Page 148 - KATE_JOHNSTON_2017

The Nation State, in this case Italy, and its governmental tiers (regional and local

authorities) then administer and enforce the UN legal order, the EU’s regional policy

as well as the specific species conservation mechanisms, through their own fishery

policy and other related policies and laws. The Italian fishery policy is implemented

through the Directorate General for Fisheries and Aquaculture of the Italian Ministry

for Agriculture, Food and Forest Policies (MIPAAF), by regional administrations

(Italy is divided into twenty regions), with support of the Marine Coastal Guard

across decentralised offices (FAO 2016b).

It will become apparent through the next chapters that the global goal of ocean

management for the ‘benefit of mankind’ (UNCLOS nd, p. 25) is far from a

straightforward process. ‘Exploitation benefits’ (UNCLOS n.d., p. 25) are far from

evenly distributed, and practices of scientific exploration are not without their

political and cultural problems. Furthermore, not all countries have ratified and/or

enforce the convention. In addition, the rhetoric of the EU’s four-pillar sustainability

discourse as seen in the CFP, is far from straightforward. These layers of fishery

governance result in tensions among different sized fisheries (large-scale versus

small-scale) and also among nation states. Some of which I detail in the next chapter.

Institutional Flows of Knowledge: Sustainable Seafood Guide

The materiality of discourse exists in the institutions and disciplines that make and

sustain discourse (Bove` 1995, p. 57). As we have seen, the development of a marine

biology discipline, along with its knowledge production, institutions and technologies,

has been central to the emergence of a marine sustainability discourse. The next stage

is to examine where knowledge is produced and circulated, as well as the institutional

relationships that enable and reinforce this discourse. Linked to this inquiry is a

136