Community engagement and power dynamics in conservation philanthropy grant making.

Funding decisions influence where, how, and by whom conservation is pursued globally. In the context of growing calls for more participatory, Indigenous-led, and socially just conservation, we undertook the first empirical investigation of how philanthropic foundations working in marine conservation globally engage communities in grant-making decisions. We paid particular attention to whether and how community engagement practices reinforce or disrupt existing power dynamics. We conducted semistructured remote interviews with 46 individuals from 32 marine conservation foundations to identify how conservation foundations engage communities in setting their priorities and deciding which organizations and projects to fund. We found that community engagement in foundation decision-making was limited in practice. Eleven of the 32 foundations reported some form of community engagement in funding decisions. Two of these foundations empowered communities to shape funding priorities and projects through strong forms of engagement. Many engagement practices were one way, one time, or indirect and confined to certain points in decision-making processes. These weaker practices limited community input and reinforced unequal power relations, which may undermine the legitimacy, equity, and effectiveness of conservation efforts. We suggest that foundations aim for stronger forms of community engagement and reflect on how their grant-making practices affect power relations between foundations and communities.

Participación comunitaria y dinámicas de poder en la concesión de subsidios para la filantropía de la conservación Resumen Realizamos la primera investigación empírica sobre la forma en que las fundaciones filantrópicas que trabajan con la conservación marina a nivel mundial involucran a las comunidades en las decisiones para la concesión de subsidios. Prestamos especial atención a cómo y si las prácticas de participación ciudadana refuerzan o interrumpen las dinámicas de poder existentes. Entrevistamos de forma remota a 46 individuos de 32 fundaciones de conservación marina para identificar cómo las fundaciones de conservación involucran a las comunidades para establecer sus prioridades y decidir cuáles organizaciones y proyectos financiar. Encontramos que la participación comunitaria en las decisiones de financiamiento estaba limitada en la práctica. Once de las 32 fundaciones reportaron algún tipo de participación ciudadana en sus decisiones de financiamiento. Dos de estas fundaciones empoderaron a las comunidades para que formaran las prioridades de financiamiento y a los proyectos por medio de una participación sólida. Muchas de las prácticas de participación eran de una manera, de una vez o indirectas y confinadas a ciertos puntos en el proceso de decisión. Estas prácticas más débiles limitaron la aportación comunitaria y reforzaron las relaciones desiguales de poder, lo que puede debilitar la legitimidad, equidad y eficiencia de los esfuerzos de conservación. Sugerimos que las fundaciones busquen maneras más sólidas de involucrar a la comunidad y reflexionen sobre el efecto de sus prácticas de concesión de subsidios sobre las relaciones de poder entre las fundaciones y las comunidades.

Managing small-scale commercial fisheries for adaptive capacity: insights from dynamic social-ecological drivers of change in Monterey Bay.

Globally, small-scale fisheries are influenced by dynamic climate, governance, and market drivers, which present social and ecological challenges and opportunities. It is difficult to manage fisheries adaptively for fluctuating drivers, except to allow participants to shift effort among multiple fisheries. Adapting to changing conditions allows small-scale fishery participants to survive economic and environmental disturbances and benefit from optimal conditions. This study explores the relative influence of large-scale drivers on shifts in effort and outcomes among three closely linked fisheries in Monterey Bay since the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act of 1976. In this region, Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax), northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax), and market squid (Loligo opalescens) fisheries comprise a tightly linked system where shifting focus among fisheries is a key element to adaptive capacity and reduced social and ecological vulnerability. Using a cluster analysis of landings, we identify four modes from 1974 to 2012 that are dominated (i.e., a given species accounting for the plurality of landings) by squid, sardine, anchovy, or lack any dominance, and seven points of transition among these periods. This approach enables us to determine which drivers are associated with each mode and each transition. Overall, we show that market and climate drivers are predominantly attributed to dominance transitions. Model selection of external drivers indicates that governance phases, reflected as perceived abundance, dictate long-term outcomes. Our findings suggest that globally, small-scale fishery managers should consider enabling shifts in effort among fisheries and retaining existing flexibility, as adaptive capacity is a critical determinant for social and ecological resilience.

Current practice and future prospects for social data in coastal and ocean planning.

Coastal and ocean planning comprises a broad field of practice. The goals, political processes, and approaches applied to planning initiatives may vary widely. However, all planning processes ultimately require adequate information on both the biophysical and social attributes of a planning region. In coastal and ocean planning practice, there are well-established methods to assess biophysical attributes; however, less is understood about the role and assessment of social data. We conducted the first global assessment of the incorporation of social data in coastal and ocean planning. We drew on a comprehensive review of planning initiatives and a survey of coastal and ocean practitioners. There was significantly more incorporation of social data in multiuse versus conservation-oriented planning. Practitioners engaged a wide range of social data, including governance, economic, and cultural attributes of planning regions and human impacts data. Less attention was given to ecosystem services and social-ecological linkages, both of which could improve coastal and ocean planning practice. Although practitioners recognize the value of social data, little funding is devoted to its collection and incorporation in plans. Increased capacity and sophistication in acquiring critical social and ecological data for planning is necessary to develop plans for more resilient coastal and ocean ecosystems and communities. We suggest that improving social data monitoring, and in particular spatial social data, to complement biophysical data, is necessary for providing holistic information for decision-support tools and other methods. Moving beyond people as impacts to people as beneficiaries, through ecosystem services assessments, holds much potential to better incorporate the tenets of ecosystem-based management into coastal and ocean planning by providing targets for linked biodiversity conservation and human welfare outcomes.