This article contributes to the increasing traction of social justice in marine spatial planning (MSP) by exploring perceptions and experiences of social justice from the viewpoint of planners and different social groups who were included and (self)excluded in MSP processes. The study builds on empirical material from Poland, Latvia, and Germany consisting of interviews, MSP legislation, and documents that were analysed through the lens of a multidimensional social justice framework centring on recognition, representation, distribution, and capabilities. Results indicate that MSP institutional arrangements constrain possibilities for marginalised and less consolidated actor groups (residents, coastal tourism, and small-scale fisheries) to enjoy the same degree of recognition that is given to groups representing strategic national interests (renewable energy and shipping). We also highlight the role of planners’ self-reflectivity in enhancing/depriving capabilities of vulnerable social groups whose wellbeing and multidimensional relationships with the sea call for institutional responses adaptive to specific planning contexts. 

The involvement of youth in climate actions is increasingly recognized as critical to amore just and sustainable future. Despite progress in youth climate justice (CJ) activism, research and decision-making, gaps and challenges persist. Drawing on existing literature, first, we identify three key reasons for authorities to take youth involvement in climate actions seriously, namely (a) human rights and justice, (b) efficiency, and (c) legitimacy of policy actions. Second, we propose six critical areas for policy, research, and the youth movement to deliver transformative youth CJ: (1) closing the climate finance (i.e., adaptation and loss and damage) gap in a way that prioritizes youth-responsive activities, especially in climate impact-prone regions of the world; (2) adopting an intersectional approach to CJ that challenges homogenization of the youth CJ movement, accounts for the diverse experiences, needs and perspectives of different youth, and addresses intersecting structural forms of discrimination that particularly hamper the agency of racialized youth in the global South and North; (3) youth must recast their justice frameworks and channel their activism mode (e.g., buycott) toward challenging and resisting green extractivism, the necropolitical and ecocidal effects of which are concentrated in post-colonies and other racialized contexts; (4) knowledge co-production with youth must confront the risk of knowledge coloniality, extraction and power; (5) youth should engage in more-than-human CJ activism, recognizing the intertwined fate of youth and more-than-human nature; (6)as legitimate representatives of future generations, youth should consider claiming their space in legislative arenas to ensure the protection of future generations. The involvement of youth in climate actions is increasingly recognized as critical to amore just and sustainable future. Despite progress in youth climate justice (CJ) activism, research and decision-making, gaps and challenges persist. Drawing on existing literature, first, we identify three key reasons for authorities to take youth involvement in climate actions seriously, namely (a) human rights and justice, (b) efficiency, and (c) legitimacy of policy actions. Second, we propose six critical areas for policy, research, and the youth movement to deliver transformative youth CJ: (1) closing the climate finance (i.e., adaptation and loss and damage) gap in a way that prioritizes youth-responsive activities, especially in climate impact-prone regions of the world; (2) adopting an intersectional approach to CJ that challenges homogenization of the youth CJ movement, accounts for the diverse experiences, needs and perspectives of different youth, and addresses intersecting structural forms of discrimination that particularly hamper the agency of racialized youth in the global South and North; (3) youth must recast their justice frameworks and channel their activism mode (e.g., buycott) toward challenging and resisting green extractivism, the necropolitical and ecocidal effects of which are concentrated in post-colonies and other racialized contexts; (4) knowledge co-production with youth must confront the risk of knowledge coloniality, extraction and power; (5) youth should engage in more-than-human CJ activism, recognizing the intertwined fate of youth and more-than-human nature; (6)as legitimate representatives of future generations, youth should consider claiming their space in legislative arenas to ensure the protection of future generations.

While blue justice has gained traction, recognition and capability, which are necessary conditions for procedural and distributive justice, remain under-developed. We develop a four-dimensional blue justice framework that builds on recognition and capabilities to critically examine and advance justice in Poland’s marine spatial planning (MSP). We find that misrecognition of differential identities and capacities scripted powerless stakeholders out of participation and reduced possibilities for fair distribution. Conversely, MSP regulation augmented the rights of powerful actors through granting de jure “objecting” rights to some, inviting only strategic sectors to agenda-setting fora and, limiting MSP communication to meeting legal requirements. Several stakeholders also see defence and wind energy as key winners of MSP. While society will benefit from national security and energy sufficiency, especially given Russia’s increased weaponization of energy, many believe that financial profits from wind energy will accrue to developers. We offer governmental and planning measures to enhance capabilities. 

Worldwide, marine conflicts are growing in frequency and intensity due to increasing global demands for resources (Blue Growth) and climate change. This article introduces a collection in Maritime Studies on marine conflicts and pathways to sustainability in an era of Blue Growth and climate change. We posit that while conflict can be problematic, it can also play a positive role in bringing about societal change, by highlighting unsustainable and unjust practices and be a trigger for sustainability transformation. However, left unattended, festering marine conflict can hinder just and equitable sustainability transformation. We present two distinct, yet arguably complementary, lenses through which researchers working with sustainability engage with marine conflicts. First, a social-ecological systems approach engages in conflicts by examining the interdependencies between human and ecological systems and related governance arrangements, promoting collaborative learning and action, and exploring adaptive governance strategies that seek sustainability conflict resolution. Second, a political ecology approach addresses conflicts by examining power dynamics and resource (mal)distributions, arguing for fair governance, and emphasizing the need to address historical and current injustices that are at the root of conflicts. Next, we present insights on diverse sustainability transformational pathways, including the importance of searching for common ground and the need for the reconfiguration of power relations as key steps to understand and inform sustainability conflict research. We conclude by indicating that more sustainability research in marine conflict settings is needed and by forwarding intersectionality as a promising approach to productively reframe and disrupt the debilitating effects of deep-rooted marine sustainability conflicts. 

This article examines the development of marine tenure in the Maullín River, Chile. It starts with the emergence of artisanal red algae (Gracilaria chilensis) gathering and the changes resulting from the governmental ad hoc allocation of small-scale aquaculture concessions. We aim to track this transition, its drivers, effects on the work organization, gender relations, market relations and the sustainability/equity challenges currently confronting the community. We use a feminist political ecology approach to direct our multi-method data collection strategy and to analyse the empirical material. The State by enabling local tenure for the development of marine aquaculture concessions played an influential role in Maullín community attaining de facto territorial tenure. This led to the establishment of residential aquaculture communities while facilitating the integration of women in aquaculture activities. We see both steps as positive economic and social development opportunities in Maullín. While marine tenure has provided livelihood chances, low prices caused by the producers’ disadvantaged market position and the lack of supportive alliance building pose ongoing problems. We conclude that these factors are serious challenges to the sustainability of aquacultural livelihoods at Maullín River. While the case depicts aspects of women’s empowerment such as their engagement in developing potential post-production innovation ideas, entrepreneurial abilities to conduct market transactions as well as their better competence in literacy, math and financial expertise, there is still a long way to reach gender equality in the male-dominated aquacultural sector. © 2024, The Author(s).

Community participation and influence are vitally important for meeting the multidimensional sustainability aims of marine spatial planning (MSP) and more specifically for procedural and distributive justice. While participation has received substantial research interest, we identify a need to: 1) develop equity-based principles for coastal community participation that can be used to assess and reform MSP practices; 2) generate rich empirical accounts of coastal community participation and representation linked to real-world MSP practices. Here we present the results of a study that synthesizes critical MSP and blue justice scholarship to develop principles and indicators of coastally equitable and just planning. Drawing on interviews with planners and stakeholders and analysis of planning and legal documents, these principles are used to assess participatory processes linked to Latvian MSP practices in the period 2015 to 2019. Our analysis shows that equitable and just MSP needs to be based on participation that is timely, inclusive, supportive & localized, collaborative, methodical and impactful. When applied to the Latvian case these six principles provide a comprehensive and versatile heuristic approach to assess participation in MSP. In the context of Latvian MSP practices, we revealed a fundamental challenge of maintaining inclusive and localized participation throughout the full planning cycle. To counteract the successive narrowing/hardening of participatory space our results indicate a need for continuously promoting diversity of voices and perspectives, opportunities for collaborative sense making, visioning and critique. This will help to bridge diverse MSP divides (e.g., between land and sea, between local, national, and global values and priorities, between science and local knowledge, and between blue growth, conservation, and justice goals). If applied more generally in research and as part of MSP evaluation an equity-based approach can promote the mainstreaming of coastally just and equitable MSP practices. Finally, considering contextual factors (e.g., history, culture, power, legislation) that shape participation and representation is crucial when applying the equity principles to a particular MSP setting to acknowledge and accommodate its particular characteristics and challenges.

This paper explores deep insights into sustainability transition tensions and pathways in terms of place-based conflict and potential for synergies between offshore wind energy (OWE) development and justice for humans and nonhuman nature. Specifically, we build a capability and recognition-based multispecies blue justice framework that at once centers ecological reflexivity (i.e., environmental awareness-raising, proxy representation of nature, and institutional recognition and protection of rights of nature and human-nature relationality), decenters anthropocentric frames of justice, and sheds light on injustices, human and nonhuman that climate and energy transitions may create or reinforce. This framework then informs analysis of a sustainability transition conflict, specifically a longstanding OWE conflict on Hiiumaa island, Estonia. This analysis unravels justice concerns, human and nonhuman, raised by proxy representatives of nature (i.e., grassroots actors and environmental stewards), the knowledge contestations involved, and the resolution measures undertaken thus far. Next, we discuss the possible transformative role of the OWE conflict, including how a Supreme Court ruling invalidating the OWE plan has fostered reflexive planning and may have set a legal precedent that may have human and nonhuman justice implications for the handling of future planning cases. We then highlight remaining challenges for socially and ecologically responsive OWE deployment. These include the judicial non-recognition of nature’s right as well as environmental values and sociocultural ties to nature as rights worth protecting, and the likely effects that formalization of European Union ambitions to speed-up and ramp-up renewable energy could have locally. These include prospects for environmental stewards and ocean defenders to steer nature-positive, people-centered energy transitions. Last, we propose conditions for enhanced multispecies justice, including how formal interventions (e.g., law) and informal practices (e.g., negotiation, awareness-raising) can be harnessed to unlock productive conflict and align energy transitions with the norms of justice, human and nonhuman.

As countries consider new area-based conservation targets under the Convention on Biological Diversity, protected areas (PAs) and their impacts on people and nature are coming under increasing scrutiny. We review the evidence base on PA impacts, combining the findings from existing rigorous impact evaluations with local case studies developed for this study. We identify characteristics of PA establishment and management that improve the sustainability of biodiversity conservation and justice for local communities. We find that recognizing and respecting local values and knowledge about natural resource stewardship, colearning, and comanagement are key to achieving positive impacts for nature and people. Transforming PA governance toward more inclusive conservation depends upon the ability of PAs to be designed and implemented around the values and needs of local people. 

Festering ocean conflict thwarts efforts to realize the Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. This paper explores transformations of ocean conflict into situated sustainability pathways that privilege human needs, justice and equity. We first outline the promise and limits of prevailing ocean/coastal governance practices, with a focus on marine spatial planning (MSP), which by framing conflict in shallow terms as use incompatibility, supports resolution strategies that privilege neoliberal technocratic-managerial and post-political models of consensual negotiation, thereby obscuring the structural inequalities, maldistributions and misrecognitions that drive deep-seated conflicts. Next, the distinctive features of the marine realm and ocean conflict are explained. Third, we outline the root causes, drivers and scale of conflict, with reference to history, climate, culture, governance, institutions and prevailing international socio-political conditions. Fourth, we reflect on the nature of conflict, exploring implications for shallow and deeper approaches of handling conflicts. Fifth, we highlight the implications of knowledge co-production for understanding and transforming conflict in pursuit of justice. Then, in response to the orthodoxies of MSP and prevailing conflict resolution strategies, we elaborate an alternative approach – Pragmatic Agonistic co-produced Conflict Transformation (PACT) for sustainability – sketching out key elements of a praxis that seeks to transform destructive interaction patterns of conflict into co-produced, constructive, scalable and ‘institutionalizable’ yet contestable and provisional sustainability knowledge-action.

A number of commentators have argued that up until now marine/maritime spatial planning (MSP) research and practice have been dominated by blue economy and environmental concerns and have tended to neglect what might be regarded as social sustainability concerns. To gain more insight into the character and extent of such a gap, as well as how to address it, this article examines how social sustainability has been addressed in peer reviewed scientific articles on MSP between 2005 and 2020. Using search terms such as participation, democracy, social inclusion, social cohesion, equity we systematically identify and review 310 scientific articles that address diverse social sustainability concerns within MSP and marine governance. The review showed that very few papers systematically conceptualised or developed a coherent framework for engaging with social sustainability. Instead, they mostly addressed particular social concerns including participation and engagement, equity and social justice, socio-cultural values and preferences. Marine management and planning efficiency, as well as related instrumental framings of the merits of participation were the key arguments for including these dimensions of social sustainability in MSP. In terms of how to better include social sustainability in MSP, most attention was given to social-cultural mapping and ways to improve social inclusion/participation while also redressing exclusion and maldistribution of outcomes in MSP practice. We conclude that there is a need to deepen and diversify MSP inquiry with respect to social sustainability. In particular, scholars would do well to delve deeper and more broadly in social science literature to find inspiration on ways to understand and elucidate social issues. Here, the enormous body of relevant work on justice, power, critical institutionalism, political ecology and terrestrial planning literatures has hardly been tapped. It is also evident from this review that there is a need for both the academic and practice-based communities to more comprehensively address how the multidimensions of social sustainability interact with each other, as well as with economic and environmental aspects of marine planning and governance. Based on these observations, we highlight a set of suggestions on how to develop MSP research and practice on social sustainability. Most importantly, we argue that more in-depth co-production, linking scholars, practitioners and society actors, is needed.