A review of how we study coastal and marine conflicts: is social science taking a broad enough view?

Abstract

Conflict in the marine environment is of increasing relevance as blue growth boundaries are pushed and resource access and use are in dispute. Social science disciplines have a long history and a wide range of approaches for studying conflict. However, understanding the approaches used to study marine conflict is challenging since the literature is large, broad, difficult to navigate, and there is little connection between conflict themes and the associated methods used to analyze these conflicts. In the present study, we take a first step to address this by systematically reviewing 109 peer-reviewed articles that employ empirical social science methods to study marine conflict. We find that studies on marine conflicts have centered on disputed space, mainly at local scale, and natural resources, such as fish. The main parties at the center of the conflicts are small-scale fisheries and public authorities, although with a growing presence of blue growth sectors. Most studies employed qualitative approaches to study marine conflicts. Current gaps in the understanding of marine conflict include gaps in understanding relational interactions and historical causal events. The need for social science research into marine conflict and the application of multiple social science methods is ongoing as different constellations of conflict actors emerge and as disputed ocean spaces expand beyond EEZs, to include polar regions, and the sea floor.