Over the last several decades, the oceans have become more crowded. Aquaculture, wind and wave energy, and oil and gas exploration are taking up more space. This growth threatens the health of ocean ecosystems and coastal communities’ access to food and livelihoods that they have relied on for centuries.
It can also lead to conflicts. We define conflicts as events where the differing goals of two or more groups lead to clashes over marine resources or places.
Conflicts can work against the goals of a blue economy: environmental sustainability and equity. A blue economy uses the oceans in ways that are fair to people, do not harm the environment, and make economic sense. By contrast, an ocean economy may prioritise only economic gain.
Read more: How to get fishers more involved in decisions that affect them
Several African countries have included blue economy expansion as part of their national or regional development policies. For example, the Africa Blue Economy Strategy outlines a vision for an “inclusive and sustainable blue economy that significantly contributes to Africa’s transformation and growth”.
To achieve that vision, the underlying issues that lead to conflicts must be addressed. The first step is to document where conflicts are occurring, who is involved, and the nature of the disputes.
We were part of a team of environmental and social scientists who mapped conflicts over ocean resources and places across 34 African countries using reports from newspapers, magazines and journals from 2008 to 2018. With these data and a survey of experts working in government, civil society organisations or academia, we also identified ways that marine conflicts have been resolved.
Read more: How to harness the ocean for prosperity: funding African innovations can unlock the blue economy
Our research identified more than 1,000 conflicts over the study period. The conflicts we found were mainly non-violent, verbal disagreements. These conflicts may draw less attention than physical fighting. However, they are still important because they disrupt how ocean resources are managed and who benefits from them.
Nearly 75% of conflicts were related to access to ocean resources such as fisheries or places like mangrove forests, fishing grounds, and landing sites where vessels can offload their catches.
Our findings demonstrate the value of fair interventions. They also show the importance of including groups and communities in decision-making processes that affect them.
Conflict narratives
We found that most conflicts involved at least two sectors (for example, fisheries and oil drilling or industrial fisheries and small-scale fisheries). More than a quarter were not related to fisheries, such as disputes between government officials and sand miners or hotel developers and local community organisations.
These results emphasise that conflicts often go far beyond fisheries. Projects related to the blue economy will increasingly require cooperation among different sectors on planning and management to avoid conflicts.
Read more: Nigeria’s new blue economy ministry could harness marine resources - moving the focus away from oil
We also found that conflicts may differ depending on cultural context and regional dynamics. For example, in South Africa’s Saldanha Bay Municipality, home to a port and thriving fisheries sector on the west coast, conflicts emerged over aquaculture and port development. Marine park regulations also caused tensions by prioritising tourists over small-scale fishers. These tourism activities negatively affected small-scale fishers’ livelihoods by limiting their access to fishing grounds and landing sites.
Government decisions to allow seismic surveying also threatened to further damage the wellbeing, earnings and food security of fisher communities. (Sound waves emitted by seismic surveys can affect fish behaviour and cause them to move elsewhere.)
Read more: Climate change is hurting Kenyan women working in coastal tourism – they explain how
In Ghana, conflicts have often taken the form of persistent disputes between industrial and small-scale fishers over access to coastal waters. Fishers have also challenged government officials about whether halting fishing for periods is effective.
In Kenya, local authorities enforced national gear restrictions differently across neighbouring communities. These restrictions regulate what kinds of fishing equipment (like nets or spearguns) may be used. Lack of coordination and ineffective ways of handling disagreements led to conflicts between traditional leaders of neighbouring communities and county and national government authorities.
Moving beyond conflict
Our analysis found that there is room for improvement in settling the grievances that cause conflicts and prevent resolution. Less than a third of the conflicts we examined were resolved, which puts social equity and environmental sustainability at risk.
Several findings from our work point to actions that may help avert or settle conflicts.
Government officials, including governing bodies, enforcement agents and local or national politicians, were involved in the vast majority of conflicts we recorded. This pattern reflects the central roles they have in creating rules as well as enforcing them. Better practices that focus on inclusive processes for developing rules and consistent implementation of them are essential for managing conflicts.
Read more: South Africa’s small-scale fishers have been marginalised since apartheid – what needs to change
Policymakers must assess how potential actions could affect a range of groups. People who are often marginalised – small-scale fishers, women and Indigenous communities – require more attention. For example, in South Africa, communities were able to document how proposed seismic activity would affect access to their fishing grounds. They then brought a court case in 2022 that prevented those activities from proceeding.
Although that conflict was resolved, the case demonstrates how small-scale fishers’ livelihoods are not always recognised in decision-making. This indifference threatens the equity central to a blue economy.
Read more: African marine rules favour big industry, leaving small-scale fishers in the lurch
In parallel, efforts should concentrate on fair enforcement of existing rules to create greater accountability. These actions can build trust. For the conflicts we analysed, inadequate governance, such as failing to enforce rules or applying them unevenly, was commonly reported as both a direct and indirect cause of conflict.
Read more: African countries must protect their fish stocks from the European Union - here’s how
However, conflicts can also lead to governance changes and governments can play constructive roles in conflict resolution. For example, Ghana’s 2025 Fisheries and Aquaculture Act doubles the area reserved exclusively for small-scale fishers. This new law may help ease tensions within the fisheries sector.
Read more: Better care for locals and the ocean to make Indonesia’s blue economy more viable
The experts we surveyed also highlighted that greater community engagement is critical to conflict resolution. In Kenya, conflicts were helped by group forums and dialogues that fostered agreements on which fishing gears to restrict and how to coordinate across communities.
Delivering on blue economy aspirations will likely require national and community-led efforts. A dual approach can help to establish more effective governance and engage an increasingly diverse set of people in resolving conflicts for the benefit of all of society.
Tim McClanahan co-authored this article.
Elizabeth Selig received funding for this work from Research Council of Norway grant 287442. She provides scientific support to companies in the seafood sector through the Seafood Business for Ocean Stewardship (SeaBOS) initiative (https://seabos.org/). That engagement is voluntary and unpaid. None of the SeaBOS members had any role in the study design, analysis, interpretation of data, or conclusions drawn in the research described in this article.
Adelina Maria Mensah receives funding from the Norwegian Research Council.
Mafaniso Hara received funding in the last ten years from: Water Research Commission (RSA); Global Centre on Biodiversity for Climate (UK Government); National Research Foundation (RSA); Oak Foundation; Norwegian Research Council; NORAD; and the European Union.
Moenieba Isaacs has received funding from the Norwegian Research Courncil, National Research Foundation (South Africa), and Oak Foundation in the last 5 years. She is Chair of the Masifundise Development Trust (a fisher social movement and NGO).
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
