240 likes | 334 Views
1. Center of economics and ethics for the environment and development. Farm ed icons: a deliberative decision/policy making case study. Marennes Oysters in the Pertuis Charentais, France. Université de Versailles Saint Quentin-en--Yvelines.
E N D
1 Center of economics and ethics for the environment and development Farmed icons: a deliberative decision/policy making case study. Marennes Oysters in the PertuisCharentais, France. Université de Versailles Saint Quentin-en--Yvelines Jean-Paul Vanderlinden1, Claire Kostrzewa1, Jean Prou2, Scott Bremer1, Jean-Marc Douguet1 and Martin O’Connor1. 2 IFREMER Station de La Tramblade
Issue mapping • Method • Summary results • Discussion • Conclusion • Real world results • Challenges related results • Comparative perspective? • Introduction • Context • The SPICOSA project • Marennes Oysters and the Pertuis Charentais • Freshwater allocation issues • Challenges • Deliberative decision making • Ker-DST deliberation support tool • Getting to a dual scale structuring of deliberation OUTLINE
The SPICOSA Projet Science and Policy Integration for COStal Areas. 13 Work Packages 54 research institutes 4 years 12*106$ Mid term evaluation just finished 17 Application sites CONTEXT
Marennes Oysters as a strong identity marker in the Pertuis Charentais CONTEXT A picture (thing) representing something of greater significance
The freshwater allocation ISSUE CONTEXT From Granjou et Garin (2006)
The freshwater allocation ISSUE CONTEXT From Filali (2007)
Deliberative decision making Employment Economics Society CHALLENGES Identity Environment Marshlands How can policy makers make sense of intertwined dynamic discourses
Deliberative decision making Employment Economics Society CHALLENGES Identity Environment Marshlands How can policy makers make sense of intertwined dynamic discourses
Z-axis — Scenarios ofPossible futures Y-axis — Categories of Stakeholders X-axis — The Governance Issues(or principal evaluation categories) Ker-DST deliberation Support Tool CHALLENGES
Ker-DST deliberation Support Tool CHALLENGES Part of SPICOSA’S suites of science and policy integration tools http://kercoast.c3ed.uvsq.fr/
Dual scale deliberation • How to articulate the constant dialog between local issues and overarching ICZM goals? • How to contextualize local deliberation? • How to move further once an issue fades away/ is dealt with. • How to prepare for learning circles/spirals? CHALLENGES ?
Methods • Part of larger stakeholder issue mapping thing (4 Maps produced) • Semi structured interview • Coding • Issues • Connexions between issues • Representation • Table (Map 1 and Map 4) • Diagram (Map 2 and Map 3) – Use of VUE software • Validation • Other methological routes available • Desktop + focus group • Focus groups • Participatory mapping etc… ISSUE MAPPING
Results in a nutshell ISSUE MAPPING
Short discussion ISSUE MAPPING
Real life results • Iterative co-construction of maps • Creation of progressively shared narratives • Pre-deliberative deliberation????? • Setting up the rules of future deliberation • Appropriation of the clarifying nature of the mapping • Appropriation of the simplifying nature of the mapping SETTING THE FOUNDATION FOR A DELIBERATIVE COMMUNITY? CONCLUSION
Challenge related results Employment Economics Society CONCLUSION Identity Environment Marshlands
Challenge related results CONCLUSION
Challenge related results Two connected matrices : local and overarching issues CONCLUSION
THANK YOU ! To my fellow IACA team mate To the conference organizing team To the EC and SPICOSA partners To IFREMER jean-paul.vanderlinden@uvsq.fr