Pretty good governance: balancing policy drivers and stakeholder interests in developing fisheries ecosystem plans

The central research question that this thesis addresses is whether there is a significant gap between fishery stakeholder values and the principles and policy goals implicit in an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM). The implications of such a gap for fisheries governance are explored. Furthermore an assessment is made of what may be practically achievable in the implementation of an EAFM in fisheries in general and in a case study fishery in particular. The research was mainly focused on a particular case study, the Celtic Sea Herring fishery and its management committee, the Celtic Sea Herring Management Advisory Committee (CSHMAC). The Celtic Sea Herring fishery exhibits many aspects of an EAFM and the fish stock has successfully recovered to healthy levels in the past 5 years. However there are increasing levels of governance related conflict within the fishery which threaten the future sustainability of the stock. Previous research on EAFM governance has tended to focus either on higher levels of EAFM governance or on individual behaviour but very little research has attempted to link the two spheres or explore the relationship between them. Two main themes within this study aimed to address this gap. The first was what role governance could play in facilitating EAFM implementation. The second theme concerned the degree of convergence between high-level EAFM goals and stakeholder values. The first method applied was governance benchmarking to analyse systemic risks to EAFM implementation. This found that there are no real EU or national level policies which provide stakeholders or managers with clear targets for EAFM implementation. The second method applied was the use of cognitive mapping to explore stakeholders understandings of the main ecological, economic and institutional driving forces in the Celtic Sea Herring fishery. The main finding from this was that a long-term outlook can and has been incentivised through a combination of policy drivers and participatory management. However the fundamental principle of EAFM, accounting for ecosystem linkages rather than target stocks was not reflected in stakeholders cognitive maps. This was confirmed in a prioritisation of stakeholders management priorities using Analytic Hierarchy Process which found that the overriding concern is for protection of target stock status but that wider ecosystem health was not a priority for most management participants. The conclusion reached is that moving to sustainable fisheries may be a more complex process than envisioned in much of the literature and may consist of two phases. The first phase is a transition to a long-term but still target stock focused approach. This achievable transition is mainly a strategic change, which can be incentivised by policies and supported by stakeholders. In the Celtic Sea Herring fishery, and an increasing number of global and European fisheries, such transitions have contributed to successful stock recoveries. The second phase however, implementation of an ecosystem approach, may present a greater challenge in terms of governability, as this research highlights some fundamental conflicts between stakeholder perceptions and values and those inherent in an EAFM. This phase may involve the setting aside of fish for non-valued ecosystem elements and will require either a pronounced mind-set and value change or some strong top-down policy incentives in order to succeed. Fisheries governance frameworks will need to carefully explore the most effective balance between such endogenous and exogenous solutions. This finding of low prioritisation of wider ecosystem elements has implications for rights based management within an ecosystem approach, regardless of whether those rights are individual or collective.

Ireland's knowledge economy policy: beliefs, drivers and prospects

This dissertation critically examines Ireland’s knowledge economy policy, the country’s basis for economic recovery and growth, to enhance future policy decisions and debate. Much has been written internationally on the ‘knowledge economy’ with its emergence closely related to globalisation and technological progression in the 1990s. Since the late 1990s, Irish policy-makers have been firmly committed to positioning Ireland as a leading knowledge economy. Transforming the country’s competitive base to a knowledge economy is pivotal, directly shaping the course of Ireland’s economy and society. Given Ireland’s current economic crisis, limited resources, global competition from leaders in science and technology and growing challenges from emerging economies, a systematic study of Ireland’s major competitive policy is imperative. Above all, this study explores the processes behind the policy and the multiple actors from different institutions who follow and seek to influence decisions. The advocacy coalition framework is used to identify the advocacy coalition operating in the knowledge economy policy subsystem. The theoretical insights of this framework are also combined with other public policy approaches, providing complementary insights into the policy process. The research is framed around three elements - the beliefs underpinning the policy; who is driving the policy; and the prospects of the policy. Primary information is collected by way of semi-structured in-depth interviews with 49 Irish elites (politicians, senior bureaucrats, academics and business leaders) involved in the formation and implementation of the policy. This study finds that a strong advocacy coalition has formed in this policy subsystem whose members are collectively driving the policy. Both exogenous and endogenous forces help frame a common perception of the problems the policy addresses and the solutions it offers. Evidence suggests that this policy is a sustainable option for Ireland’s economic future and the study concludes with policy recommendations for advancing Ireland’s knowledge economy.

Cross-sectoral differences in the drivers of innovation: evidence from the Irish Community Innovation Survey

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to analyse differences in the drivers of firm innovation performance across sectors. The literature often makes the assumption that firms in different sectors differ in their propensity to innovate but not in the drivers of innovation. The authors empirically assess whether this assumption is accurate through a series of econometric estimations and tests. Design/methodology/approach: The data used are derived from the Irish Community Innovation Survey 2004-2006. A series of multivariate probit models are estimated and the resulting coefficients are tested for parameter stability across sectors using likelihood ratio tests. Findings: The results indicate that there is a strong degree of heterogeneity in the drivers of innovation across sectors. The determinants of process, organisational, new to firm and new to market innovation varies across sectors suggesting that the pooling of sectors in an innovation production function may lead to biased inferences. Research limitations/implications: The implications of the results are that innovation policies targeted at stimulating innovation need to be tailored to particular industries. One size fits all policies would seem inappropriate given the large degree of heterogeneity observed across the drivers of innovation in different sectors. Originality/value: The value of this paper is that it provides an empirical test as to whether it is suitable to group sectoral data when estimating innovation production functions. Most papers simply include sectoral dummies, implying that only the propensity to innovate differs across sectors and that the slope of the coefficient estimates are in fact consistent across sectors.