Participation and Legitimacy Actor Involvement for Nature Conservation

293 Pages·2017·7.21 MB·English

A P Participation and Legitimacy
c a
t r
o t
r ic Actor Involvement for Nature Conservation
In ip
v a
o t
i
l o
The MPA is a pawn in a larger political game. Swedish poli- ve n Linn Rabe
ticians have promised to protect this area in order to reach m a
n
international goals, but without first asking the owners. To give en d
away someone else’s property – without asking – is usually called t L
f e
anything but democracy, justice and protection of rights. o g
r it
N i
m
(Local actor involved in the consultation process of HELCOM MPA a
t a
implementation) u c
re y

C
There are high expectations among scientists and politicians alike that o
n
participation, particularly at the local level, will establish legitimacy s
e
of multi-level nature conservation governance as it is implemented in r
v
practice. However, as this thesis shows, conflicts of interests, power a
t
i
relations and institutional conditions create enormous challenges for o
n
participatory practice in such complex environmental governance
settings. By examining two local Swedish HELCOM Marine Protected
Area processes that vary in the participatory approach adopted and
level of conflict experienced, this thesis aims to further advance
understanding of the relation between participation and legitimacy in
multi-level environmental governance.

Linn Rabe carries out research in the field of environmental science
with a special focus on environmental governance. This is her PhD L
I
N
thesis.
N

R
Environmental Science, School of Natural Science, Technology A
B
and Environmental Studies, Södertörn University. E
Baltic and East European graduate school (BEEGS), Södertörn
University.
Distribution: Södertörn University, Library, SE-141 89 Huddinge. [email protected] SÖDERTÖRN DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS
Participation and legitimacy

Participation and legitimacy
Actor involvement for nature conservation

Linn Rabe
Subject: Environmental Science
Research Area: Environmental Studies
School: Natural Sciences, Technology and Environmental Studies
and Baltic and East European Graduate School (BEEGS)

Södertörn University
The Library
SE-141 89 Huddinge

www.sh.se/publications

© The author

Cover image: © Sofie Rabe
Cover layout: Jonathan Robson
Graphic Form: Per Lindblom & Jonathan Robson

Printed by Elanders, Stockholm 2017

Södertörn Doctoral Dissertations 128
ISSN 1652-7399

ISBN 978-91-87843-74-7
ISBN 978-91-87843-75-4 (digital)
Tänk själv!

To my father, Per Rabe, who told me to think independently.
To my mother, Pia Rabe, who inspired by example.

Abstract
This PhD thesis in environmental science aims to contribute to the theoretical
and empirical understanding of the relation between participation and legit-
imacy in multi-level environmental governance.
It is widely assumed that actor involvement has great potential to improve
the legitimacy of nature conservation through long-term acceptance and target
achievement. However, local resource conflicts problematize the way a relation
between participation and legitimacy is depicted on other administrative levels.
Studies exploring the effect that participation has on legitimacy are relatively
rare, especially in multi-level arrangements of coastal conservation. In this
thesis the relation between participation and legitimacy on the local level is
examined, as well as how this relation is conditioned by multi-level governance
and power. The relation is empirical studied with two local implementation
processes of the Helsinki Convention’s network of marine protected areas
(HELCOM MPAs). The cases are located in Sweden.
Sweden and the Baltic Sea region are in the forefront of participation in nature
conservation, and therefore act as a strong case for the exploration of institutional
participation. However, despite apparent political will and international support,
the efficiency of actor involvement for nature conservation has been questioned,
also for the HELCOM MPA and especially on the local level.
Based on the results of this study, I question the assumption that weak
legitimacy predominantly is an issue of insufficient information sharing. The
findings show that involving actors to legitimize the adoption of strict ad-
herence to a pre-established model of conservation likely fail to create long-
term support for conservation. Instead, relocation of power to the affected
actors seem essential in order to make participation establish legitimacy. It
appears important to create room for local influence in the design, management
and implementation of a particular conservation area in the particular place/
context. In both examined cases, there are elements of participation that sup-
port legitimacy, for example the development of a shared vision. There are also
elements that hamper legitimacy, such as, for example, the high expectations
different actors have on participation to reach consensus on protective values.
These unmet expectations seem to fuel conflicts of interests among actors on
different levels.
Keywords: Participation, legitimacy, multi-level, governance, actor involvement,
marine protected areas, coastal management, public consultation, locals, nature
resource conflict, public-private relations, HELCOM, Baltic Sea, Sweden.

Contents
List of tables and figures .................................................................................................... 13
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ............................................................................... 15
Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................. 17
PART 1 ................................................................................................................................. 21
CHAPTER 1
Problematizing the relation between participation
and support in multi-level environmental governance. ............................................... 23
1.1 Aim and research question ................................................................................... 29
1.1.2 Motivations .................................................................................................... 30
1.2 The structure of this book ..................................................................................... 32
CHAPTER 2
From “tragedy” to “success story”
– a contextual background of Baltic Sea management ................................................. 35
2.1 Marine Protected Areas ......................................................................................... 37
2.2 Helsinki Convention and HELCOM................................................................... 39
2.2.1 HELCOM MPA ............................................................................................. 42
2.3 Aarhus Convention ................................................................................................ 45
2.4 To realize the HELCOM MPA recommendation… ......................................... 47
2.4.1 … in Sweden .................................................................................................. 50
2.5 Background summary ........................................................................................... 55
CHAPTER 3
The theoretical relation between participation and legitimacy .................................. 57
3.1 To increase the legitimacy of decision-making systems ................................... 59
3.1.1 Legitimacy in multi-level governance ........................................................ 61
3.1.2 Legitimacy through participation ............................................................... 63
3.2 Participation............................................................................................................ 66
3.2.1 Actors .............................................................................................................. 67