Fig 1 - uploaded by Alice Vadrot
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
The UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021–2030) aims to tackle several challenges on the path towards more sustainable ocean futures. Its central objectives are to close knowledge gaps, increase the usability of scientific knowledge on the ocean, strengthen science-policy interfaces, and make oceanography fit for purpose. The...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... and interests that have been shaping the complex web of these relationships and hamper inclusiveness, transparency, and best practices' identification. In this perspective piece, we propose a research agenda detailing the contributions of the social sciences to the following three themes: reflexive, policy-relevant, and engaged ocean science (see Fig. ...
Similar publications
With a focus on oceans, we collaborated across ecological, social and legal disciplines to respond to the United Nations call for transformation in the ‘2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’. We developed a set of 13 principles that strategically and critically connect transformative ocean research to transformative ocean governance (complementi...
Citations
... There seems to be general agreement that science needs to inform decision-making regarding marine biodiversity (Gjerde et al., 2019;Gownaris et al., 2019;Lubchenco & Grorud-Colvert, 2015;Marques & Carranza, 2013;Rabone et al., 2019). The UN Decade for Ocean Science exemplifies the need for and willingness of governments to engage with policy-relevant science throughout the development of ocean protection measures and new international agreements (Howell et al., 2021;Polejack, 2021;Ryabinin et al., 2019;Vadrot et al., 2022). In past experience, however, the bargaining process of intergovernmental negotiations has been dominated by political and economic considerations, rather than by science (Ali & Susskind, 2014). ...
... As personal contact was reduced and in most areas of the world completely halted, the planned-to-be last negotiation session was postponed three times and extended by two further sessions. During this over two-year intersessional period, a formal online intersessional work platform was initiated by the UN Secretariat 14 where registered participants to BBNJ could attend, post written responses to questions of the facilitators and comment on other actors' suggestions and views (see Vadrot et al., 2022). State and non-state actors used this space to not only make references to scientific concepts and terms, but also to link or upload academic papers and evidence. ...
A new legally binding agreement for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) was adopted by consensus on 19th June, 2023. Setting new regulations and filling regulatory gaps of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea are expected to be informed by “best available science”. It is critical to understand how science entered the negotiations, which defined the global scientific knowledge base of decision-makers. This paper presents various pathways over which scientific input entered the BBNJ negotiations, using empirical data, collected through collaborative event ethnography, including participant observation and semi-structured interviews at the BBNJ negotiation site. Results show that scientific input in the BBNJ negotiations was not systematic and transparent but dependent on (a) available national scientific capacity, (b) financial resources, (c) established contacts and (d) active involvement of actors. Results of the study call for formalised science-policy interfaces, initiated by the UN Secretariat to guarantee a global knowledge base for decision-making. Keywords: international negotiations; United Nations; marine biodiversity; BBNJ; ocean protection; science-policy interfaces.
... Hence, the UN Decade of Ocean Science explicitly values inter-and transdisciplinary perspectives (Visbeck 2018 ). It encourages ocean scientists to take the 'social factor' into consideration, both in their attempts to 'make oceanography fit for purpose' (Ryabinin et al. 2019 ) and to reach the objective of policy-relevant marine scientific research (Vadrot et al. 2022 ). Indeed, showing that political, social, and historical studies of science can serve science and policy to achieve better monitoring is becoming easier (Geijzendorffer et al. 2016 ). ...
... This story from the frontline demonstrates the added value of a social science understanding of marine biodiversity monitoring, arguing that it is a central component not only of marine scientific research but, also, of global environmental agreement-making and the struggle over environmental knowledge between the Global South and Global North (Vadrot 2020, Vadrot et al. 2022 ). We will introduce the MARIPOLDA T A ( www.maripoldata.eu ...
... Inside the negotiation room, the capacity to monitor marine biodiversity was turned into an essential tool to gain privileged access to marine life and exercise power over the marine world. One example is the discussion over the Common Heritage of Humankind, where unequal access to the ocean as a space to be explored and monitored played an essential role (Vadrot et al. 2022 ). Another example relates to the potential of tracking MGRs (from the collection of a water sample to the final product), which some state actors equally associated with what monitoring systems in the BBNJ context should do. ...
Marine biodiversity monitoring is a complex task given the vast ocean areas to be covered, the types of data to be integrated, and the large number of possible parameters to consider when measuring biodiversity change. International agreements, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) or the recently adopted ‘BBNJ treaty’protecting biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ), encourage states to monitor marine life both within and beyond their national waters to foster marine biodiversity conservation and sustainable use. While oceanographers in general, and marine biologists in particular, are aware of the challenges and complexities of measuring biodiversity in the ocean, the politics of marine biodiversity monitoring and the added value of social science perspectives tend to be neglected. This story from the frontline describes our experiences with turning marine biodiversity monitoring into an object of social science inquiry. The MARIPOLDATA project developed an innovative multi-sited approach to capture both the politics and practices of monitoring marine life. During our research, we were confronted with a diversity of perspectives and expectations of what monitoring is, how it works, why it should be done, and whom it should serve. By adopting a mixed-method approach and collecting data at different epistemic sites (negotiation rooms, scientific fields, laboratories, and conferences), we tried to cut through some of the observed ambiguities and trends. We conclude that studying monitoring necessitates a multidisciplinary approach and a sensitivity for the regional, institutional, and cultural specificities and inequalities that shape how we know and govern the ocean.
... Cette ontologie justifie par ailleurs l'envoi de robots pour explorer les abysses où plonge une grande partie de ce carbone terrestre. Concernée par la viabilité de la vie terrestre, la réflexivité scientifique renvoie à la posture d'intendance des humains vis-à-vis des océans et au rôle du savoir sur les océans en regard des politiques humaines (Vadrot et al., 2022). En offrant de nouveaux liens avec et de nouveaux lieux au vivant, cette réflexivité sociotechnique engage les scientifiques dans la production de nouvelles médiations avec la planète (Ratté, 2019). ...
Que se passe-t-il si nous prenons au sérieux le vivant comme concept politique ? En partant de l’abandon de l’ontologie moderne fondée sur la distinction entre nature et culture, cet article explore les perspectives ouvertes par le tournant du vivant et poursuit deux objectifs : distinguer les principaux objets conceptuels et débats qui constituent le champ de la recherche sur le vivant, et distinguer l’intérêt qu’il y a à investir le vivant comme sujet et/ou objet politique pour la pensée critique contemporaine. Pour faire du vivant un objet politique, nous partons du constat que ce dernier impose la reconnaissance d’une réalité hybride, où l’agentivité qui caractérise une multitude d’êtres leur permet de faire territoire sur un lieu où émerge une vie sociale interespèces organisant cet espace. Nous abordons ces trois débats en mobilisant des travaux qui réalisent par leur parti pris pour le vivant une avancée dans l’« art d’observer » les alliances entre humains et non-humains dans des endroits parfois inattendus. Cette démarche nous permet ensuite d’appréhender ce qui vient après la nature en discutant trois modèles de relation des humains au vivant : celui de la soustraction qui prend le contre-pied de l’actuelle domination sur la nature, celui de légation où la relation avec le vivant mène l’humain à composer son action et son territoire avec d’autres vivants, et celui de la coexistence qui tient compte de l’historique moderne et entend bien éviter de reconduire une telle tragédie en s’efforçant de sanctuariser des zones pour laisser libre cours au vivant. Nous complétons cette discussion ontologique par un questionnement du rôle des sciences, notamment pour ouvrir de nouvelles médiations. Nous concluons sur les luttes émancipatrices qui agissent pour le vivant, sans la nature.
... Without such collaborations, initiative success is less likely, even if goals are ecosystem or biologically focused. In this context, it is clear that ambitious progress towards Sustainable Development Goal 14 'Life Below Water' can avoid costly setbacks and harms when informed by social science 49 . Arguments for such an agenda are now growing and diverse [2][3][4][50][51][52][53][54][55][56] . ...
Ocean sustainability initiatives – in research, policy, management and development – will be more effective in delivering comprehensive benefits when they proactively engage with, invest in and use social knowledge. We synthesize five intervention areas for social engagement and collaboration with marine social scientists, and in doing so we appeal to all ocean science disciplines and non-academics working in ocean initiatives in industry, government, funding agencies and civil society. The five social intervention areas are: (1) Using ethics to guide decision-making, (2) Improving governance, (3) Aligning human behavior with goals and values, (4) Addressing impacts on people, and (5) Building transdisciplinary partnerships and co-producing sustainability transformation pathways. These focal areas can guide the four phases of most ocean sustainability initiatives (Intention, Design, Implementation, Evaluation) to improve social benefits and avoid harm. Early integration of social knowledge from the five areas during intention setting and design phases offers the deepest potential for delivering benefits. Later stage collaborations can leverage opportunities in existing projects to reflect and learn while improving impact assessments, transparency and reporting for future activities.
... Many social scientists have long advocated greater inclusion of social sciences into marine sciences (see van Putten et al., 2021). In recent decades, the need for increased emphasis of marine social sciences in delivering effective management of marine environmental changes has been highlighted (Bennett, 2019;Gruby et al., 2016;Vadrot et al., 2022). A range of disciplinary approaches from sociology, psychology, and international relations to tourism have examined, for example, the value types and attitudes towards the sea (e.g., Potts et al., 2016), ocean governance and planning (e.g., Flannery et al., 2016;Harris, 2022), stakeholder participation (e.g., Dreyer et al., 2014;Kraan et al., 2014) and the role of the ocean in supporting human well-being (e.g., Kelly, 2018). ...
... While not the immediate actor in producing or using science, nation-states are nevertheless a highly relevant analytical object as they regulate, fund and bene t from national science and innovation systems 48 . Furthermore, they establish the conditions for accessing and using genetic resources within their jurisdiction and they are entangled with the interests of a liated companies and scientists 49,50 . To understand the extent to which countries provide scienti c knowledge, we rst explore which countries contribute most to the publication of marine genetic studies. ...
Marine genetic resources hold great value for biotechnological innovation and sustainability-oriented research. However, studies indicate that intellectual property rights pertaining to these resources are concentrated in a handful of companies and countries, triggering contentious international debates. This paper highlights an overlooked dimension: scientists and their affiliated countries as central actors in the provision of marine genetic research. We introduce a dataset of 23,417 marine genetic studies and trace patent references to these studies. Our analysis reveals that molecular biological research, oftentimes on bacterial species, attracts the most patenting interest. Some countries own relatively more patents than they provide in science, with the U.S. benefiting the most from available research. Science by G77 researchers has seen limited uptake in patents. These findings aim to inform international biodiversity regimes, such as the UN treaty on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ), on how to more equitably distribute marine genetic resources’ economic, socio-cultural, and ecological benefits.
... While some international science projects [48][49][50] , organisations 51 and declarations 52,53 aspire to and/or support stakeholder engagement, they tend to reinforce science-and state-led framing of the mesopelagic zone, rather than opening up to different forms of knowledge and values associated with the deep sea. Thus diversity and inclusion in science must go beyond multi-disciplinarity within deep ocean science: it must also extend to diverse communities, nations and epistemologies if the coming decade of ocean science is going to lead to equitable outcomes [54][55][56][57] . A further democratisation of knowledge would as such not negate the role of fundamental science as a crucial way of classifying and quantifying the mesopelagic zone. ...
The potential of the mesopelagic zone (200–1000 m depth) to provide natural resources and ecosystem services is of increasing interest to a broad range of societal stakeholders. As this interest grows, divergent ideas about its current and future role in supporting human life are being expressed in scientific and public discourse. We use automated content analysis to identify 13 key topics about the mesopelagic zone from 2226 scientific abstracts and 4066 tweets. Two dominant ideas emerge: (1) the exploitation of fish resources and (2) the role of the mesopelagic zone as a carbon sink. We find that, in the absence of significant mesopelagic zone policy, science plays a de facto governing role by shaping how the ecosystem is known to the public and policymakers alike. These results indicate the need and potential for new knowledge and governance arrangements that can broaden the range of meanings and knowledge needed to anticipate future uses of deeply uncertain ecosystems and resources.
The challenges of achieving just, equitable and sustainable ocean futures require a new type of transdisciplinary and action-oriented science that integrates across disciplines and knowledge systems. Scientists and researchers in academia, industry or government, who contribute to knowledge creation, innovation, and policy development for the ocean, must be empowered with a fresh set of competences. This paper maps the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to enable such a shift. The proposed skillset serves as a foundation for the design and operationalisation of modern training for ocean sustainability and is envisaged to be used by researchers both individually and in teams. It also highlights the potential for career diversification beyond the traditional 'blue jobs' legitimated by existing sectors. To ensure the short-term practical implementation of the competence framework, self-awareness and self-reflection are encouraged among learners and teachers, along with pragmatic actions to overcome barriers to transdisciplinarity. For long-term impact, system interventions will be necessary to improve organisations’ readiness to absorb and valorise researchers trained in this new framework. This will require re-training the current pedagogical workforce as well as reframing existing knowledge systems and incentives.
Global environmental negotiations have become central sites for studying the interaction between politics, power, and environmental degradation. This book challenges what constitutes the sites, actors, and processes of negotiations beyond conventional approaches and provides a critical, multidisciplinary, and applied perspective reflecting recent developments, such as the increase of actor diversity and the digitalisation of global environmental meetings. It provides a step-by-step guide to the study of global environmental negotiations using accessible language and illustrative examples from different negotiation settings, including climate change, biodiversity, and ocean protection. It introduces the concept of 'agreement-making' to broaden understanding of what is studied as a 'site' of negotiation, illustrating how diverse methods can be applied to research the actors, processes, and order-making. It provides practical guidance and methodological tools for students, researchers and practitioners participating in global environmental agreement-making. One of a series of publications associated with the Earth System Governance Project: www.cambridge.org/earth-system-governance.
