Skip to main content
European Commission logo

What do we talk about when we talk about integration: towards a differentiated view on integration and fragmentation in coastal and marine spatial planning

Maritime Studies 22, 5 

Abstract:

Bob Dylan once sang that he contained multitudes. So too does integration. More integrated planning of coasts and oceans has long been hailed as a goal and is seen as a pathway towards a more legitimate, cost-effective, equitable and sustainable planning of marine space. However, a reading of the literature indicates that many integration efforts have seemingly failed to reach their potential, and there is no clear understanding of what integration means or how we should best go about achieving it.

The paper claims that this uncertainty partially stems from a unnuanced and static treatment of the concept, and a lack of recognition of the multitudes of integration. The paper argues firstly that fragmentation should not uncritically be seen as the antithesis to integration and as a negative property to be avoided. Secondly, there needs to be greater recognition of both the varying degrees of integration and the contextually dependent necessity of different degrees of integration. Lastly, it is more fruitful to see the multitude of nodes in the expanding ‘network of planning’ not as fragmentation, but as differentiation. Such an approach allows us to see integration as a mean towards more sustainable planning of coastal and marine areas, not end in and of itself.

Application in MSP:
Type of Issue:
Type of practice:
Stage of MSP cycle:
Key words:

Implementation Context: This research work was undertaken by the Norwegian Institute of Food, Fisheries and Aquaculture Research. It stems from the observation that there is and unnuanced and static treatment of the concept of integration, as well as a lack of recognition of the multitudes of integration. 

Aspects / Objectives: The paper aims to provide more clarification on the concept of integration and how it is used in the scientific debate.

Method: The author gives an overview of how integration has been conceptualised in scientific literature. He then discusses the negative pole to integration and how it is conceptualised, ending by arguing in favour of a differentiated approach to integration. 

Main Outputs / Results: The concept of integration in MSP must be more nuanced and should be treated in terms of different degrees. Integration should not be conceptualised as a final goal, but rather as a means towards more sustainable planning of ocean and coastal areas.

Transferability: This paper aims at clarifying the concepts of integration and fragmentation in the context of MSP. This conceptual analysis can easily be transferred to other MSP processes. 

Responsible Entity: Norwegian Institute of Food, Fisheries and Aquaculture Research

Costs / Funding Source: This work was funded by The Research Council of Norway under Grant No. 294799. Open Access funding provided by Nofima the food research institute.

Contact person: Patrick Berg Sørdahl, Nofima AS — Norwegian Institute of Food, Fisheries and Aquaculture Research, Muninbakken 9-13, Post box 6122 Langnes, NO-9291 Tromsø, Breivika, Norway