| 1. |
- Allard, Christina, et al.
(författare)
-
Rasbiologiskt språkbruk i statens rättsprocess mot sameby : DN Debatt 2015-06-11
- 2015
-
Annan publikation (populärvet., debatt m.m.)abstract
- Statens hantering av forskningsresultat i rättsprocessen med Girjas sameby utgör ett hot mot Sverige som rättsstat och kunskapsnation. Åratal av svensk och internationell forskning underkänns och man använder ett språkbruk som skulle kunna vara hämtat från rasbiologins tid. Nu måste staten ta sitt ansvar och börja agera som en demokratisk rättsstat, skriver 59 forskare.
|
|
| 2. |
- Boström, Magnus, et al.
(författare)
-
The Ecosystem Approach to Management in Baltic Sea Governance : Towards Increased Reflexivity?
- 2016. - 1
-
Ingår i: Environmental Governance of the Baltic Sea. - Cham : Springer. - 9783319270050 - 9783319270067 - 9789401772785 ; , s. 149-172
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter analyses the governance structures linked to the marine environment of the Baltic Sea. The purpose is to assess whether current developments of the governance structures have a potential to take into account requirements of an Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM). We use the concept of reflexive governance to understand key components and weaknesses in contemporary governance modes, as well as to elaborate on possible pathways towards a governance mode more aligned with EAM. The reflexive governance framework highlights three elements: (1) acknowledgement of uncertainty and ambiguity; (2) a holistic approach in terms of scales, sectors and actors; and (3) acknowledgement of path dependency and incremental policy-making. Our analysis is based on a comparative case study approach, including analysis of the governance in five environmental risk areas: chemical pollution, overfishing, eutrophication, invasive alien species and pollution from shipping. The chapter highlights an existing governance mode that is ill-equipped to deal with the complexity of environmental problems in a holistic manner, with systematic attention to uncertainty, plurality of values, ambiguity and limited knowledge, while also pointing at important recent cognitive and institutional developments that can favour pathways towards reflexive governance and consequently EAM.
|
|
| 3. |
- Gee, Kira, et al.
(författare)
-
Can tools contribute to integration in MSP? : A comparative review of selected tools and approaches
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Ocean and Coastal Management. - : Elsevier. - 0964-5691 .- 1873-524X. ; 179, s. 1-11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The role of tools and approaches is currently much debated in maritime spatial planning (MSP). Past evaluation has mainly concentrated on decision support tools and the tangible outputs these can provide for MSP, but little attention has so far been been given to the soft or indirect benefits tool use can have in MSP. This paper assesses the potential benefits of tool use in the context of four common integration challenges in MSP. Drawing on case study material from the Baltic Sea region, the paper reviews the potential contribution of five selected tools and approaches to multi-level and transboundary, policy and sector, stakeholder and knowledge integration. Specific end points are defined for each integration challenge, including general desired outcomes of integrated MSP processes as a template for assessment. Our review shows that the selected tools play different roles in moving towards the various end points of MSP integration. There is an important difference between the potential of each tool, or its inherent capacity, and how it is applied, e.g. in a participative or non-participative setting. Another lesson is that some integration benefits can be achieved by the tools alone, while others – often secondary benefits - depend on how the outcomes of tool use are taken up by the subsequent MSP process. Although the nature of a tool does restrict its potential contribution to MSP integration challenges, the secondary “soft” benefits that can be achieved through certain styles of application and good links to the MSP process can add important integration benefits up and beyond the tool itself. The results presented here may also be relevant to other types of spatial planning and conservation management.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Hassler, Björn, 1964-, et al.
(författare)
-
BONUS BALTSPACE D2:2 : Ambitions and Realities in Baltic Sea Marine Spatial Planning and the Ecosystem Approach: Policy and Sector Coordination in Promotion of Regional Integration
- 2017
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This report is part of the BONUS BALTSPACE project and is focused on challenges for policy and sector integration in Baltic Sea marine spatial planning (MSP). The main objectives have been to identify concrete coordination problems, to analyse why they have emerged and to discuss possible remedies. It is based on selected aspects extracted from case studies carried out in this project related to the development of regional MSP approaches in Denmark, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Sweden and on an additional case study on the HELCOM-VASAB Working Group on MSP. To facilitate the analysis of vertical policy interactions between institutions at different levels as well as of horizontal interactions over sector and country borders, an analytical framework was constructed. This framework consists of two main components; (a) institution-driven coordination where institutions such as global treaties, the EU, regional organisations, and state authorities provide boundaries for decisions taken at lower levels and (b) benefit-driven coordination capturing horizontal coordination across sector and country borders.
|
|
| 6. |
- Hassler, Björn, 1964-, et al.
(författare)
-
BONUS BALTSPACE: Deliverable 2.7: New generation EU Directives and the role of transnational coordination : Marine Spatial Planning of the Baltic Sea
- 2018
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The EU Maritime Spatial Planning Directive (MSP Directive) from 2014 is an example of a so-called new generation directive, which gives Member States room for adaptation to national contexts. Because of this larger room for adaptation, transposition becomes a process of designing domestic policy frameworks that fulfil the broad requirements of the Directive, rather than a simple and linear implementation procedure. However, allowing Member States to design marine spatial planning frameworks that fit domestic contexts, have thus far meant that regional coherence suffers. Although the pivotal role of transnational coordination is emphasised in the Directive, it does not stipulate how to set up such coordination, and the Member States have not yet been able to achieve much of self-organising in this area.A closer look is in this report taken on four policy-dimensions that are emphasised in the MSP Directive: Planning approach, Organisation, Sustainability, and Stakeholder inclusion. Based on in-depth case studies carried out in the BALTSPACE research project on MSP frameworks in Denmark, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Sweden, examples of coordination and coherency challenges are described and discussed for each dimension.It is shown that planning approaches can differ substantially between neighbouring countries, which can make it challenging to coordinate across country borders. Even though they share the same (EU) regulatory pressures, Latvia and Lithuania, for example, are developing national MSP frameworks based on quite different conceptual foundations. Whereas Latvia has taken the Ecosystem Approach as a point of departure for constructing a new MSP framework, Lithuania has instead chosen to adapt existing functional zoning approaches to management of maritime areas. Such diversity may be possible to explain because of differing domestic contexts, but may nevertheless lead to coordination problems when coordination is needed.Divergence between national MSP frameworks can also emerge from different political, jurisdictional and, administrative systems and traditions, that is, in societal organisation. In an example based on case studies undertaken in Denmark and Sweden, it is shown that degree of societal centralisation and distribution of political power can be related to differences in how environmental protection and blue growth are prioritised. However, it is difficult to tell whether diverging prioritisations have led to differences on organisation, or of it is the other way around, that differences in organisation have led to diverging prioritisations.It is stated in the MSP Directive that the overarching objective is to promote sustainable development. The focus on sustainable development can be said to reflect the Directive’s new generation characteristics. The concept of sustainable development is broad and imprecise, which facilitates political agreement. However, when more precise details must be addressed, disagreements may surface that make implementation challenging. In cases where neighbouring countries diverge substantially on how ecological, economic and social sustainable ought to be balanced, finding agreements on how to coordinate policies and practices, when needed, can be difficult. Based on case studies in Denmark, Latvia, Lithuania, and Sweden, it is, for example, argued that adoption of functional zoning or the Ecosystem Approach may not say much about how ecological, economic, and social dimensions are prioritised in different countries.Stakeholder consultations of some kind have historically been undertaken in all Baltic Sea countries. However, how such consultations have been undertaken, who have been invited, and the role the consultations play in relation to political decision-making differ, as shown in examples from Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Poland. Because the MSP Directive is silent on how to design stakeholder consultations – it only says that they should be held – there is no political pressure on regional coordination. It is not clear from our data if these differences cause efficiency losses due to coordination deficits, but a reasonable assumption is that when, for example, marine natural resources are shared between two or more countries, jointly designed and undertaken consultations on specific transboundary issues potentially can promote transparency, understanding, and coordination.In conclusion, it is suggested that while regional coherency is often called for as a means to reduce inefficiencies, it might not be a good idea to integrate without discretion. Considering that the MSP Directive allows domestic context to matter when Member States design national MSP frameworks and that adaptation to domestic context is likely to reduce implantation gaps and increase the legitimacy of marine spatial planning, a more reasonable objective can be to embrace domestic diversity, while simultaneously adaptively promoting possibilities to solve coordination problems at lower levels, if they emerge or can be foreseen. From this perspective, increased coherence is a tool to reduce efficiency losses, rather than an intrinsic good.
|
|
| 7. |
- Hassler, Björn, 1964-, et al.
(författare)
-
Collective action and agency in Baltic Sea marine spatial planning: Transnational policy coordination in the promotion of regional coherence
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Marine Policy. - : Elsevier BV. - 0308-597X .- 1872-9460. ; 92, s. 138-147
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Despite the increasing attention given to marine spatial planning and the widely acknowledged need for transnational policy coordination, regional coherence has not yet improved a great deal in the Baltic Sea region. Therefore, the main objectives in this article are: (a) to map existing governance structures at all levels that influence how domestic marine spatial planning policy strategies are formed, (b) to identify specific challenges to improved regional cooperation and coordination, and (c) to discuss possible remedies. Based on data from in-depth case studies carried out in the BONUS BALTSPACE research project, it is shown that, despite the shared goal of sustainability and efficient resource use in relevant EU Directives, action plans and other policy instruments, domestic plans are emerging in diverse ways, mainly reflecting varying domestic administrative structures, sectoral interests, political prioritisations, and handling of potentially conflicting policy objectives. A fruitful distinction can be made between, on the one hand, regulatory institutions and structures above the state level where decision-making mechanisms are typically grounded in consensual regimes and, on the other hand, bilateral, issue-specific collaboration, typically between adjacent countries. It is argued that, to improve overall marine spatial planning governance, these two governance components need to be brought together to improve consistency between regional alignment and to enhance opportunities for countries to collaborate at lower levels. Issue-specific transnational working groups or workshops can be one way to identify and act upon such potential synergies. © 2018 The Authors
|
|
| 8. |
- Hassler, Björn, 1964-, et al.
(författare)
-
Cooperating for sustainable regional marine governance : The case of fisheries and nutrient runoff from agriculture to the Baltic Sea, Synthesis report
- 2019
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Over-fishing and eutrophication (too much nutrients) are among the most severe threats to the ecosystems of the Baltic Sea and the ecosystem services they provide. Despite the well-known fact that effective and sustainable management requires cooperation – among as well as within states – appropriate frameworks that work have not yet been constructed and successfully applied. This report summarises findings from a research project on cooperation for sustainable marine governance of the Baltic Sea carried out between 2013 and 2018. Three aspects of central relevance for the understanding of regional cooperation in environmental governance are distinguished: interests, knowledge and management. It is shown that it is not enough to design cooperative arrangements that make the group of users, stakeholders or states better off than without such an arrangement. It is furthermore required that all actors have individual interests to participate, and that free-riding on others’ contributions can be controlled. When this is not the case, effective abatement of eutrophication is not likely to be forthcoming, even though aggregated benefits from such measures are larger than expected costs.Knowledge often play important roles in marine environmental governance, not least in relation to so-called epistemic communities, that is, groups of experts that share a common understanding of the environmental problem at hand, and how to address it. It is shown that the coherence of the epistemic group can be a crucial factor influencing its impact. In both abatement of eutrophication and management of fish stocks, these expert groups have been somewhat divided, which has limited their impact.Modes of management can influence cooperation and outcomes in ways that can be difficult to predict. Although environmental taxes and subsidies are powerful policy instruments in contemporary governance, they must be carefully crafted to fit into exiting norms and contexts to be effective. It is shown that monetary incentives targeting farmers’ use of fertilisers tend not to be effective when they are at odds with deeply held norms on what constitute a “good farmer”.
|
|
| 9. |
- Hassler, Björn
(författare)
-
Coping and adaptation in socio-ecological problem structures : Towards an integrated framework for analyzing trans-boundary environmental problems in marine settings
- 2015
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The literature on governance of socio-ecological systems has been growing fast during the last one or two decades. However, sound theoretical underpinnings to these systems have not been sufficiently articulated and tied to existing theory, it is argued in this working paper. To address this shortcoming, this paper aims to elaborate on how the theoretical constructs problem structure, collective choice theory and adaptive governance can be brought together to form a coherent analytical framework for analyzing trans-boundary environmental problems in marine settings. The argument that collective action problematiques may inhibit successful adaptation to environmental change among sovereign states is fundamental to this model. Given that governments tend to prefer national coping strategies where expected national rather than joint benefits are maximized, mutually beneficial cooperation often does not evolve and regional adaptation turn out piecemeal. It is concluded that in order to improve trans-national environmental governance, a better understanding of underlying drivers and countries’ incentives to take action is a necessary prerequisite.
|
|
| 10. |
- Hassler, Björn, 1964-, et al.
(författare)
-
New generation EU directives, sustainability, and the role of transnationalcoordination in Baltic Sea maritime spatial planning
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Ocean and Coastal Management. - : Elsevier. - 0964-5691 .- 1873-524X. ; :169, s. 254-263
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The EU MSP Directive is an example of a so-called new generation directive, which gives Member States room foradaptation to national contexts. The main objective in this article is to identify and analyse potential obstacles toeffective and efficient planning caused by the diversity among national MSP frameworks that the Directive'sbroad regulatory boundaries have led to. It is shown that planning approaches can differ substantially betweenneighbouring countries, which can make it challenging to coordinate across national borders. Divergence betweennational MSP frameworks can also emerge from how political, jurisdictional and, administrative systemsand traditions are organised in different Member States. It is shown that neighbouring countries can divergesubstantially in how the ecological, economic and social dimensions of sustainability are balanced, which canmake transnational coordination challenging. Furthermore, it is shown that stakeholder consultations differamong Member States in terms of, for example, who were invited, how the consultations were undertaken, andthe role they play in relation to political decision-making. Because of these, and other differences in how MSPframeworks are being developed in the Member States, it is suggested that regional integration should bepromoted with discretion. From this perspective, it seems reasonable to embrace diversity, while simultaneouslypromoting the adaptive management of coordination problems at lower levels, when, or if, they emerge or canbe foreseen. Thus, increased integration of national MSP frameworks should be viewed as an instrument toreduce concrete efficiency losses, rather than as an intrinsic good.
|
|
