Home 5 Module Assessment LME Module: Governance
GOVERNANCE MODULE INDICATORS

 

The governance module is implementing innovative governance practices in several GEF funded LME projects now underway in Africa and Asia. In LME assessment and management projects supported by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) for the Guinea Current, and Benguela Current LMEs, agreements have been reached among the environmental, fisheries, energy and tourism ministers of the countries bordering these LMEs to enter into joint transboundary, international resource assessment and management Commissions. Elsewhere, the Great Barrier Reef and Antarctic LMEs are also being managed from an ecosystem perspective, the latter under the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. Governance profiles of LMEs are being explored to determine their utility in promoting long-term sustainability of ecosystem resources (Juda and Hennessey 2001). In each of the LMEs, governance jurisdiction can be scaled to ensure conformance with existing legislated mandates and authorities (Olsen et al. 2006).

The multisectoral approach to GEF funded LME assessment and management projects has been adopted in the establishment of the three-country Benguela Current Commission. South Africa, Namibia, and Angola signed an agreement in August 2006 to formally establish the Benguela Current Commission (BCC) that provides for joint management of the goods and services of the Benguela Current LME. Establishment of the BCC is a culmination of 10 years of effort by scientists, stakeholders, resource managers, and multisectoral ministerial representatives (e.g. fisheries, mining, energy, tourism, environment) from the three countries who began to share their knowledge and understanding of the Benguela Current LME in 1995 during the first operational phase of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) supported BCLME assessment and management project (www.bclme.org/news). The three Southwest African countries will collectively manage transboundary environmental and resource issues including recovering and sustaining fish stocks, mitigating effects of offshore mining and oil and gas production, mariculture, shipping, and transport, energy production, tourism, and mining, and improving the condition of degraded habitats. The BCC in partnership with the GEF, UNDP, and other agencies including US-NOAA, Norwegian, German, and Icelandic marine specialists, is advancing the understanding of the physical and biological drivers of change through research and assessment actions that will support management actions for protecting and sustaining the highly valued goods and services of the BCLME. Now in its fifth year, the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem Program has allocated US$10 million in support of 75 scientific and economic research projects in the region. Considerable effort is presently underway by the BCLME Project in bringing the information from each of the five assessment modules together into an integrated ecosystem-based assessment (IEA), describing the overall ecological condition and prospects for recovery and sustainability of the goods and services of the ecosystem.

The 10-year timeline of annualized adaptive management actions is depicted in Figure 1. These planning actions, including joint transboundary diagnostic analyses (TDAs) and strategic action plans (SAPs), provide the participating countries opportunity to jointly prioritize activities, monitor progress over time, and eventually to continue the LME assessment and management program as a self-financing activity supported with partnerships among stakeholders and engaged ministries vested with responsibility for marine resource development and sustainability. Required are adaptive management actions based on a thorough additive and integrative evaluation of the effects of changing ecological conditions across the multiple goods and services sectors.

In the mid-1990s the scientific basis for moving toward ecosystem based assessment and management of marine goods and services was put forward by Lubchenco (1994; McLeod et al. 2005) and the Ecological Society of America (Christensen 1996). This movement represents a paradigm shift moving from single species assessments to multiple species assessments and the LME scale for measuring changing ecosystem states on an annual basis with a focus on ecosystem goods and ecosystem services.

In order to respond adaptively to enhanced scientific information, socioeconomic considerations must be closely integrated with science findings. Both socioeconomic and governance indicators are used in the planning and implementation actions as summarized in Figure 1. Within the context of ecosystem-based management the integration of data and information for decision making is additive and vertically integrated for the five modules, and adaptive contingent on annual assessment findings horizontally across years. From Year 1, the GEF supported projects move toward the goal of self-financing of the ecosystem assessment and management process by year 10.

Figure 1. Integrated Ecosystem-based assessment and adaptive management planning actions over 10 years.

 

References

Christensen NL, Bartuska AM, Brown JH, Carpenter S, D'Antonio C, Francis R, Franklin JF, MacMahon JA, Noss RF, Parsons DJ and others. 1996. Report of the Ecological Society of America committee on the scientific basis for ecosystem management. Ecological Applications 6(3):665-691.

Juda L, Hennessey T. 2001. Governance profiles and the management of the uses of large marine ecosystems. Ocean Development and International Law 32:41-67.

Lubchenco J. 1994. The scientific basis of ecosystem management: Framing the context, language, and goals. In: Zinn J, Corn ML, editors. Ecosystem management: Status and potential: 103rd Congress, 2d Session, Committee Print. U.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents. 33-39.

McLeod KL, Lubchenco J, Palumbi SR, Rosenberg AA. Scientific Consensus Statement on Marine Ecosystem-Based Management. Signed by 219 academic scientists and policy experts with relevant expertise. compassonline: Communication Partnership for Science and the Sea (COMPASS) [ http://compassonline.org/?q=EBM ]

Olsen SB, Sutinen JG, Juda L, Hennessey TM, Grigalunas TA. 2006. A Handbook on Governance and Socioeconomics of Large Marine Ecosystems. Kingston, RI: Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island. 94 p.

Selected Governance Indicators Module Publications

Belsky MH. 1986. Legal constraints and options for total ecosystem management of large marine ecosystems. In: Sherman K, Alexander LM, eds, editors. Variability and management of large marine ecosystems. AAAS Selected Symp. 99. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, Inc.

Belsky MH. 1989. The ecosystem model mandate for a comprehensive United States ocean policy and Law of the Sea. San Diego Law Review 26(3):417-495.

Belsky MH. 1992. Interrelationships of law in the management of large marine ecosystems. In: Sherman K, Alexander LM, Gold BD, editors. Large marine ecosystems: Patterns, processes, and yields. Washington, DC: AAAS Press. p 224-233.

Juda L. 1999. Consideration in developing a functional approach to the governance of large marine ecosystems. Ocean Development and International Law 30(2):89-125.

Juda L. 1996. Developing international law and ecosystem-based fisheries management. In: Sherman K, Jaworski NA, Smayda TJ, eds, editors. The Northeast Shelf ecosystem: Assessment, sustainability and management. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Science, Inc. p 527-533.

McLeod KL, Lubchenco J, Palumbi SR, Rosenberg AA. Scientific Consensus Statement on Marine Ecosystem-Based Management. Signed by 219 academic scientists and policy experts with relevant expertise. compassonline: Communication Partnership for Science and the Sea (COMPASS) [ http://compassonline.org/?q=EBM ]

Olsen SB, Sutinen JG, Juda L, Hennessey TM, Grigalunas TA. 2006. A Handbook on Governance and Socioeconomics of Large Marine Ecosystems. Kingston, RI: Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island. 94 p.

Siron, R., Sherman, K., Skjoldal, HR, Hiltz, E. 2008. Ecosystem-based management in the Arctic Ocean: A Multi-Level Spatial Approach. Arctic 61:86-102 ,Suppl.1.

Somers, E. 1998. Legal constraints and options for total ecosystem management of large marine ecosystems. 333-342 in Sherman, K., E.M. Okemwa, M.J. Ntiba, eds. Large Marine Ecosystems of the Indian Ocean: Assessment, sustainability, and management. Blackwell Science. 394p.

Ukwe, C.N., CA Ibe, K. Sherman. 2006. A sixteen-country mobilization for sustainable fisheries in the Guinea Current Large Marine Ecosystem. Ocean & Coastal Management 49:385-412.

Wang, H. 2004. Ecosystem management and its application to large marine ecosystems: Science, law, and politics. Ocean Development and International Law 35(1):41-74.