Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Towards deliberative and pragmatic co-management

Research

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Towards deliberative and pragmatic co-management: a comparison between inshore fisheries authorities in England and Scotland

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Towards deliberative and pragmatic co-management: a comparison between inshore fisheries authorities in England and Scotland. / Pieraccini, Margherita; Cardwell, Emma Jayne.
In: Environmental Politics, Vol. 25, No. 4, 2015, p. 729-748.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Pieraccini, M & Cardwell, EJ 2015, 'Towards deliberative and pragmatic co-management: a comparison between inshore fisheries authorities in England and Scotland', Environmental Politics, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 729-748. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2015.1090372

APA

Pieraccini, M., & Cardwell, E. J. (2015). Towards deliberative and pragmatic co-management: a comparison between inshore fisheries authorities in England and Scotland. Environmental Politics, 25(4), 729-748. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2015.1090372

Vancouver

Pieraccini M, Cardwell EJ. Towards deliberative and pragmatic co-management: a comparison between inshore fisheries authorities in England and Scotland. Environmental Politics. 2015;25(4):729-748. Epub 2015 Sept 30. doi: 10.1080/09644016.2015.1090372

Author

Pieraccini, Margherita ; Cardwell, Emma Jayne. / Towards deliberative and pragmatic co-management : a comparison between inshore fisheries authorities in England and Scotland. In: Environmental Politics. 2015 ; Vol. 25, No. 4. pp. 729-748.

Bibtex

@article{5edb6c84efd5499bac951962e5664bf5,
title = "Towards deliberative and pragmatic co-management: a comparison between inshore fisheries authorities in England and Scotland",
abstract = "In seeking to answer the question {\textquoteleft}who should be included in fisheries co-management?{\textquoteright}, a constructive critique of the existing co-management literature is provided by filling the gaps of Habermas{\textquoteright}s deliberative theory of democracy with Dewey{\textquoteright}s pragmatism. Three conditions for ensuring democratic co-management are extrapolated from the theories: actors{\textquoteright} authority over decision making (empowerment), actors{\textquoteright} diversity (membership), and the right to self-nomination (procedures for external inclusion). The theoretical insights developed are supported with two examples of co-management institutions for inshore fisheries in the UK: Scottish Inshore Fisheries Groups (IFGs) and English Inshore Fisheries Conservation Authorities (IFCAs).",
author = "Margherita Pieraccini and Cardwell, {Emma Jayne}",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1080/09644016.2015.1090372",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "729--748",
journal = "Environmental Politics",
issn = "0964-4016",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Towards deliberative and pragmatic co-management

T2 - a comparison between inshore fisheries authorities in England and Scotland

AU - Pieraccini, Margherita

AU - Cardwell, Emma Jayne

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - In seeking to answer the question ‘who should be included in fisheries co-management?’, a constructive critique of the existing co-management literature is provided by filling the gaps of Habermas’s deliberative theory of democracy with Dewey’s pragmatism. Three conditions for ensuring democratic co-management are extrapolated from the theories: actors’ authority over decision making (empowerment), actors’ diversity (membership), and the right to self-nomination (procedures for external inclusion). The theoretical insights developed are supported with two examples of co-management institutions for inshore fisheries in the UK: Scottish Inshore Fisheries Groups (IFGs) and English Inshore Fisheries Conservation Authorities (IFCAs).

AB - In seeking to answer the question ‘who should be included in fisheries co-management?’, a constructive critique of the existing co-management literature is provided by filling the gaps of Habermas’s deliberative theory of democracy with Dewey’s pragmatism. Three conditions for ensuring democratic co-management are extrapolated from the theories: actors’ authority over decision making (empowerment), actors’ diversity (membership), and the right to self-nomination (procedures for external inclusion). The theoretical insights developed are supported with two examples of co-management institutions for inshore fisheries in the UK: Scottish Inshore Fisheries Groups (IFGs) and English Inshore Fisheries Conservation Authorities (IFCAs).

U2 - 10.1080/09644016.2015.1090372

DO - 10.1080/09644016.2015.1090372

M3 - Journal article

VL - 25

SP - 729

EP - 748

JO - Environmental Politics

JF - Environmental Politics

SN - 0964-4016

IS - 4

ER -