Liza Griffin

Scales of knowledge: North Sea fisheries governance, the local fisherman and the European scientist

Recent European Union fisheries governance reforms have included the development of new regional fora designed to enable stakeholders and scientists to deliberate together about the nature of the fisheries crisis and its possible solutions. In this devolved context, fishing industry groups frequently argue, deploying local knowledge of the fishing grounds, that stocks are in better shape than many authorities estimate using the tools of universal science. Under EU fisheries governance reform, policymakers and stakeholders are forced to arbitrate between these different knowledge claims in new ways and in new, rescaled spaces. This adjudication between universal, expert knowledges and the locally-framed ‘insurgent knowledge’ of fishermen is a power-laden exercise. The rescaling of participatory processes appears to have had an effect upon the way, and at which scale, stakeholders frame their knowledge claims and how, through this reframing of knowledge, certain stakeholders attempt to lever greater influence in fisheries policymaking.

Where is Power in Governance? Why Geography Matters in the Theory of Governance

The concept of governance has provided many ways to theorise the shifting power relations between the state, interest groups and civil society over the last 30 years. Theorisations have culminated in ‘spatial imaginaries’ for visualising new governing practices and their associated power relations. By paying attention to these imaginaries, it is possible to see how each theory of governance brings particular spatialities of power to the fore, while necessarily foreclosing others. This foreclosure stems from a failure to visualise diverse and multiple modes of power in governance models and to take in power as a relative and spatially contingent property. This is not only theoretically significant, however; it also has important practical consequences for how we govern effectively in practice. I argue that rather than starting our analyses of governance arrangements with theoretical models which appear to predetermine our understanding of the spatial workings of power, we should instead remain open and attuned to the complex geographies of power that might actually operate in practices of governance on the ground. I suggest that by deploying John Allens topological approach to power we can achieve a more relational and spatially contingent account of power in practice under the turn to governance. This will give us greater insight into actual governance arrangements and their limitations, exclusions and unevenness.

All aboard: Power, participation and governance in the North Sea regional advisory council

This paper explores and reveals some hitherto concealed powers relations in the European Unions new political-economic governance procedures. It does this through an empirical investigation of the fisheries stakeholder forum, the North Sea Regional Advisory Council. It shows that although governance arrangements are now designed to be more inclusive than they were before the CFP (Common Fisheries Policy) reforms, they do still involve exclusions, and uneven power relations that are not always readily apparent. The paper is based on research carried out by the author, comprising a case study of the CFP governance reforms. The research includes analysis of EU policy documents, press reports and websites and over 50 interviews with key players in North Sea fisheries governance.