Does polycentricity fit? Linking social fit with polycentric governance in a large-scale marine protected area.

Scholars have theorized that polycentricity may produce benefits that promote effective, sustainable governance of complex social-ecological systems. Yet, little empirical research exists exploring whether and how these benefits emerge and what additional outcomes polycentric governance systems produce. This paper presents an empirical examination of Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument (PMNM), one of the longest-standing and largest marine protected areas in the world. Monument governance is structured as a polycentric system, including semi-autonomous decision-making groups and governance actors that interact across jurisdiction, geography, and decision-making levels. Through analysis of qualitative empirical data, we explore whether and how PMNM functions as theory predicts, with a particular focus on social fit and how it has evolved over time. Findings indicate that PMNM largely exhibits social fit for governance actors, and they add empirical support and additional nuance to theoretical understandings of functional polycentricity. Specifically, the case suggests additional contextual features that might promote social fit, including sufficient time and resources, clear communication and shared understanding, and socially astute and strategically savvy governance actors holding key governance positions. The article demonstrates that social fit can increase or decrease over time, and that different actors may perceive its presence and extent differently. These findings suggest avenues for additional research into how the enabling conditions of polycentric governance systems and the contextual features that enliven those systems in practice may interact and affect functionality and other outcomes.

Stakeholder perspectives on large-scale marine protected areas.

Large-scale marine protected areas (LSMPAs), MPAs greater than 100,000km2, have proliferated in the past decade. However, the value of LSMPAs as conservation tools is debated, in both global scientific and policy venues as well as in particular sites. To add nuance and more diverse voices to this debate, this research examines the perspectives of stakeholders directly engaged with LSMPAs. We conducted a Q Method study with forty LSMPA stakeholders at five sites, including three established LSMPAs (the Marianas Trench Marine National Monument, United States; the Phoenix Islands Protected Area, Kiribati; the National Marine Sanctuary, Palau) and two sites where LSMPAs had been proposed at the time of research (Bermuda and Rapa Nui (Easter Island), Chile). The analysis reveals five distinct viewpoints of LSMPAs. These include three more optimistic views of LSMPAs we have named Enthusiast, Purist, and Relativist. It also depicts two more cautious views of LSMPAs, which we have named Critic and Skeptic. The findings demonstrate the multi-dimensionality of stakeholder viewpoints on LSMPAs. These shared viewpoints have implications for the global LSMPA debate and LSMPA decision-makers, including highlighting the need to focus on LSMPA consultation processes. Better understanding of these viewpoints, including stakeholder beliefs, perspectives, values and concerns, may help to facilitate more nuanced dialogue amongst LSMPA stakeholders and, in turn, promote better governance of LSMPAs.