Networks of marine protected areas – the contributions of a social relational network perspective

Abstract

Roff (2014) made the case that networks of marine protected areas (MPAs) suffer from a demonstrability dilemma. According to Roff (2014) this demonstrability dilemma concerns illustrating and measuring the ‘added value’ of networks of MPAs compared with stand-alone MPAs. He makes a number of important points regarding MPA networks including the current lack of data, the inconsistencies in how they are defined, the little consideration given thus far for evaluating their performance and outcomes, and the importance of proper documentation of their ‘added value’ (e.g. species range extensions and/or re-establishment). However, the demonstrability problem is not solely ecological, it is also about people and their interactions related to the planning and management of MPA networks – which brings us into the realm of governance. Accordingly, addressing this challenge requires moving beyond an ecological perspective. While an ecological perspective provides a great starting point, there is merit in taking a parallel social relational network perspective that builds upon the ecological network ideas outlined by Roff (2014). Identifying and examining the connections between individuals, organizations and agencies – i.e. governance networks – provide an entree to consider the social reality within which MPA networks are embedded. Accordingly, it is through these governance networks that decisions are made and actions implemented concerning MPA networks. A social relational network perspective includes a conceptual model, the accompanying theoretical assumptions, and its associated methodological toolbox (sensu Alexander and Armitage, 2014). This perspective is largely informed by relational sociology and social network analysis. Three theoretical assumptions are central to this social relational network perspective: (i) emphasis is placed on relations rather than personal attributes; (ii) analytical and theoretical emphasis is placed on examining networks rather than groups; and (iii) we can only understand specific relations or patterns of relations relative to their broader relational context (Alexander and Armitage, 2014). Consideration of the social connectivity associated with networks of MPAs faces a similar *Correspondence to: Steven M. Alexander, Department of Environment and Resource Studies, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1. E-mail: s22alexa@uwaterloo.ca Response to: Editorial: ‘Networks of marine protected areas – the demonstrability dilemma’ By John C. Roff A group is defined here as a discretely bounded collective of individuals organized formally or informally.