MPA governance

Strategy setting

Management plans

Management schemes

Management statements

Different stakeholders have different needs and preferences

Local users: Linked to individual sites, wouldn't support grouping MPAs by species, need a two way flow of information exchange

Statutory agencies: Need coherence, 1 meeting rather than 10. Need to provide information to local users who won't know everything about their patch.

Different designations have different users - management needs to cator to all

Offshore sites don't have 'local users' and so stakeholder engagement crosses sector and jurisdictional/country boundaries.

Some "top down" decisions are needed

Good examples

Scale

Needs to be inclusive (local stakeholders) but efficient (stat agency time)

Needs to reflect the scale at which problems occur i.e. no problem occur at a SW scale - too big

Take time to create; do we really need them?

Can build greater buy-in and ownership; can be based on templates and tweeked to reflect local variance

Be responsive to environmental / pressure changes within a reasonable time frame i.e. a by-law change versus nationalpolicy/legislation change.

People’s ability to absorb relevant information – the larger the management remit, the more information needs to be gathered and understood

Information

Information needed for management is collected and presented at different scales

Think about the scale at which information collectors act i.e. MMO and IFCA

Non-local stakeholder with an interest in the site - then general public and people based internationally (the public in public good)

Difference between the need to share day to day management activity versus making information about a site publicly available

New Tamar estuary website is great example of information sharing

Wembury Marine Centre