65
2.5. Ambivalence EQ3 :
Two actors can share both converging and diverging positions on different objectives. Hence, we
call this couple of actors ambivalent. If they wish to become allies, they have to work only on
those common objectives, and put aside their diverging objectives. Actor ambivalence is
calculated with three equilibrium indicators using their simple, valued, then valued, and
weighted positions. We‟re only considering the third indicator EQ3 to produce a histogram
representing the ambivalence of actors on objectives (Figure 27).
If two actors have common interests their potential alliance is very much probable. If their
interests are diverging, they are more likely to be in conflict.
However, it is not enough to be in conflict with an actor in order to oppose him; one must
also have the direct or indirect means of action to do so. This conditions the alliances or
conflicts. Furthermore, it is the existence of a favourable competitiveness that triggers a
conflict (Gombleu, 2018).
Order 03 analysis clarifies the impact of considering actors‟ competitiveness in the
evaluation of their convergences, and divergences. This not only affects the intensities of
these indicators as shown in the graphs but also allows us to assess actors‟ mobilisations,
and rates of opposition towards objectives in both systems.
The rate of opposition on all 9 objectives is non-existent since all mobilisation values are
positive. Meaning that not only are the actors involved in the 9 objectives, but they also have
means of action on them considering their competitiveness.
We notice a significant decrease in the overall intensity of convergences, and divergences in
both systems when considering the actor‟s competitiveness. Implying that actors have less
means of actions to trigger conflicts or form alliances in real MSP than in theory.
The strongest link of convergence in theory is between ministries: ME, MICLAT, and
MFPP but the ministry in charge of the environment diverges away in real MSP. The
weakest convergences in both systems are noticed with industry operators (IO), proxies (P),
medias (M), and recreational fishermen (RF) in addition to fishermen (F), and the national
coastal commission of Annaba (NCAA) in real MSP.
The strongest link of divergence in interests is between the coastguard service (NCGS), and
MFPP, and between MICLAT, and IO in theory MSP. While in real MSP, the strongest link
is between the ministry of industry, and mines (MIM), and ME. A lot of weak divergences
appear in theory which is not the case of real MSP where most links are of moderate
intensity. RF‟s order 02 analysis status is maintained, it has indeed a neutral or indifferent
position.
Medias do not appear on the divergence graphs, probably because of their main topics of
interest which are not necessarily in line with the priorities of key players in costal and
marine zones. On the other hand, the temporal horizon for medias is not consistent with the
temporal horizon of administrative, and economic actors, and of coastal, and maritime
planning.
2.5. Ambivalence EQ3 :
Two actors can share both converging and diverging positions on different objectives. Hence, we
call this couple of actors ambivalent. If they wish to become allies, they have to work only on
those common objectives, and put aside their diverging objectives. Actor ambivalence is
calculated with three equilibrium indicators using their simple, valued, then valued, and
weighted positions. We‟re only considering the third indicator EQ3 to produce a histogram
representing the ambivalence of actors on objectives (Figure 27).
If two actors have common interests their potential alliance is very much probable. If their
interests are diverging, they are more likely to be in conflict.
However, it is not enough to be in conflict with an actor in order to oppose him; one must
also have the direct or indirect means of action to do so. This conditions the alliances or
conflicts. Furthermore, it is the existence of a favourable competitiveness that triggers a
conflict (Gombleu, 2018).
Order 03 analysis clarifies the impact of considering actors‟ competitiveness in the
evaluation of their convergences, and divergences. This not only affects the intensities of
these indicators as shown in the graphs but also allows us to assess actors‟ mobilisations,
and rates of opposition towards objectives in both systems.
The rate of opposition on all 9 objectives is non-existent since all mobilisation values are
positive. Meaning that not only are the actors involved in the 9 objectives, but they also have
means of action on them considering their competitiveness.
We notice a significant decrease in the overall intensity of convergences, and divergences in
both systems when considering the actor‟s competitiveness. Implying that actors have less
means of actions to trigger conflicts or form alliances in real MSP than in theory.
The strongest link of convergence in theory is between ministries: ME, MICLAT, and
MFPP but the ministry in charge of the environment diverges away in real MSP. The
weakest convergences in both systems are noticed with industry operators (IO), proxies (P),
medias (M), and recreational fishermen (RF) in addition to fishermen (F), and the national
coastal commission of Annaba (NCAA) in real MSP.
The strongest link of divergence in interests is between the coastguard service (NCGS), and
MFPP, and between MICLAT, and IO in theory MSP. While in real MSP, the strongest link
is between the ministry of industry, and mines (MIM), and ME. A lot of weak divergences
appear in theory which is not the case of real MSP where most links are of moderate
intensity. RF‟s order 02 analysis status is maintained, it has indeed a neutral or indifferent
position.
Medias do not appear on the divergence graphs, probably because of their main topics of
interest which are not necessarily in line with the priorities of key players in costal and
marine zones. On the other hand, the temporal horizon for medias is not consistent with the
temporal horizon of administrative, and economic actors, and of coastal, and maritime
planning.