Ecosystem-Based Integrated Ocean Management: A Framework for Sustainable Ocean Economy Development

Balance of Power

(Key) Stakeholders Process leadership, authority for process and outcomes

Stakeholder Leadership

Delegate of some or all responsibility for process and outcomes Authorities

Stakeholders Right to veto outcomes or break off process

Decision Making

Retain formal power over process and outcomes Authorities

Stakeholders Joint participation, collaborative and consensus based, help define process and outcomes Obliged to collaborate with stakeholders, but retain formal power over process and outcomes Authorities Stakeholders Joint participation, dialogue and learning, right to be listened to Obliged to listen, but retain power to define process and decide outcomes Authorities Stakeholders Bilateral participation, right to review plans and provide feedback Obliged to listen, but retain power to define process and decide outcomes Authorities Stakeholders Passive participation, right to be informed, but no influence on process or outcomes Obliged to inform stakeholders, but retain full control over process and outcomes Authorities

Collaboration

Deliberation

Consultation

Information Provision

Source: adapted from Morf et al. (2019).

Figure 6. The Ladder of Participation. The ladder represents different levels of power delegation from authorities to stakeholders. Higher levels of power delegation can ease burdens on authorities and improve management effectiveness, if the power delegation is genuine. Two levels represented in this figure, deliberation and collaboration, require different stakeholders to engage with each other and work together across sectoral divides (indicated by the black circular arrows around the stakeholder group icon). This cross-sectoral element is absent in the two highest levels on this particular version of the ladder, which is based on a geographically limited sample of MSP case studies (all in Europe). However, in EB-IOM it is also possible to maintain the cross-sectoral collaborative aspect while fully delegating power to stakeholders (for example, there are successful examples of collaborative, community-based co-management of coastal fisheries and MPAs in other parts of the world). Cross-sectoral engagement can bring significant benefits, if there is sufficient capacity to support mechanisms that bring stakeholders together and facilitate their joint work. The most appropriate and effective form of engage- ment depends on a wide range of case-specific considerations (including the cultural, political, and legislative context, established engagement practices, and the resources and capacities available). There is no single type of engagement that is inherently superior: every type of engagement represented here can be an effective element of EB-IOM in the right circumstances, and different types of engagement might be needed at different stages of the same process.

19