Facilitating Mechanisms in Support of Emerging Collaborative Governance of Mpas in Québec and Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Facilitating Mechanisms in Support of Emerging Collaborative Governance of MPAs in Québec Geneviève Layton-Cartier A Thesis in The Department of Geography, Planning and Environment Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (Geography, Urban and Environmental Studies) at Concordia University Montréal, Québec, Canada August 2014 © Geneviève Layton-Cartier, 2014 CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY School of Graduate Studies This is to certify that the thesis prepared By: Geneviève Layton-Cartier Entitled: Facilitating Mechanisms in Support of Emerging Collaborative Governance of MPAs in Québec and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Geography, Urban and Environmental Studies) complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality. Signed by the final Examining Committee: ______________________________________ Chair Dr. Pascale Biron ______________________________________ Examiner Dr. André Pierre ______________________________________ Examiner Dr. Kevin Gould ______________________________________ Supervisor Dr. Monica Mulrennan Approved by ________________________________________________ Dr. Monica Mulrennan, Chair of the Department of Geography, Planning and Environment ________________________________________________ Dr. André Roy, Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Science Date ________________________________________________ ABSTRACT Facilitating Mechanisms in Support of Emerging Collaborative Governance of MPAs in Québec Geneviève Layton-Cartier Marine protected area (MPA) creation is widely acknowledged as a valuable tool for marine conservation, a recognition reiterated at the eleventh Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in India (Oct. 2012). However, most countries have made limited progress in this area, including Canada, which has protected just over 1% of its Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ). The purpose of this study was to conduct an evaluation of four MPA cases in Québec – two designated MPAs (the Parc marin du Saguenay- Saint-Laurent (PMSSL) and the Réserve aquatique projetée de Manicouagan (RAPM)) and two proposed MPAs (the Îles-de-la-Madeleine1 and a project initiated by the Cree Nation of Wemindji (Tawich)) – focused on facilitating mechanisms availed of during the pre- establishment stages that support emerging collaborative governance (co-governance) arrangements. In Québec, these arrangements include both federal and provincial government involvement. Twenty-two semi-structured interviews were conducted with representatives of key stakeholders identified at Québec’s first MPA Symposium (June 2010) and then coded with the qualitative data analysis software (QDAS), NVivo 10. Facilitating mechanisms were identified, including the need for: aboriginal and local community engagement; bridging organizations and leadership; traditional and local ecological knowledge (TEK and LEK); public education- awareness; and transparent communications. These are consistent with findings in the literature on collaborative management (co-management) of natural resources as well as the limited literature on MPA governance. The research is intended to support the establishment of MPAs by providing insights from a diversity of stakeholder perspectives based on past experiences and current circumstances. 1 The French designation of the Réserve aquatique projetée de Manicouagan and Îles-de-la-Madeleine project is used by all governmental agencies while both the French and English names of the Parc marin du Saguenay-Saint- Laurent are widely accepted. However, I have made a linguistic choice to name the three MPA initiatives located in the St. Lawrence River/Gulf in French for consistency. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge all the help I have received throughout this M.Sc. thesis and express my gratitude. First and foremost, I wish to thank Dr. Monica Mulrennan for her knowledge, inspiring guidance, patience and support. From discussing details to reviewing my drafts, her invaluably constructive criticism has helped me throughout this process. I also wish to recognize the valued support I have received from Sylvain Archambault during these past years. Additionally, I thank my friends and family for their presence over the past years. Their never-ending support, friendly advice and patience have been of great help. This research would also not have been possible without all the informants who agreed to participate and I wish to acknowledge them here: Rodney Mark; Edward Georgekish; Dennis Georgekish; Richard Nadeau; Rodolphe Balej; Patrick Beauchesne; Patrick Nadeau; Sylvain Archambault; Nadia Ménard; Denis Ross; Jules Dufour; Leone Pippard; Ray Bailey; Danielle St- Laurent; René Simon; Jack Picard; Élaine Albert; Gugliermo Tita; Joël Arseneau; Selma Pereira; Luc Miousse; Léonard Poirier; Yves Martinet; and Hélène Tivemark. On a more personal note, I would like to express my deepest thanks to several people who have directly or indirectly supported me throughout this process: Amy Pershing; Lucie Sarrasin; Brené Brown; Amy Weintraub; Megha Nancy Buttenheim; and Jurian Hughes. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii List of Acronyms ........................................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Background ................................................................................................................ 1 1.1.1. MPAs and MPA Networks: Targets and Current Status ................................... 3 1.2. Research Statement .................................................................................................... 7 1.2.1. Research Context............................................................................................... 8 1.3. Thesis Structure ....................................................................................................... 10 Chapter 2. Marine Protected Area Context in Québec ................................................................. 11 2.1. Marine Jurisdictional Context .................................................................................. 11 2.1.1. Marine Jurisdictional Context of the St. Lawrence Estuary and Gulf ............ 11 2.1.2. Marine Jurisdictional Context of Eastern James Bay ...................................... 13 2.2. MPA Policy Context ................................................................................................ 15 2.2.1. Endangered Species Laws ............................................................................... 16 Chapter 3. Conceptual Framework and Literature Review on MPA Governance ....................... 18 3.1. Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................ 18 3.1.1. Co-Management as a Co-Governance Arrangement ...................................... 22 3.1.2. Social Networks .............................................................................................. 24 3.2. Literature Review on MPA Governance ................................................................. 26 3.2.1. PA/MPA Governance Types ........................................................................... 27 3.2.2. PA/MPA Governance Actors and Participation .............................................. 30 3.2.2.1. Indigenous Peoples and MPAs ............................................................... 31 3.2.3. PA/MPA Governance Evaluation ................................................................... 32 3.2.3.1. Good Governance Principles .................................................................. 32 3.2.3.2. Marine Protected Area Governance Framework .................................... 36 3.2.3.3. Governance System Analysis ................................................................. 37 3.3. Concluding Remarks ............................................................................................... 38 Chapter 4. Methods ....................................................................................................................... 39 4.1. Qualitative Exploratory Research ............................................................................ 39 4.2. Interview Analysis Procedure .................................................................................. 40 4.2.1. Methodological Approach: Applied Thematic Analysis ................................. 40 4.2.2. MPA Case Selection........................................................................................ 40 4.2.3. Interview Design and Data Collection ............................................................ 42 4.2.4. Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 46 4.2.5. Presentation of Findings .................................................................................. 47 4.2.6. Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................