Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/28580
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorJones, Estelle Ven_UK
dc.contributor.authorGray, Timen_UK
dc.contributor.authorMacintosh, Donalden_UK
dc.contributor.authorStead, Selina Men_UK
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-19T01:05:16Z-
dc.date.available2019-01-19T01:05:16Z-
dc.date.issued2016-04-30en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/28580-
dc.description.abstractSuccessful implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) requires critical reflection on governance structures especially in the biodiverse tropics where institutional capacity is weak and fragmented. This paper explores three modes of marine governance in Thailand and discusses the challenges each faces when delivering conservation and sustainable development objectives. Focusing on Marine Protected Areas (MPA), the dominant management approaches to biodiversity conservation, centralised, decentralised and shared governance, are scrutinised through a review of the literature and 24 key informant interviews with leading Thai academics, national and regional government officers and NGOs. We find both the centralised, state-managed MPA system and the decentralised, community-based MPA system to have severe limitations, for different reasons, in protecting biodiversity, whereas shared governance, despite being less common, is the best intermediate mode. Shared governance is the most viable option available in Thailand for working towards key CBD targets because: (1) local participation can legitimise much of the relationship with the centralised system and can help embed a decentralised system in natural resources management; (2) the centralised system will still remain in ultimate control, which, whilst not favoured by those who want decentralisation, will satisfy powerful elites, and offer more opportunity to empower local people to take responsibility for conservation targets; and (3) the capacity of both local and national stakeholders can be built to deal with the complexity of the marine environment.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherElsevieren_UK
dc.relationJones EV, Gray T, Macintosh D & Stead SM (2016) A comparative analysis of three marine governance systems for implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Marine Policy, 66, pp. 30-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.01.016en_UK
dc.rightsThis article is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). You may copy and distribute the article, create extracts, abstracts and new works from the article, alter and revise the article, text or data mine the article and otherwise reuse the article commercially (including reuse and/or resale of the article) without permission from Elsevier. You must give appropriate credit to the original work, together with a link to the formal publication through the relevant DOI and a link to the Creative Commons user license above. You must indicate if any changes are made but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use of the work.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_UK
dc.subjectConvention on Biological Diversityen_UK
dc.subjectMarine governanceen_UK
dc.subjectMarine protected areasen_UK
dc.subjectShared governanceen_UK
dc.subjectCommunityen_UK
dc.subjectThailanden_UK
dc.titleA comparative analysis of three marine governance systems for implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)en_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.marpol.2016.01.016en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleMarine Policyen_UK
dc.citation.issn1872-9460en_UK
dc.citation.issn0308-597Xen_UK
dc.citation.volume66en_UK
dc.citation.spage30en_UK
dc.citation.epage38en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.contributor.funderNatural Environment Research Councilen_UK
dc.citation.date21/01/2016en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationNewcastle Universityen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationNewcastle Universityen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationAarhus Universityen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationNewcastle Universityen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS: WOS:000371552800005en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-84954469972en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1090282en_UK
dc.date.accepted2016-01-12en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2016-01-12en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2019-01-17en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_UK
local.rioxx.authorJones, Estelle V|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorGray, Tim|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorMacintosh, Donald|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorStead, Selina M|en_UK
local.rioxx.projectProject ID unknown|Natural Environment Research Council|http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000270en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2019-01-17en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/|2019-01-17|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenameA comparative analysis of three marine governance systems for implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source1872-9460en_UK
Appears in Collections:Aquaculture Journal Articles



This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.