Authors Winder and Le Heron (2017) call on geographers to engage in marine policy venues associated with the Blue Economy agenda. This commentary suggests a pragmatic approach, drawing on our human–environment and spatial traditions and bridging positivist and critical constructivist epistemologies. Biophysical attributes of ocean environments create diffuse publics. Examples from fisheries and marine planning illustrate how geographers can lend expertise in scalar and socio-spatial complexity.
BoucqueyNFairbanksLSt. MartinK. (2016) The ontological politics of marine spatial planning: assembling the ocean and shaping the capacities of ‘community’ and ‘environment’. Geoforum75: 1–11.
2.
BrewerJFSpringuelNWilsonJ. (2017) Engagement in a public forum: knowledge, action, and cosmopolitanism. Antipode2: 49.
3.
CahillCSultanaFPainR (2015) Participatory ethics: politics, practices, institutions. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies6: 15.
4.
CardwellEThorntonTF (2015) The fisherly imagination: the promise of geographical approaches to marine management. Geoforum64: 157–167.
5.
O’BoyleRCadrinSGeorgianaD. (2012) Ecosystem-based fishery management for the new England fishery management council. In: KruseGHBrowmanHICochraneKL. (eds) Global Progress in Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management. Fairbanks: Alaska Sea Grant, pp. 87–104.
6.
SayreNF (2005) Ecological and geographical scale: parallels and potential for integration. Progress in Human Geography29: 276–290.
7.
SteinbergPPetersK (2015) Wet ontologies, fluid spaces: giving depth to volume through oceanic thinking. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space33: 247–264.
8.
WinderGMLe HeronR (2017) Assembling a Blue Economy moment? Geographic engagement with globalizing biological–economic relations in multi-use marine environments. Dialogues in Human Geography7(1): 3–26.
