Are targets really SMART-er? Challenging assumptions behind global environmental policy goals to realize ocean equity

IF 2.2 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Hillary Smith, Anastasia Quintana, Lisa Campbell
{"title":"Are targets really SMART-er? Challenging assumptions behind global environmental policy goals to realize ocean equity","authors":"Hillary Smith, Anastasia Quintana, Lisa Campbell","doi":"10.1007/s40152-024-00374-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Unpacking the dynamics of policy mobility is critical to understanding what happens when global environmental policies are implemented, including why equity goals remain unmet. In this paper, we ‘follow the policy’ focusing on two policies with ocean equity goals, the Aichi Biodiversity Target for protected areas and the Small-Scale Fisheries Guidelines. Through case studies of national-level implementation of these instruments in Mexico and Tanzania, we demonstrate how flexibility to determine implementation actions and indicators can benefit equity, in particular understudied recognitional and procedural dimensions of equity. Recently, the Convention on Biological Diversity negotiated new biodiversity targets for 2030. During this multi-year process, negotiators debated whether or not to include difficult-to-measure equity elements within the protected areas target, given the commitment to making all targets “SMART” (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time-bound) as policymakers ‘doubled down on targets’ and the underlying metrological regime despite their failings. Based on our analysis, we outline alternative strategies to ‘double down on equity’ instead.</p>","PeriodicalId":45628,"journal":{"name":"Maritime Studies","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maritime Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-024-00374-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Unpacking the dynamics of policy mobility is critical to understanding what happens when global environmental policies are implemented, including why equity goals remain unmet. In this paper, we ‘follow the policy’ focusing on two policies with ocean equity goals, the Aichi Biodiversity Target for protected areas and the Small-Scale Fisheries Guidelines. Through case studies of national-level implementation of these instruments in Mexico and Tanzania, we demonstrate how flexibility to determine implementation actions and indicators can benefit equity, in particular understudied recognitional and procedural dimensions of equity. Recently, the Convention on Biological Diversity negotiated new biodiversity targets for 2030. During this multi-year process, negotiators debated whether or not to include difficult-to-measure equity elements within the protected areas target, given the commitment to making all targets “SMART” (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time-bound) as policymakers ‘doubled down on targets’ and the underlying metrological regime despite their failings. Based on our analysis, we outline alternative strategies to ‘double down on equity’ instead.

Abstract Image

目标真的更有 SMART 吗?挑战全球环境政策目标背后的假设,实现海洋公平
要了解全球环境政策在实施过程中会发生什么,包括为什么公平目标仍未实现,了解政策流动的动态至关重要。在本文中,我们 "跟踪政策",重点关注两项具有海洋公平目标的政策,即保护区爱知生物多样性目标和小型渔业准则。通过对墨西哥和坦桑尼亚在国家层面实施这些文书的案例研究,我们展示了确定实施行动和指标的灵活性如何有利于公平,特别是公平的认可和程序层面。最近,《生物多样性公约》就 2030 年新的生物多样性目标进行了谈判。在这一多年进程中,谈判者就是否在保护区目标中纳入难以衡量的公平要素展开了辩论,因为政策制定者 "加倍努力实现目标",并承诺所有目标都要 "SMART"(具体、可衡量、可实现、现实、有时限),尽管基本计量制度存在缺陷。根据我们的分析,我们概述了 "加倍注重公平 "的替代战略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Maritime Studies
Maritime Studies ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
11.80%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: Maritime Studies is an international peer-reviewed journal on the social dimensions of coastal and marine issues throughout the world. The journal is a venue for theoretical and empirical research relevant to a wide range of academic social science disciplines, including anthropology, sociology, geography, history and political science. Space is especially given to develop academic concepts and debate. We invite original research papers, reviews and viewpoints and welcome proposals for special issues that make a distinctive contribution to contemporary discussion around maritime and coastal use, development and governance. The journal provides a rigorous but constructive review process and rapid publication, and is accessible to new researchers, including postgraduate students and early career academics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信