Challenges to achieving greater and fairer stakeholder involvement in marine spatial planning as illustrated by the Lyme Bay scallop dredging closure

The statutory closure of 60 square miles of Lyme Bay to towed fishing gear in 2008 marked the culmination of nearly 20 years of discussions between conservationists and fishermen. Prior to the 2008 decision, voluntary, bottom–up led agreements resulted in inadequate protection of the bay's biological resources and significant erosion of social capital. Lyme Bay provides an excellent case study of the challenges likely to be posed by wider stakeholder involvement imposed under the new Marine Act. This paper examines a broad range of perspectives in relation to the Lyme Bay consultation and subsequent closure, via semi-structured interviews with 25 representatives of different interest groups in Lyme Bay. All respondents acknowledged significant flaws in the process leading to the Lyme Bay decision and felt the Marine Act was well placed to tackle many of these criticisms. However, while the Marine Act should provide a framework for resolving conflicts, it will not prevent them. Success will depend on collaboration between different marine interests, and also on the government acknowledging that outcomes are unlikely to favour everyone in the short-term and that top-down interventions are inevitable.

► Increasing pressure and international scrutiny on uses of marine environment.
► Interviews with 25 marine users in Lyme Bay show a broad range of perspectives.
► Inadequate process for engaging stakeholders in Lyme Bay, resulting in conflict.
► Need for strong institutions and blend between science and stakeholder consultation.
► Lyme Bay study highlights some areas of attention for new UK Marine Act.