Farmed icons: a deliberative decision/policy making case study. Marennes Oysters in the Pertuis Charentais, France.

1
Farmed icons a deliberative decision/policy
making case study. Marennes Oysters in the
PertuisCharentais, France.
1
Center of economics and ethics for the
environment and development
Université de Versailles Saint Quentin-en--Yveline
s

• Jean-Paul Vanderlinden1, Claire Kostrzewa1, Jean
  Prou2, Scott Bremer1, Jean-Marc Douguet1 and
  Martin OConnor1.

2
IFREMER Station de La Tramblade
2

• Introduction
• Context
• The SPICOSA project
• Marennes Oysters and the Pertuis Charentais
• Freshwater allocation issues
• Challenges
• Deliberative decision making
• Ker-DST deliberation support tool
• Getting to a dual scale structuring of
  deliberation

• Issue mapping
• Method
• Summary results
• Discussion
• Conclusion
• Real world results
• Challenges related results
• Comparative perspective?

OUTLINE
3
INTRODUCTION
4
CONTEXT
5
The SPICOSA Projet

• Science and Policy Integration for COStal Areas.

13 Work Packages 54 research institutes 4
years 12106 Mid term evaluation just
finished 17 Application sites
CONTEXT
6
Marennes Oysters as a strong identity marker in
the Pertuis Charentais
CONTEXT
A picture (thing) representing something of
greater significance
7
The freshwater allocation ISSUE
CONTEXT
From Granjou et Garin (2006)
8
The freshwater allocation ISSUE
CONTEXT
From Filali (2007)
9
CHALLENGES
10
Deliberative decision making
Employment
Economics
Society
CHALLENGES
Identity
Environment
Marshlands
How can policy makers make sense of intertwined
dynamic discourses
11
Deliberative decision making
Employment
Economics
Society
CHALLENGES
Identity
Environment
Marshlands
How can policy makers make sense of intertwined
dynamic discourses
12
Ker-DST deliberation Support Tool
CHALLENGES
13
Ker-DST deliberation Support Tool
CHALLENGES
Part of SPICOSAS suites of science and policy
integration tools http//kercoast.c3ed.uvsq.fr/
14
Dual scale deliberation

• How to articulate the constant dialog between
  local issues and overarching ICZM goals?
• How to contextualize local deliberation?
• How to move further once an issue fades away/ is
  dealt with.
• How to prepare for learning circles/spirals?

CHALLENGES
?
15
ISSUE MAPPING
16
Methods

• Part of larger stakeholder issue mapping thing (4
  Maps produced)
• Semi structured interview
• Coding
• Issues
• Connexions between issues
• Representation
• Table (Map 1 and Map 4)
• Diagram (Map 2 and Map 3) Use of VUE software
• Validation
• Other methological routes available
• Desktop focus group
• Focus groups
• Participatory mapping etc

ISSUE MAPPING
17
Results in a nutshell
ISSUE MAPPING
18
Short discussion
ISSUE MAPPING
19
CONCLUSION
20
Real life results

• Iterative co-construction of maps
• Creation of progressively shared narratives
• Pre-deliberative deliberation?????
• Setting up the rules of future deliberation
• Appropriation of the clarifying nature of the
  mapping
• Appropriation of the simplifying nature of the
  mapping
• SETTING THE FOUNDATION FOR A DELIBERATIVE
  COMMUNITY?

CONCLUSION
21
Challenge related results
Employment
Economics
Society
CONCLUSION
Identity
Environment
Marshlands
22
Challenge related results
CONCLUSION
23
Challenge related results
Two connected matrices local and overarching
issues
CONCLUSION
24
THANK YOU !
To my fellow IACA team mate To the conference
organizing team To the EC and SPICOSA partners To
IFREMER
jean-paul.vanderlinden_at_uvsq.fr