing port of El Marsa (FPE)
27. Fishing port of Seraidi (FPS)
28. Fishing shelter of Ain Barbar (FSA)
29. Tourism operators (TO)
30. Industrial operators (IO)
31. Hydrocarbon transportation company (HTC)
32. Badji Mokhtar University of Annaba (BMUA)
33. Other universities, and the higher national school
of marine sciences, and coastal management (OU)
34. Fisheries, and aquaculture training centre
(FATC)
35. National chamber of fisheries, and aquaculture
(NCFA)
36. Fishermen associations (FA)
37. Environmental protection associations (EPA)
38. Nautical activities (NA)
39. Medias (M or Me)
40. Recreational fishermen (RF)
In the fifth stage, additional analysis on the chosen parameters was conducted in order to rank
the actors using two parameters R i , and NS, to profile each one, define the key actors, and to help
interpret the influence/dependence map as well as the rest of the results.
In order to highlight the difference between the actors‟ actions and the activities‟ hypothetical
frame, we chose to conduct two parallel studies on MACTOR with the same sets of actors, and
objectives, yet with different input matrices. Therefore, from this point on, we‟ll be talking about
“MSP in theory”, “Real MSP”, and the “comparison” between these two which is calculated by
subtraction (for better illustration of the differences) at various stages of the methodology, and
the discussion. Furthermore, figure 10 summarizes the whole actor mapping methodology.
1.2. Input data
1.2.1. Common data
1.2.1.1. List of Actors:
A list of 40 actors was defined. Actors were selected combining stakeholders at the National,
regional, and local level. The selection of these actors was based on their implication in the
studied problematic, their level of power, scope of action, and their backgrounds. These actors
were grouped into 05 categories: administration, local authorities, scientists, economic
operators, and socio-professional organisations.
The choice of categories was based on experts‟ opinion, and literature search. We tried covering
every type of actors that usually affects the studied system at different levels, and backgrounds,
so that the final list is representative of the system. Although 40 is quite a big number for the
MACTOR standards, efforts were made to reach this number. We limited the number of actors
according to their relative weight regarding the problematic, so the 3 or 4 most influent actors of
each category were included in the final list in order not to put any category at disadvantage over
the others. The final list consists of the following stakeholders:
1. Ministry in charge of Environment (ME)
2. Ministry of fishing, and fishery products (MFFP)
3. Ministry of the interior, local authorities, and
territorial planning (MICLAT or MILGA)
4. Ministry of tourism, and handicraft (MTH)
5. Ministry of industry, and mines (MIM)
6. Ministry of finance (MF)
7. Environment department of Annaba (EDA)
8. Environment department of Skikda (EDS)
9. Department of fishing, and aquaculture of
Annaba (DFAA)
10. Department of fishing, and aquaculture of Skikda
(DFAS)
11. Department of tourism, and handicraft of
Annaba (DTHA)
12. Department of training, and vocational education
(DTVE)
13. National coastal commission of Annaba (NCCA)
14. National coast guard service (NCGS)
15. Wilaya of Annaba (WA)
16. Wilaya of Skikda (WS)
17. Municipalities of the Edough region (MER)
18. Fishermen (F)
19. Small trades (ST)
20. Trawler fleets owners (TFO)
21. Sardine fleets owners (SFO)
22. Proxies (P)
23. Aquaculture farms (AF)
24. Fishing port of Chetaibi (FPC)
25. Mixed use port of Annaba (MUPA)
26. Fishing port of El Marsa (FPE)
27. Fishing port of Seraidi (FPS)
28. Fishing shelter of Ain Barbar (FSA)
29. Tourism operators (TO)
30. Industrial operators (IO)
31. Hydrocarbon transportation company (HTC)
32. Badji Mokhtar University of Annaba (BMUA)
33. Other universities, and the higher national school
of marine sciences, and coastal management (OU)
34. Fisheries, and aquaculture training centre
(FATC)
35. National chamber of fisheries, and aquaculture
(NCFA)
36. Fishermen associations (FA)
37. Environmental protection associations (EPA)
38. Nautical activities (NA)
39. Medias (M or Me)
40. Recreational fishermen (RF)