COMMENTARY AND CORRESPONDENCE

Exploring the shallows: a response to ‘Saving the shallows: focusingmarine conservation where people might care’

STEPHEN FLETCHERa,*, REBECCA JEFFERSONa and EMMA MCKINLEYb

aCentre for Marine and Coastal Policy Research, Plymouth University, Portland Square, Drake Circus, Plymouth, UK, PL4 8AAbSchool of Enterprise, Management and Leadership, University of Chichester, Upper Bognor Road, Bognor Regis, West Sussex, UK,

PO21 1HR

INTRODUCTION

The central thesis of Amanda Vincent’s Editorialentitled ‘Saving the shallows: focusing marineconservation where people might care’ (Vincent,2011) is that the oceans are not enough of a publicand political priority and a considerable shift inthe relationship between society and the seas isrequired to drive a much needed increase in marineconservation efforts. Vincent cites the considerabledisconnect between society and the sea, particularlyin terms of understanding how personal behaviourchoices can impact marine environmental health.We agree entirely with these views; there is astrong scientific evidence base that supportsboth socio-ecological connections between humanactivity and marine environmental health (Halpernet al., 2008; Rogers and Laffoley, 2011) and thedisconnect between society and marine health(Fletcher and Potts, 2007; Natural England, 2008;Jefferson, 2010; McKinley and Fletcher, 2012).Vincent asserts that the most effective way ofengaging people with the marine environment isto focus on shallow seas less than 10m deep. Theseareas, she argues, are those that people have mostexperience of and are therefore most likely tocare about, as they can be considered to be thelocal ‘ocean neighbourhoods’ of individuals andcommunities.

In this response, we begin by making what we hopeare helpful observations about the shallow seas

approach based on some of our own research, beforepresenting some observations about the linkagesbetween society, behaviour change, citizenship andmarine policy. In particular, we assert the importanceof marine citizenship as an overarching concept tomove this debate forward, to better understand thesociety-sea relationship, and as a potential policychannel to deliver marine conservation benefits. Weconclude by noting areas of research that we considercrucial to better engaging the public with the marineenvironment.

ARE SHALLOW SEAS DEEP ENOUGH?

We find the shallow seas approach engaging andpersuasive, particularly the assertion that people willpreferentially care about their local neighbourhoodocean due to its familiarity. We support the viewthat the ‘localization’ of the marine environmentcreates numerous opportunities to maximize thebenefits associated with personal experience of themarine environment. In general terms, personalexperience of an environment or environmental issuehas been found to have a significant and positive effecton personal environmental values and behaviour(Jorgensen and Stedman, 2001; Steel et al., 2005;Ruchter et al., 2010). Experience appears tofacilitate stronger emotional connections to naturalenvironments, which in turn generally increase

*Correspondence to: S. Fletcher, Centre for Marine and Coastal Policy Research, Plymouth University, Portland Square, Drake Circus, Plymouth,UK, PL4 8AA. E-mail: steve.fletcher@plymouth.ac.uk

Copyright # 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

AQUATIC CONSERVATION: MARINE AND FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS

Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 22: 7–10 (2012)

Published online 18 January 2012 in Wiley Online Library(wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/aqc.2220

the willingness of an individual to protect thatenvironment (Miller, 2005). Similarly, experienceof species in their natural environment has beenfound to increase children’s awareness of, andinterest in, those species (Lindemann-Matthies,2005), which can positively influence environmentalknowledge and action (Bogeholz, 2006). Althoughmuch work has been done on the link betweenexperience, values and behaviour in non-marineenvironments, our research suggests that similarlystrong impacts can be expected in marineenvironments (Steel et al., 2005; Williams, 2008;Jefferson, 2010; McKinley, 2010; McKinley andFletcher, 2010). We therefore support Vincent’s callto encourage direct experience of shallow seas.

A key challenge, however, is to recognize thatthere are individuals and communities that haveno ‘local’ shallow sea or that are restricted fromexperiencing the shallows, perhaps because theylive inland, have limited economic means, orare physically unable to travel to or access thecoast. Despite the everyday behaviour of thesegroups undoubtedly having impacts on marineenvironmental health and such groups obtainingbenefits from marine ecosystem services, theiropportunity to engage with shallow seas may belimited. For these groups, innovative approaches totake the sea to them will be required, perhaps vianew digital media. However, it is not known whetherindirect experiences such as those offered by digitalmedia are as effective at engaging audiences as directexperience would be. We should certainly use everytool at our disposal to better connect society withthe sea, but this should be done with anunderstanding of the effects of that chosen tool.

We also take the view that by focusing onshallow seas, other opportunities to engage thepublic may bemissed. For example, whale migrations,hydrothermal vents, mid-ocean ridges, conservationof the high seas, trawling, underwater exploration,and discovery of new deepwater species are alllocated in water greater than 10m deep, yet have thepotential to capture public imagination. There arealso examples where the public have becomeengaged with issues in marine areas over 10mdeep which have resulted in behavioural change.In the UK, Hugh’s Fish Fight campaign to reducefisheries by-catch through changed public seafoodbuying habits has reportedly led to an increase insales of sustainably sourced seafood (Smithers,2011). At the time of writing, over 770 000individuals had signed up to the campaign to showtheir support for reform of European fishing

policy (see www.fishfight.net). This illustrates thatseas over 10m deep can capture public imaginationand are potential catalysts for pro-environmentalbehaviour change.

These observations suggest that encouragingengagement with deeper seas may be moreappropriate, powerful, and potentially easier, forsome audiences to identify with than shallowseas. By connecting with activities outside 10m,people can take action that is not dependentupon having an ocean neighbourhood, but whichmay still have direct relevance to the marineenvironment, such as seafood purchasing choices.Similarly, where the neighbourhood shallow seasappear to be dull, lifeless, industrialized, urbanized,or already degraded, it might be easier to get peopleenthused about offshore environments. It maytherefore be prudent not to concentrate all of ourefforts on the shallow seas alone.

BEHAVIOUR CHANGE: MARINE PUBLICS,VALUES, CITIZENSHIP

We share Vincent’s view that personal behaviourneeds to change in order to promote marineconservation benefits. However, a key observationthat we take from Vincent’s editorial, was the relativelack of emphasis placed on the need to understand thefactors that underpin public behaviour changetowards the seas. For us, this is a vital issue thatrequires focused attention in order to achieve the sortof marine conservation benefits that Vincent, and we,seek. For example, there is considerable risk attachedto acceptance of the knowledge deficit model inwhich it is assumed that people behave in a certainway because they lack the knowledge about theimplications of that behaviour. Therefore, byfilling this ‘knowledge deficit’ it is assumed a morepositive behaviour choice will be made (Kollmussand Agyeman, 2002). In reality, there is a complexweb of variables which motivate behaviours;knowledge is one of these but so too are values,emotions and infrastructure (Kollmuss andAgyeman,2002; Jefferson, 2010). Without understanding theinterplay between these variables, and betterunderstanding them within the context of the marineenvironment, we risk not knowing why certainapproaches to engagement work and others fail.

A further complexity of engaging society with thesea is illustrated by our research which shows thatthere is significant variation in attitudes towardsthe marine environment within the UK population;

FLETCHER ET AL.8

Copyright # 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 22: 7–10 (2012)

notable examples are variation correlated withgender and social values (Jefferson, 2010). Thissuggests that there is no single marine ‘public’ andthatmessages encouraging altered behaviour or valuesneed to be precisely tailored to specific audiences(Jefferson, 2010). This is particularly relevant toVincent’s comments on the lack of effectiveness ofprevious attempts to engage the public with the sea,after which she calls for new coalitions of expertiseusing new technology to try alternative approaches.Our view is that in order for any new approach towork, we need to understand the way in whichpeople perceive and value the sea, their motivations,and what constrains their choices. Only once weknow these controlling factors can we tailor ourpositive messages accurately. Any other approachrisks making the same mistakes as were made inthe past.

We also share Vincent’s view that popularengagement with marine conservation should be ‘amatter of personal responsibility rather than anabstract notion and a tiresome chore’ (p. 494). Theidentification of mechanisms to develop personalresponsibility for the oceans is an emergent researchagenda, and has coalesced around the debateof marine citizenship (Fletcher and Potts, 2007;McKinley and Fletcher, 2010). Marine citizenshipdescribes a relationship between an individual,the state, and the marine environment, in whichthe individual adopts behaviours that supportbeneficial marine conservation policies that servethe ‘common good’. Other expressions of marinecitizenship exist, potentially driven by personalvalues, NGO membership, or public campaigns.Our research into how to engender marine citizenshiphas found key factors to include: personal attachmentto the marine environment (including through directpersonal experience), awareness of the issues facingthe marine environment and one’s personal role inthem, and a value set that creates motivation tochange behaviour (McKinley, 2010; McKinley andFletcher, 2010). There are also enabling factors thatencourage marine citizenship and its attendant marinepro-environmental behaviour, including a supportivepolicy context, marine management strategies thatprovide genuine opportunities for public engagement,and adequate personal socio-economic capacity(McKinley, 2010).

Our research therefore strongly suggests thatawareness of marine issues alone is insufficient tosecure the scale of behaviour change necessary todeliver the desired level of conservation benefit

(McKinley and Fletcher, 2012). There are manyexamples from other aspects of life in which peopleare aware that a particular behaviour is damaging,but choose to persist with it, such as smoking, alcoholconsumption, and eating habits. Our view is that it isthe values that people apply to their awareness thatprompts changed behaviour, but these can beconstrained by factors largely out of the control ofthe individual. Marine conservation is no exception,and heightened awareness of, and altered valuestowards, the marine environment within the contextof a supportive public policy framework are essentialcomponents to achieving altered behaviour.

CONCLUSION

We agree with much of what Vincent calls for in hereditorial. We particularly agree that the oceans arenot enough of a public or political priority and thata considerable shift in the relationship betweensociety and the sea is required immediately toachieve enhanced marine conservation outcomes.We see marine citizenship as a helpful vehicle tomove this debate forward through its capacity tointegrate marine values, behaviour, and policy into asingle socio-ecological approach to conservation.

The main points of debate we have presented inthis response review some of the challenges andopportunities of applying the shallow seas approach.This is not an insignificant debate, as although thereis consensus about the need for greater publicengagement with the sea, there is no consensus abouthow to deliver it most effectively. The focus onshallow seas less than 10m deep has clear benefits,primarily through building upon local connectionsand experiences with the sea. In turn, these can forma foundation for encouraging individuals to recognizethe value of healthy ocean neighbourhoods to theirpersonal and community wellbeing. However, thekey challenge presented by the shallow seas approachis that it may not in itself overcome the challenge ofhow to improve society’s engagement with the marineenvironment, and in turn, how to drive the requiredbehaviour change. Resolving questions related to thelinkages between marine values, behaviour, policyand conservation is complex. It takes us beyond whathas traditionally been considered to be marineconservation into the developing area of marinecitizenship. The underlying point is that if we are togain marine conservation benefits through focusingour efforts on shallow seas ‘where people may care’the risk remains that people may not care, and we

EXPLORING THE SHALLOWS - A RESPONSE 9

Copyright # 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 22: 7–10 (2012)

need to understand why this is and be in a position totake action accordingly.

REFERENCES

Bogeholz S. 2006. Nature experience and its importance forenvironmental knowledge, values and action: recent Germanempirical contributions. Environmental Education Research12: 65–84.

Fletcher S, Potts J. 2007. Ocean citizenship: An emergentgeographical concept. Coastal Management 35: 511–524.

Halpern BS, Walbridge S, Selkoe KA, Kappel CV, Micheli F,D’Agrosa C, Bruno JF, Casey KS, Ebert C, Fox HE, et al.2008. A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems.Science 319: 948–952.

Jefferson RL. 2010. Communicating marine environmentalhealth: connecting science, social and policy values. PhD thesis,University of Plymouth.

Jorgensen BS, Stedman RC. 2001. Sense of place as an attitude:Lakeshore owners’ attitudes toward their properties. Journalof Environmental Psychology 21: 233–248.

Kollmuss A, Agyeman J. 2002. Mind the gap: why do people actenvironmentally andwhat are the barriers to pro-environmentalbehavior? Environmental Education Research 8: 239–260.

Lindemann-Matthies P. 2005. ‘Loveable’ mammals and ‘lifeless’plants: how children’s interest in common local organisms canbe enhanced through observation of nature. InternationalJournal of Science Education 27: 655–677.

McKinley E. 2010.ACritical Evaluation of the Concept ofMarineCitizenship and its Application to Contemporary UK Marine

Management. Bournemouth University. School of AppliedSciences: Bournemouth.

McKinley E, Fletcher S. 2010. Individual responsibility forthe oceans? An evaluation of marine citizenship by UKmarine practitioners. Ocean & Coastal Management 53:379–384.

McKinley E, Fletcher S. 2012. Improving marine environmentalhealth through marine citizenship: a call for debate. MarinePolicy 36: 839–843.

Miller JR. 2005. Biodiversity conservation and the extinction ofexperience. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20: 430–434.

Natural England. 2008. Marine protected areas, qualitativevalue mode research. Technical Report, Natural England,Peterborough.

Rogers AD, Laffoley D.d’A. 2011. International Earth systemexpert workshop on ocean stresses and impacts. Summaryreport, IPSO, Oxford.

Ruchter M, Klar B, Geiger W. 2010. Comparing the effects ofmobile computers and traditional approaches in environmentaleducation. Computers in Education 54: 1054–1067.

Smithers R. 2011. Sales of sustainable seafood soar in UKsupermarkets. The Guardian Online: Monday 17 January2011 (www.guardian.co.uk).

Steel BS, Smith C, Opsommer L, Curiel S, Warner-Steel R.2005. Public ocean literacy in the United States. Ocean andCoastal Management 48: 97–114.

Vincent ACJ. 2011. Saving the shallows: focusing marine con-servation where people might care. Aquatic Conservation:Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 21: 495–499.

Williams LBR. 2008. Public attitudes towards the maritimeenvironment around the Menai Strait and Conwy Bay.CCW Policy Research Report 55.

FLETCHER ET AL.10

Copyright # 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 22: 7–10 (2012)