Charting sustainable waters: Governance challenges and opportunities for fisheries and coastal beach resources in a West African country Richard Takyi a,b,c,*, Francis Kofi Ewusie Nunoo d, Badr El Mahrad b,e,f, Cynthia Addo g, John Essandoh h a Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Italy b CIMA, FCT-Gambelas Campus, University of Algarve, Faro 8005-139, Portugal c Blue Resources Research and Policy Institute, Box L534 Mallam, Greater Accra, Ghana d Department of Marine and Fisheries Sciences, University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana e Murray Foundation, Brabners LLP, Horton House, Exchange Street, Liverpool L2 3YL, UK f Laboratory of Geoscience, Water and Environment, (LG2E-CERNE2D), Department of Earth Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, Mohammed V University of Rabat, Rabat 10000, Morocco g Fisheries Committee for the West-Central Gulf of Guinea, Tema, Ghana h Department of Conservation Biology and Entomology, University of Cape Coast, Ghana A R T I C L E I N F O Keywords: Sustainable resource management Legal and institutional frameworks Fisheries and beach resource compliance Governance effectiveness Environmental policy Ghana A B S T R A C T Marine fisheries and beaches (i.e., backshore, foreshore and shoreface) are essential for providing ecosystem services globally, with coastal states being at the forefront of this benefit. Consequently, several policies, leg- islations, and governance processes must be formulated to ensure their sustainable use due to the impact of anthropogenic and natural pressures. This study aims to analyse the legal and institutional frameworks for the management of marine fisheries and beach resources (such as flora (coconut), fauna (ghost crabs), dunes, and rocky components) under key international laws and conventions, using Ghana as a case study. The study identifies the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) within resource management, as well as their impact on the country’s progress in the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Africa Union Agenda 2063. Data was collected through interviews with fishers, coastal residents, and other relevant stakeholders, as well as a review of secondary data. The results unveil a distinctive contrast in the regulatory landscape between fisheries and beach resources. While numerous policies have been formulated to ensure the sustainable management of fisheries, the same level of attention and commitment has not been extended to beach resources. The SWOT analysis revealed that some of the strengths in the governance of marine fisheries and beach resources rest on the availability of institutions and laws. The weakness lies in inadequate enforcement and data gathering and analyses to inform decision making. This study provides as an illuminating exploration into the legal and institutional underpinnings of marine fisheries and beach resource management in Ghana, shedding light on the critical junctures where improvements are needed. 1. Introduction Globally, marine and coastal environmental governance has become essential due to the growing crisis in their ecology brought about by multiple competing economic and social sectors [15,44,107]. These sectors contribute food (i.e., over 78 million tonnes of fish in 2020), revenue (e.g., over US$ 4 trillion in marine tourism), create livelihood (over 200 million in marine fisheries) and habitation (about 40% of the world’s population) for millions of people worldwide [36,79,102,110]. For instance, in Ghana, the marine fisheries sector generates over US$ 1 billion per annum and support essential livelihood of fishers and traders [39,80]. Beaches (i.e., backshore, foreshore and shoreface) serve as recreational, tourism and developmental sites for housing and other infrastructure [84,93]. Human activities associated with these sectors whether in situ of coastal zones, marine or from terrestrial sources, exert pressure on coastal and marine resources at unsustainable levels [24, 56]. These activities have and continue to contribute to ecological changes in the status (i.e., from abundance to vulnerable, threatened or * Corresponding author at: Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Italy. E-mail address: richardktakyi@gmail.com (R. Takyi). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Marine Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106398 Received 8 November 2023; Received in revised form 2 August 2024; Accepted 5 September 2024 Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 Available online 13 September 2024 0308-597X/© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies. mailto:richardktakyi@gmail.com www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/0308597X https://www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106398 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106398 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106398 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106398&domain=pdf endangered) of some species and habitats, as well as accelerating the pressure from climate change [24,94,108]. For instance, poor water quality, including increased sea fishing pressure, and other pressures from the human activities have contributed to the bleaching of coral reefs, decline of Sardinella spp., the loss of nursery sites for sea turtle species (e.g., Lepidochelys olivacea and Dermochelys coriacea), and exac- erbate geo-environmental hazards (e.g., coastal erosion), globally and in Ghana [43,50,100]. Given the uniqueness of coastal and marine environments in terms of their characteristics, resources, the competing sectors and their contri- bution to the global socio-economy (including Ghana), they require appropriate governance through relevant legislative and institutional frameworks [34,65]. In the absence of appropriate governance, i.e., established rules and laydown processes for the exploitation of common resources, usage becomes subject to individual discretion, increasing the vulnerability of these resources to unsustainable levels [14,90]. Although the specific forms of governance may vary across countries depending on the political, fiscal, socioeconomic, and cultural context, the governance must emphasise the three key components, i.e., laws, institutional frameworks and the mechanism of implementation, coupled with fairness, rules, accountability, stakeholder participation, and transparency at all levels [88,91,104,109,111,113]. Adequate and appropriate governance can be the rallying point for decision-makers, globally and in Ghana, to organise society and the citizenry to protect the coastal and marine resources, meeting the relevant Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (1, 2, 8, 12, and 14), the objectives outlined in the Convention on Biological Diversity (post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework targets) and African Union (AU) Agenda 2063 [6,61,63,65, 91,99,114,122]. Although international and regional laws and conventions (e.g., United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)) are critical in the governance of coastal and marine resources, including fisheries and beaches, national commitment is the sole preserve of the countries involved [101]. Globally, central governments (top-down) are the pri- mary driver, complemented by formal structures and some co-management systems led by communities and users [38,73,106]. However, these formal structures often have deficiencies due to differ- ences in objectives and values, especially under cross-sectorial Fig. 1. The stakeholders in the fisheries sector of Ghana, including managers, resource users, civil societies, and academic and research institutions. R. Takyi et al. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 2 jurisdictions, leading to the marginalisation of some resources [15]. For instance, in Ghana, government ministries (e.g., the Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development and the Ministry of Environment, Sci- ence, Technology, and Innovations) and agencies (e.g., Fisheries Com- mission, Land Use and Spatial Planning Authority and Ghana Maritime Authority) (as illustrated in Figs. 1 and 2) manage these resources [70, 71,73]. Due to inadequate synergies between these organisations (i.e., in beach management), prioritisation of one resource (i.e., fisheries with scientific staff under the Fisheries Commission of Ghana) over the other (beaches) or marginalisation (i.e., due to scale and remoteness) by decision-makers, overlapping responsibilities, and gaps in the legislative framework, the sustainable conservation of these resources is threat- ened. In an era of a complex global wicked problem such as climate change and the need for shared management responsibility, it is essen- tial for decision-makers in coastal countries (i.e., including Ghana) that have ratified international guidelines and conventions to have the right tools and information to ensure the adequacy of management and governance regimes for the sustainability of resources [76,85]. The objectives of this manuscript are to examine the institutional and legal framework governing fisheries and beach resources in Ghana using key international guidelines and conventions such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Food and Agriculture Organisation’s Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, the African Union (AU) Agenda 2063 and the Convention on Biological Diversity. The study also employs both secondary data analysis and stakeholder questionnaires to evaluate the governance of marine fisheries and beach resources, specifically the backshore, foreshore and shoreface. Further- more, the research aims to identify and assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats within resource governance, as well as the sources of gaps and biases in current legislation and management practices to provide guidance for decision-makers. 2. Theoretical background Good governance is critical in determining marine and coastal resource use, sustainability, and conservation effectiveness [96]. Inter- national guidelines and conventions, including the UNCLOS, SDGs, and Food and Agriculture Organisation’s Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, have integrated good governance for marine and coastal re- sources [7,96]. They have implications for fisheries and beach resources at the domestic level and may contribute to establishing institutional and legal frameworks by providing the mechanisms and procedures for implementation and compliance [58]. However, without implementing and enforcing rules and norms at the domestic level, the effectiveness of harmonising with international guidelines and conventions in achieving the goals will not materialise [89]. Institutional and legal frameworks in fisheries and beach governance are essential in decision-making due to the challenges with sustain- ability in a changing climate [19]. Thus, throughout human history, the institutional and legal frameworks have evolved from managing and controlling the behaviour of humans to ways fisheries and beaches are protected [68]. The institution and legal frameworks refer to the structure of government and its agencies, civil societies and other stakeholders, as well as the laws and regulations (with amendments), ordinances, and enforcement mechanisms [52]. They define the course of action that influences the enhancement of fisheries and beach Fig. 2. Stakeholders in the management and utilisation of beaches in Ghana. R. Takyi et al. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 3 resource stewardship [1]. It is worth noting that inadequate institutional and legal framework breeds opaqueness and uncertainty, and challenges the course and consistency of delivery of intended objectives [51]. Although, there are different levels of governance capacity and re- sources that are devoted to the sectors, adequacy of legal and institu- tional framework, and processes contribute to the realisation of effective management [68,71]. Formal governance codification of policy, rules and accompanying institutions that govern access, exclusion, planning and engagement over fisheries and beach resources into constitutions, laws, regulations and management plans is fundamental to the institutional and legal frameworks [35]. Additionally, stakeholders’ perception of institutional and legal framework is essential due to the reliance on the success of governance on how they endorse, accept, or reject the frameworks that help diagnose strengths, weaknesses and opportunities, as well as un- derstand the relationship between the governed and the governing system [7]. 3. Materials and methods 3.1. Study area Ghana (see Fig. 3), a sub-Saharan West African coastal country bordered on the north by Burkina Faso, to the south by the Gulf of Guinea (Atlantic Ocean), to the east by Togo, and on the west by Cote d′Ivoire, was selected for the study due to its ratification of the several conventions for the management of coastal and marine resources (i.e., fisheries, beachfront, dunes, rocky beaches, and biodiversity) [29,103, 121]. Additionally, marine fishing and activities around beaches (e.g., tourism, and sand and stone mining) are essential economic ventures in Ghana [66,118]. The country has a coastline of 550 km (i.e., with over 70 % being sandy), a lower middle-income status, practices presidential democracy with strong institutions (i.e., the Parliament of Ghana, judiciary and civil societies) and ranked tops in several governance surveys across Africa [3,5,112,118]. Tema (i.e., in Greater Accra) and Cape Coast (i.e., Central) are essential coastal fishing communities, with Fig. 3. The coastal and marine zone of Ghana, including the two sites (i.e., Cape Coast and Tema), where questionnaires were administered to fisheries managers, fishers, residents, and non-residents. R. Takyi et al. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 4 beachfront that serves as leisure centres for both domestic and inter- national tourist in Ghana. 3.2. Method The research methodology for this study is a multi-approach that aims to obtain a comprehensive understanding of fisheries and beach resource governance in Ghana. Large data collection and thorough analysis were conducted to ensure a comprehensive assessment. 3.2.1. Data collection Predefined keywords and search phrases, such as ‘UNCLOS’, ‘FAO’s code of conduct for responsible fisheries’, ‘coastal and marine governance’, ‘human activities in coastal and marine environment globally’, ‘coastal and marine resources policy of Ghana’ ‘fisheries management in Ghana’, and ‘beach management in Ghana’, among others were developed [48,100]. These were used to systematically search the Web of Knowledge (ISI Web of Science), Science Direct (Scopus), Google Scholar, official web portals of relevant government institutions (e.g., Parliament of Ghana, National Development Planning Commission), and Google [31]. The searches identified 68 relevant documents, including 24 peer-reviewed articles in ISI journals, 14 official government documents, 4 interna- tional conventions, 1 book, 10 reports, 2 theses, and 13 other relevant literature through title, abstract, conclusions, and full-text readings. A systematic review of relevant documents formed the foundation of the data collection process. This includes a comprehensive assessment of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, FAO’s Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, Ghana’s legal framework, encom- passing the Constitution and key laws like the Fisheries Act 625 of 2002, Coastal Development Authority Act 961 of 2017, Environmental Pro- tection Act 490 of 1994, and Fisheries Regulations L.I. 1968 of 2010. Additionally, policy documents and management plans were also assessed, including the Fisheries Management Plan of Ghana-A National Policy for the Management of Fisheries Sector 2015–2019 and 2022–2026, among others through full-text reading. To obtain valuable insights from key stakeholders involved in the management and utilisation of fisheries and beach resources in Ghana, structured interviews were conducted with questionnaires to explore the views of respondents. A total of 69 participants were interviewed (be- tween January and February 2020), including 9 fisheries managers, 46 fishers representing small-scale, semi-industrial, and industrial sectors, and 14 coastal and non-coastal residents. A self-administered ques- tionnaire was used for fisheries managers who were purposefully sampled [92,120]. Face-to-face administration of questionnaires was used after randomly selecting fishers and coastal resident respondents in Cape Coast and Tema, with the help of research assistants [86,87,92]. Non-coastal residents’ respondents were purposively sampled in these locations for divergent perspectives [21]. The questionnaires that were administered for an in-depth data gathering on awareness of manage- ment laws on fisheries and beach resources, enforcement and sensiti- sation activities, and status of governance structure, among others. Each group of respondents was administered a separated set of questionnaires. 3.2.2. Data analysis The information gathered through document review and interviews were processed for data analysis. This involved: An assessment of the collected data to identify key trends, regulatory gaps, and areas of convergence or divergence within the context of marine fisheries and beach resource governance landscape of Ghana, UNCLOS, FAO’s Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, the sus- tainable development goals (SDGs), the African Union (AU) Agenda 2063 and Convention on Biological Diversity. An in-depth analysis was conducted to interpret the significance of the identified information such as planning and access management, providing insights into the implications for the management of marine fisheries and beach resources in Ghana. Data from the questionnaires administered were analysed with the IBM SPSS Statistics by coding the responses of re- spondents [22]. Relevant data points and findings were systematically tabulated to facilitate organisation and comparison (See below – Results section) to identify the general patterns and disparities. 3.2.3. SWOT analysis Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, and Threats (SWOT) analysis of the sector management was also conducted. SWOT is a strategic and an effective situational analysis tool used to measure an organisation or individual or sector’s capabilities and deficiencies that help managers to understand the organisational and environmental factors [17,46]. SWOT provides the opportunity to focus on all aspects of the internal and external environment of the organisation or resources. It is a road map that guides one from the general to the specific, is easy to communicate, and helps to identify future opportunities [17,46]. In this study, SWOT analysis was used as a strategic tool to appraise the performance of the governance framework of fisheries and beach resources in Ghana [67,98]. To ensure rigorous and comprehensive analysis we utilised a combination of expert opinion, secondary data sources and questionnaires administered to fisheries managers, fishers, coastal and non-coastal respondents [67,98]. The data were systemati- cally tabulated, providing a clear and structured overview of the SWOT analysis outcomes. The research approach ensured a thorough exami- nation of Ghana’s marine fisheries and beach resource governance, enabling us to draw informed conclusions, perspectives, and recommendations. 4. Results 4.1. Fisheries and beach management measures Article 55 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) stipulates that countries possess sovereign rights to explore and exploit as well as conserve and manage living and non-living re- sources within their exclusive economic zones. The right to conserve and utilise living marine resources has further impetuous under Articles 61 and 62 of the UNCLOS, with Article 73 outlining the necessity of compliance in these activities. Ghana’s policies for the fisheries sector include the “Safeguarding, conservation, and sustainable management of the re- sources, developing capture fisheries production as well as promote aquaculture development” [74]. While that for the management of beach resources include “Increasing investment in control-structures (gabions and boulder re- vetments to arrest erosion), promotion of afforestation to prevent erosion, reduction in pollution and poor sanitation and ensuring proper siting of industries (adopted from coastal policy of Ghana)” [77]. The current legal (i.e., Fisheries Act 625 of 2002, Fisheries Regula- tions L.I. 1968 of 2010 (Fisheries (Amendment) Regulations L.I. 2217 of 2015) regime for fisheries in Ghana includes planning the fisheries (as illustrated in Table 1) industry through research (i.e., in compliance with Article 61(2) of UNCLOS) and cooperation with all stakeholders, whether at the local, sub-regional, or international level. There are ac- cess management measures through licensing and permit regimes for all fleets and types of fishing, seasonal closures (i.e., July to August annu- ally), declaration of protected areas, gear prescriptions (i.e., in compli- ance with Article 8, Section (Sec.) 8.5 of FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing (CoCRF) and Article 62 (a) of UNCLOS), where they can be used and the monitoring of fishing activities. Concerning access management, when some fishers were asked, “What type of license do you personally hold apart from that of the fishing vessel?” their response was, “Bosun license.” Some artisanal fishers responded, “Yes, canoe numbering” when asked “Do you have a license for your fishing craft?” R. Takyi et al. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 5 Table 1 Marine fisheries and beach resource governance in the coastal and marine areas of Ghana. Governance Area of regulation International conventions National law Ghana’s relevant institution Gaps in the national governance Marine fisheries management measures Fisheries planning (with scientific data, stakeholder collaboration), management of access (including license, quota, monitoring, and control), catch (prohibition of gravid, juvenile, mammal landings), conflicts resolution and pollution Articles 55, 61, 62 and 73 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Article 8, Sections. 8.4. and 8.5 of FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CoCRF) Sustainable Development Goals (12 and 14), Goal 6 of African Union Agenda 2063 Article 87(c) and 269(1) of Ghana’s 1992 constitution; Fisheries Act, 625 of 2002 and Fisheries Regulations L.I. 1968 of 2010 (Fisheries (Amendment) Regulations L.I. 2217 of 2015); Ghana Maritime Authority Act 630 of 2002 Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development and Fisheries Commission (i.e., Marine Fisheries Research Division, Fisheries Scientific Survey Division, Monitoring Control and Surveillance Division, Fisheries Enforcement Unit and Fisheries Settlement Committee) with support from Ministry of Transport (i.e., Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority and Ghana Maritime Authority). Monitoring is mainly in the industrial fishery sector and sometimes in semi-industrial. Small- scale crafts do not have the required equipment hence monitoring is inefficient. Although fishermen are not supposed to land gravid fishes, they cannot also dump fish caught into the aquatic environment. Community-Based Fisheries Committees are not mentioned in the resolution of conflicts of the Fisheries Act 625 of 2002. Beach management measures Beach planning, management of access (e.g., authorisation and permit regime for structures, entertainment, excavation, and sand mining), and pollution Articles 55, 61, 62 and 73 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Sustainable Development Goals (12), Goal 6 of African Union Agenda 2063 Article 87(c) and 269(1) of Ghana’s 1992 constitution; Beaches Obstructions Ordinance (CAP 240), Coastal Development Authority Act 961 of 2017, Land Use and Spatial Planning Act 925 of 2016, Land Commission Act 767 of 2008, Minerals Commission Act 703 of 2006, Environment Protection Agency Act 490 of 1994, Environmental Assessment Regulations L.I. 1652 of 1999, Ghana Maritime Authority Act 630 of 2002 Coastal Development Authority (CoDA), Land Use and Spatial Planning Authority, Ghana Maritime Authority, Lands Commission, Coastal Metropolitan Municipal and District Assemblies, and Environmental Protection Agency of Ghana all have some institutional oversight. Beach resources are not singled-out for planning. Tenet of co- management is non-existent, and law for the management beaches is inadequate and obsolete with last amendment being in the 1950s. Public hearings are only organised when there is a public outcry about a particular project. Only sand and not coastal flora and fauna along the beaches are mentioned for protection from removal in the Beaches Obstructions Ordinance (CAP 240). Lack of long- term master plan, dedicated scientific staff and beach categorisation. R.Takyietal. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 6 The legislation controls catch through quota allocation (i.e., for trawl and tuna vessels), requires catch recordings, minimum mesh size and fish size, prohibits the catch and landing of gravid finfish, shellfish, and mammals and prohibits illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing and destructive methods (i.e., in compliance with Article 8, Sec. 8.4 of FAO CoCRF, and Articles 61, 63 and 65 of UNCLOS). Regarding the recording of catch, respondents in the industrial and semi-industrial fisheries answered “Yes, in manual logbook”, when asked, “Do you formally report the catch for each trip?”, with artisanal fishers responding “No.” Addi- tionally, when fishers were asked a question on destructive fishing, the response was “No use of explosives.” The legal framework also includes provisions for conflict manage- ment through the dispute settlement committee, Part 1 Sec. 10 of Fish- eries Act 625 of 2002 (confers on the Fisheries Commission (FC) with the sole power to appoint members and other stakeholders to settle dis- putes), which has the power to hear complaints and adjudicate on them. To ensure effective management, Ministry of Fisheries and Aqua- culture Development (MoFAD) and FC are the mandated institutions with oversight responsibility for the implementation of laws and regu- lations. Additionally, the Fisheries Act 625 of 2002 which establishes the FC, provides for the creation of a Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Division and the Fisheries Enforcement Unit (FEU) (a multi taskforce) responsible for ensuring the compliance of fisheries laws and regulations by fishers. The law also makes provision for the creation of Fisheries Scientific Survey Division, which is to undertake periodic scientific fisheries data collection (e.g., port sampling of catch) and receive catch data for analysis from fishers and observers. MoFAD and FC also collaborate with other governmental agencies (Ghana Maritime Au- thority and Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority) under the Ministry of Transport, for the licensing of vessels and fishers (e.g., captains). The available legal frameworks under which beach resource man- agement, planning, access, and pollution control fall under (see Table 1) includes the Beach Obstruction Ordinance (CAP 240), Coastal Devel- opment Authority Act 961 of 2017, Land Use and Spatial Planning Act 925 of 2016, Land Commission Act 767 of 2008, and the Local Gov- ernment Act 936 of 2016. Others include the Ghana Maritime Authority Act 630 of 2002, Environmental Protection Act 490 of 1994, Minerals Commission Act 703 of 2006, Environmental Assessment Regulation L.I. 1652 of 1999, and Coastal Metropolitan, Municipal, and District As- semblies (MMDAs) by-laws. This follows Articles 55, 61, 62 and 73 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and Sus- tainable Development Goals (12). Sections 2 and 3 of the Beaches Ob- structions Ordinance (CAP 240) make provision for the reservation of portions of the beaches for any purpose (by the President), have access Table 2 Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) in fisheries and beach resource governance in Ghana. SWOT analysis Fisheries Beach Source Strengths Availability of Fisheries policies, Fisheries Act 625 and Regulations LI 1968 with amendments. Translation of Fisheries Regulations, 2010 (L.I. 1968) into 3 Ghanaian languages. Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development and Fisheries Commission (Divisions and Units). Fisheries academic and research institution Donor agencies, regional and international organisations, and NGOs. Beaches Obstruction Ordinance (CAP 240) Environmental, land and natural resource policies. Land use and spatial planning law, land commission law, coastal bylaws, EPA laws and regulations. Academic and research institutions. Government agencies with responsibility towards coastal management and non- governmental organisations. Fisheries managers, Eshun et al. [32]; Resident and non-resident respondents; National Development Planning Commission [77] Weakness Corruption, poor remuneration of fisheries officers, inadequate enforcement of laws and regulations, disregard for customary laws Inadequate staff, perennial technical and financial logistics constraint Lack of research vessels and inadequate data record, reporting, and monitoring of small-scale fishery Too many state agencies with oversight leading to no management. Inadequate direct regulation and a master plan. inadequate data on the several people using the resource per annum. Fisheries managers, Eshun et al. [32] Jonah [54] Opportunities Amendment of existing laws and improve planning. Co-management with legal backing and logistics for Community-Based Fisheries Management Committees (CBFMCs). Collaboration with local, sub-regional, regional, and international organisations. Reduce overcapacity in fleet number (small-scale sector) and fleet capacity (semi-industrial and industrial) and increasing license renewal fees. Demarcation of protected areas and extension of closed fishing season. Reduce discards and allocation of quota to small- scale fishery. Provision of supplementary livelihood and removal of fuel subsidies. Strengthen or promulgate adequate policies, regulations, and institutions for the management of beaches. Co-management and awareness creation. Zoning and creation of buffer zones. Planning for hazard response. Increase sustainable use for jobs and revenue creation. Achieve blue flag status. Fisheries managers, MoFAD [72]; UNEP [114] Threats Subsidies (i.e., on outboard motors, and premixed fuel) and conflicts. Continuous politicisation of fisheries resources. Destructive methods of fishing, and landing of juvenile and gravid fishes. Pollution and deforestation of coastal wetlands and lagoons. Climate change, sea level rise and coastal erosion. Fishing within the 30 m depth contour by industrial vessels. Corruption and poor remuneration of fisheries officers Land tenure system and urbanisation. Pollution, sanitation (open defecation, plastic, and domestic waste), sand and stone mining, and deforestation. Climate changes, sea level rise, coastal erosion, and tidal floods. Disregard and relegation of customary laws. Conflict between public and private use, disregard for customary beliefs. Fisheries managers, Ameyaw [9]; Appeaning-Addo [11]; Appeaning-Addo and Adeyemi [12] ; Bokpe [20]; Glover [42]; Jonah et al. [55] [55]; Takyi et al. [99]; Wallner-Hahn et al. [119]; Adu-Boahen and Dadson [4]; Dosu [28]; Resident and non-resident respondents R. Takyi et al. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 7 restrictions through licensing (e.g., landing vessels, animals, and arti- cles), and the prohibition (with penalty) of the removal of sand, stones, and artificial protection without prior approval from the District Chief Executive. When some coastal and non-coastal residents were asked, “Do you know any laws that helps in the management of beaches and its resources?”, their response were “Yes, do not poach turtle” and “Turtles are not allowed to be captured by fishermen, (and) must be sent back (released) to the water.” The gaps identified in the Beaches Obstructions Ordinance (CAP 240) is its obsolete and inadequate (i.e., lacking planning framework, extensive access, and pollution management) state contributing to its inability to address current challenges facing the use of beaches in Ghana. Beach use planning is part of the general coastal and land use without special consideration, like fisheries. The jurisdictional mandates include issuing permits for construction, excavation, mining of sand and rocks, pollution prevention and an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) approved by the Environmental Protection Agency of Ghana before implementing projects. The tenets of co-management with indigenous communities enshrined in law is non-existent although there are traditional institutions (chiefs, chief fishermen, and family elders) which use ancient beliefs (e.g., taboos) to regulate the activities of persons who use these resources. Although the Coastal Development Authority (CoDA) was recently established to oversee development in the coastal zone, a perusal of the Act establishing CoDA reveals a lack of provisions toward a long-term beach resource masterplan (including a beach clean-up manual) and the categorisation of beach (urban, peri- urban, rural, safety and water quality levels) to ensure sustainable uti- lisation of these resources through behavioural changes. 4.2. Strength, weakness, and opportunities with resource governance 4.2.1. Fisheries and beach governance 4.2.1.1. Strengths. Ghana’s fisheries governance exhibits certain strengths (as illustrated in Table 2). These strengths encompass the presence of well-established policies, Fisheries Act, 625 of 2002 and Fisheries Regulations L.I. 1968 of 2010 (Fisheries (Amendment) Regu- lations L.I. 2217 of 2015), the presence of MoFAD and FC, informal institutions, and sensitised fishers (see Tables 3 and 4). The strength (see Table 2) in Ghana’s beach resources governance and usage can be identified in its coastal policies [77], Beaches Obstructions Ordinance (CAP 240), state institutions with some jurisdictional responsibility, non-governmental organisations (NGO) and sensitised stakeholders (see Tables 2 and 5). When coastal and non-coastal respondents were asked, “Do you know of any organisation(s) that controls the use of beach re- sources?” Some responded by mentioning, “Cape Coast Municipal As- sembly”, “Tema Metropolitan Assembly” and some NGOs. 4.2.1.2. Weakness. The fisheries sector in Ghana is confronted with several weakness, which includes perceived corruption, weak enforce- ment of laws (see Table 4), inadequate staff, perennial technical and financial logistic constraints, the absence of research vessels, and inad- equate data recording and monitoring capacities, particularly for the small-scale fisheries. These assertions were corroborated by fisheries managers (see Table 3). Several weaknesses persist in the management of beach resources, primarily due to the unavailability of specific policy directions (see Table 2) and a dedicated institution for beaches. Other weaknesses include inadequate consultations (see Table 5), laws (reg- ulations), and coordination among the numerous authorised institutions responsible for the management of this resource. 4.2.1.3. Opportunities. The available opportunities (as outlined in Table 2) for the fisheries sector include the implementation of co- management measures by improving on the current Community-Based Fisheries Management Communities (CBFMCs) structures through appropriate legislation and logistical support. Demarcation of marine reserves as enshrined in the Fisheries Act 625 of 2002 and Fisheries Regulations, 2010 L.I. 1968. Furthermore, opportunities exist for reducing overcapacity in terms of the number of fleets, especially in the small-scale sector, from the current levels to a more sustainable number. Table 3 Fisheries manager’s response, including their level of knowledge of fisheries policy and laws, rating of the awareness of fishers concerning Ghana’s fisheries regulations, the level of stakeholder engagement before management plans, frequency of stakeholder sensitisation, and impact of sensitisation on attitudinal change of fishers. Question Response Percentage of response (n = 9) Level of knowledge of fisheries policy, and laws Good 33.3 Very good 66.7 Awareness of fishers concerning fisheries regulation Good 77.8 Excellent 22.2 level of stakeholder engagement before management plan Good 22.2 Very good 77.8 Impact of sensitisation on attitudinal change of fishers Good 33.3 Very good 66.7 Frequency of fishers’ engagement Monthly 33.3 Occasionally 66.7 Level of fishers’ participation of engagement Good 33.3 Very good 66.7 Major weakness of fisheries governance Enforcement 100 Compliance of fishers Inadequate staff and logistics Lack of research vessel Activities that persist Illegal unreported and regulated fishing 100 Unprescribed nets 66.7 Light fishing 100 Landing of Juvenile 100 Table 4 The responses of the fishers interviewed concerning their awareness of the fisheries policy and laws of Ghana, their response concerning sensitisation by the fisheries managers, participation in workshops, and their perception on the level of enforcement carried out by the fisheries managers. Question Response Percentage of response (n = 46) Awareness of fishers concerning fisheries regulation Yes 69.6 No 30.4 Participated in workshop organized by fisheries managers Yes 28.3 No 71.7 Level of law fisheries law enforcement Poor 41.3 Good 2.2 Very good 54.3 Excellent 2.2 Sensitisation by fisheries managers at the landing beach Yes 100 Table 5 Response of residents and non-residents on their awareness of beach manage- ment laws, perception of the state of beach resources, and knowledge of man- agement organisation. Questions Response Percentage of response (n = 14) Awareness of laws concerning the management of beaches Yes 64.3 No 35.7 Perception on the state of beaches Poor 50 Fair 50 Knowledge of beach resource management organisation Yes 71.4 No 28.6 R. Takyi et al. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 8 Opportunities exist in the reduction of fleet capacity (semi-industrial and industrial sectors), increasing the amount of fees for license renewal (i.e., meeting Target 3 of post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework), extension of the close season period, provision of supplementary live- lihoods to fishers and complete removal of subsidies. There are oppor- tunities for the allocation of catch quotas in small-scale fisheries (e.g., based on the proportion of catch greater than length at first maturity of species, safety, etc.) and improvement on the current quota allocations for industrial fishers (through assessment of catch records of targeted species, fishers footprint, history of compliance, volume of bycatch landed, etc.) for a better understanding of the impact of each fisher to ensure sustainable management, similar to practices in the European Union. Opportunities (see Table 2) exist for the promulgation of extensive policies and regulations, and for improvement under the current institutional framework (i.e., CoDA being made the lead insti- tution), to ensure adequate attention and sustainability of Ghana’s beaches and their resources. There are also opportunities to establish sustainable zones and buffer areas (based on new or available scientific and local knowledge) along Ghana’s beaches as a protective measure through the restriction of access to ensure a reduction in over-utilisation and guarantee their socio-economic and environmental (biodiversity and ecology) sustainability. Co-management with local traditional au- thorities (chiefs and family elders) as well as the establishment of Community Based Beach Management Committees (CBMCs) are options that are available to ensure judicious use and effective management. The opportunity of subscribing to the Blue Flag certification standard advocated by the Foundation for Environmental Education bearing in mind the use of an ecosystem-based approach also exists for Ghana’s beach resource management. These measures can help increase sus- tainable local and national employment opportunities with accompa- nying revenues. 4.2.1.4. Threats. The Government of Ghana’s continuous provision of input subsidies, including fuel (e.g., premix fuel and tax waivers amounting to about US$ 44 million annually), fishing nets and outboard motors (i.e., costing taxpayers over US$ 4.5 million annually). Coupled with the continuous partisan politicisation of resource and fishing communities, the persistent use of destructive fishing practices poses significant threats to the fisheries sector. Despite the prohibition of dumping of fish (discards) into the sea and without authorisation, these activities persist within the fishing industry due to budgetary con- straints, and inadequate enforcement and threats to the management of the fisheries. There are also threats arising from the continuous landing of gravid and juvenile fishes (as outlined in Table 2). Further threats include fishing within the 30 m depth contour by industrial fishers (a source of conflict between small-scale and industrial sectors) and effects of climate change. Competition for resources in shared fishing grounds amongst stakeholders as a result of dwindling wild stocks, continuous destruction of small-scale fishing gear by both semi-industrial and in- dustrial fleets, conflicts between pro-illegal fishers and anti-illegal, fishers and enforcement agencies, leniency in the application of laws and regulations toward small-scale sector are all situations that threaten the effective management of the fishery. Ghana has a land tenure system in which tribal and ethnic groups, led by traditional rulers and family heads, have authority over the lands with their associated resources. The authority exercised by these leaders has always been a threat to the natural resource governance in the country of which beach resources are not exempted. Continuous activities such as sand and stone mining, pollution from effluents along the coastal zone, and unsanitary condi- tions (through open defecation, plastic and domestic waste disposal) (see Table 5), are additional threats facing beach resources in Ghana. There are also threats from the deforestation of beach vegetation (co- conut trees and other plants), climate changes and sea level rise. Furthermore, there is another threat which is the continuous disregard for customary laws and beliefs, partially due to an increase in non- traditional religious beliefs. Hitherto customary laws and beliefs (a bottom-up approach) were effective in influencing behaviour and nat- ural resource conservation, as individuals feared being punished by “god” or being summoned before the chief’s palace or community leaders for nonconformity, which could result in fines or banishment from the society. 5. Discussion Legal and institutional frameworks collectively contribute to the management of human behaviour in the utilisation of resources through decisions-making due to the essence of adequate natural resource governance [69,115]. The result of the analysis shows that Ghana, a signatory to the UNCLOS and FAO’s CoCRF, as well as several others, including the sustainable development goals (SDGs), the African Union (AU) Agenda 2063 and Convention on Biological Diversity, has legal and institutional frameworks for fisheries and beach management. However, the effect of the current policy and management landscape on fisheries and beaches for decision-makers varies significantly, with a greater focus on fisheries contributing to the continuous imbalance of legal and institutional attention on beaches. The protection and sustainability of natural resources enshrined in Ghana’s national constitution (Article 87(c), 269(1)), which mandates the country’s National Development and Planning Commission (NDPC) and governments to institute measures, have been implemented. These include policies and laws, which are central to the management system to ensures planning, management and access control, and prevention of conflict and pollution [95]. For instance, under the Fisheries Act 625 of 2002 and Fisheries Regulations (see Table 1), licenses and permits are required for all kinds of fishing fleets, fishing methods, and gears. Although measures such as selected gear types prescription have bene- fits, they also have challenges in multispecies fisheries management like Ghana for decision makers [8]. Limiting unrestricted access to fisheries and beach resources decreases anthropogenic activities and pressures, such as fishing mortality and discards (i.e., 9 million tonnes worldwide and thousands of tonnes in Ghana), coastal deforestation, pollution, sand mining and block moulding with dunes. Thereby improving the conservation of flora and fauna, aesthetics, and ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns in alignment with SDG 12 and Goal 6 of AU Agenda 2063 [16,18,23,37,41,97]. Planning in natural resources governance is also essential for estab- lishing the framework (i.e., closures, demarcating reserves and sensitive ecosystems) for sustainable utilisation [59,116]. Adequate scientific data is central to this [49], but the knowledge to back planning and the means of continuous data collection without, for example, dedicated research vessels for fisheries and scientific staff for beaches are detri- mental. Ghana’s marine fisheries often relies on a foreign research vessel like the RV Dr. Fritjof Nansen from Norway which is on a different mission in the Gulf of Guinea and does not venture in shallow areas of Ghana’s marine waters, where most of the small-scale fishers operate leaving a significant data gap for decision makers [47,64]. Additionally, although there is cooperative scientific research with mainly industrial fleets (i.e., tuna and trawl vessels) and through the observer programme, it is fraught with challenges of data inaccuracies [53]. There is no beach planning under the current governance framework supported by scien- tific data, contributing to traditional rulers and family heads controlling the exploitation of the resources without direction, purpose, and formal approval from government institutions. The marginalisation of activities of some groups (e.g., artisanal fishers and dune miners) by decision-makers due to their subsistence nature contributes to weaknesses and gaps in the resource governance regimes [33]. For instance, due to the economic vulnerability of arti- sanal fishers, enforcement of fishing, licensing and permit regulations is somewhat lenient [5,9,13,30]. Although Article 65 of UNCLOS encour- ages states to enact stringent laws to regulate the exploitation of marine R. Takyi et al. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 9 mammals due to their significant roles in the structure and function of aquatic ecosystems [62]. Several empirical studies have recorded sig- nificant numbers in Ghana’s fisheries as main catch or bycatch due to inadequate enforcement [25,83,117]. Interestingly, most of the fisher- men interviewed expressed a favourable opinion of the current enforcement regime, while the managers believe it is a challenge (Tables 3 and 4). Additionally, due to weak enforcement, coastal resi- dents openly defecate on the beach and cart away sand or mould blocks with dunes for construction purposes, which hurts the biodiversity (e.g., the decline in the population of ghost crabs and turtle nursery grounds) and the livelihoods of people in the area [27,32,57]. The current subsidy policy from central government is a major threat to the fisheries due to its contribution to excess capacity and over- exploitation of resources [60]. For instance, due to the effect of fisheries subsidies on overcapacity and overexploitation, the quantity of fish caught by the small pelagic fishery in Ghana declined from over 138000 tonnes in 1996 to about 19608 tonnes in 2016, and the landing of fish species below the recommended minimum sizes continues in clear violation of the fisheries laws of Ghana, with consequences for the conservation targets [10,75,82]. Although there are challenges, several opportunities exist for the future, especially in the areas of marine protected areas, buffer zones, and enactment of modern beach laws under current dispensation, which can serve as incentives for the conservation of sedentary species, adult spawning stocks, turtles, juvenile fishes and dunes by reducing their vulnerability for long-term sustainability [45]. Fortunately, many coastal communities in Ghana already have some customary laws and structures in place where community leaders (i.e., chief fishermen, family heads and chiefs) have customary authority to regulate the ac- tivities and shape the behaviour of people [2,4,26,81]. These can be given legitimacy within the formal governance to ensure the active participation and effective conflict resolution because empirical studies suggests that, for instance, over 60 % of fishers would rather adhere to traditional tenets of fisheries management over government legislations [9,40,78,105]. 6. Conclusion In conclusion, the comprehensive analysis conducted in this research reveals policies that encourage sustainable fisheries utilisation but do not explicitly encourage sustainable utilisation of beaches by decision- makers. Consequently, the vast potential of beaches conservation to the socio-economy of Ghana remains untapped due to overlapping re- sponsibilities, with an opportunity for short, medium, and long-term policy formulation to address current challenges. The research underscores the significance of having an adequate legal regime and a coordinating policy and technical institution for fisheries and beach resources management to ensure the provision of essential baselines such as strategic planning, access control, conflict resolutions, and pollution control. Additionally, the research identified a raft of factors that collectively show the Strengths, Weaknesses, Op- portunities, and Threats (SWOT) of the governance landscape of fish- eries and beach resources, which decision makers must consider. These include established legal frameworks (laws), enforcement mechanisms, data deficiencies, overcapacity concerns, the predominant top-down management approach, the potential for amending existing legislation, and bolstering community-based management organisations through legal provisions and logistical support. The policy and management gaps identified open the door for a comprehensive assessment of Ghana’s marine and coastal resource governance where stakeholders, including decision-makers, researchers, politicians, and institutions, can work towards a more effective sus- tainable fisheries and beach resource management while aligning with global conservation (post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework targets), sustainable development goals (SDGs) and Goal 6 of the AU Agenda 2063. CRediT authorship contribution statement Badr El Mahrad:Writing – review& editing, Visualization. Cynthia Addo: Writing – review & editing, Visualization. John Essandoh: Writing – review & editing. Richard Takyi:Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Francis Kofi Ewusie Nunoo:Writing – review & editing. Data Availability The authors are unable or have chosen not to specify which data has been used. Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the contribution of the Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degree in Water and Coastal Management (WACOMA) programme, the Centre for Marine and Environmental Research (CIMA) of the University of Algarve, Portugal, the Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Italy, Dr. Maria Inês Patricio Lopes Gameiro and Richard Adade of the Centre for Coastal Management, University of Cape Coast, Ghana. References [1] A.O. Achieng, B. Opaa, K.O. Obiero, O. Osano, B. Kaunda-Arara, Watershed management in Kenya; Societal implications, drivers of change and governance needs. in: Encyclopedia of Inland Waters, Elsevier, 2022, pp. 464–474, https:// doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819166-8.00157-2. [2] Adjei, J.K., Sika-Bright, S., 2019. Traditional beliefs and sea fishing in selected coastal communities in the Western Region of Ghana. Ghana J. Geogr. 11, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.4314/gjg.v11i1.1. [3] C.K. Adokoh, E.A. Obodai, D.K. Essumang, Y. Serfor-Armah, B.J.B. Nyarko, A. Asabere-Ameyaw, Statistical evaluation of environmental contamination, distribution and source assessment of heavy metals (Aluminum, Arsenic, Cadmium, and Mercury) in some lagoons and an estuary along the coastal belt of Ghana, Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61 (2011) 389–400, https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00244-011-9643-5. [4] K. Adu-Boahen, I.Y. Dadson, Customary practices and wetland management in Ghana: a case of Muni lagoon ramsar site in the Central Region, KNUST J. Geogr. Rural Dev. 2 (2018) 27–45. [5] Afoakwah, R., Osei, M.B.D., Effah, E., 2018. A guide on illegal fishing activities in Ghana. Cape Coast. [6] African Union Commission and African Union Development Agency - NEPAD, 2022. AUC and AUDA-NEPAD Second continental report on the implementation of agenda 2063. Midrand. [7] S. Aguado, I. Segado, M. Vidal, T. Pitcher, M. Lam, The quality of fisheries governance assessed using a participatory, multi-criteria framework: a case study from Murcia, Spain, Mar. Policy 124 (2021) 104280, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. marpol.2020.104280. [8] N. Alzorriz, L. Arregi, B. Herrmann, M. Sistiaga, J. Casey, J.J. Poos, Questioning the effectiveness of technical measures implemented by the Basque bottom otter trawl fleet: Implications under the EU landing obligation, Fish. Res. 175 (2016) 116–126, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2015.11.023. [9] Ameyaw, G.A., 2017. Managing conflicts in the marine fisheries sectors in Ghana. University of Wollongong. [10] S.K.K. Amponsah, A. Abdulhakim, P. Ofori Danson, K.F. Anyan, Population dynamics of bigeye grunt, “Brachydeuterus auritus” (Valenciennes, 1831) in Ghana and management implications, Fish. Aquac. J. 8 (2017) 1–6, https://doi. org/10.4172/2150-3508.1000233. [11] K. Appeaning-Addo, Changing morphology of Ghana’s Accra coast, J. Coast. Conserv. 15 (2010) 433–443, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-010-0134-z. [12] K. Appeaning-Addo, M. Adeyemi, Assessing the impact of sea-level rise on a vulnerable coastal community in Accra, Ghana, Jamba J. Disaster Risk Stud. 5 (2013) 1–8, https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v5i1.60. [13] B. Asiedu, F.K.E. Nunoo, P.K. Ofori-Danson, D.B. Sarpong, U.R. Sumaila, Poverty measurements in small-scale fisheries of Ghana: a step towards poverty eradication, Curr. Res. J. Soc. Sci. 5 (2013) 75–90, https://doi.org/10.19026/ crjss.5.5542. [14] A.B. Balembu, L.P.G. Lelo, A.K.P. Mayimbi, Corruption and lack of governance of natural resources in the democratic Republic Of Congo, Int. J. Progress. Sci. Technol. 40 (2023) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.52155/ijpsat.v40.2.5600. [15] M. Bellanger, C. Speir, F. Blanchard, K. Brooks, J.R.A. Butler, S. Crosson, R. Fonner, S. Gourguet, D.S. Holland, S. Kuikka, B. Le Gallic, R. Lent, G. D. Libecap, D.W. Lipton, P.K. Nayak, D. Reid, P. Scemama, R. Stephenson, O. Thébaud, J.C. Young, Addressing marine and coastal governance conflicts at R. Takyi et al. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 10 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819166-8.00157-2 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819166-8.00157-2 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-011-9643-5 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-011-9643-5 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref3 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref3 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref3 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104280 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104280 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2015.11.023 https://doi.org/10.4172/2150-3508.1000233 https://doi.org/10.4172/2150-3508.1000233 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-010-0134-z https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v5i1.60 https://doi.org/10.19026/crjss.5.5542 https://doi.org/10.19026/crjss.5.5542 https://doi.org/10.52155/ijpsat.v40.2.5600 the interface of multiple sectors and jurisdictions, Front. Mar. Sci. 7 (2020), https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.544440. [16] A. Ben-Hasan, C. Walters, U. Rashid Sumaila, Effects of management on the profitability of seasonal fisheries, Front. Mar. Sci. 6 (2019) 1–8, https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fmars.2019.00310. [17] M.A. Benzaghta, A. Elwalda, M.M. Mousa, I. Erkan, M. Rahman, SWOT analysis applications: An integrative literature review, J. Glob. Bus. Insights 6 (2021) 55–73, https://doi.org/10.5038/2640-6489.6.1.1148. [18] Blomeyer, R., Nieto, F., Sanz, A., Stobberup, K., 2015. Criteria for allocation access to dishing in EU. Directorate-General for Internal Policies, Brussels. [19] Boateng, I., 2006. Institutional frameworks in the administration of coastal and marine space in Africa, in: Administering Marine Spaces: International Issues. The International Federation of Surveyors (FIG), Copenhagen, pp. 102–118. [20] Bokpe, S.J., 2017. Irate fishermen disrupt meeting on illegal fishing in Accra [WWW Document]. URL https://www.graphic.com.gh/news/general-news/ irate-fishermen-disrupt-meeting-on-illegal-fishing-in-accra.html (accessed 4.29.20). [21] S. Campbell, M. Greenwood, S. Prior, T. Shearer, K. Walkem, S. Young, D. Bywaters, K. Walker, Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples, J. Res. Nurs. 25 (2020) 652–661, https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1744987120927206. [22] Z. Čaplová, P. Švábová, IBM SPSS statistics. in: Statistics and Probability in Forensic Anthropology, Elsevier, 2020, pp. 343–352, https://doi.org/10.1016/ B978-0-12-815764-0.00027-7. [23] P.G. Carvalho, A. Humphries, Gear restrictions create conservation and fisheries trade-offs for management, Fish Fish 23 (2022) 193–194. [24] T. Dailianis, C.J. Smith, N. Papadopoulou, V. Gerovasileiou, K. Sevastou, T. Bekkby, M. Bilan, D. Billett, C. Boström, M. Carreiro-Silva, R. Danovaro, S. Fraschetti, K. Gagnon, C. Gambi, A. Grehan, S. Kipson, J. Kotta, C.J. McOwen, T. Morato, H. Ojaveer, C.K. Pham, R. Scrimgeour, Human activities and resultant pressures on key European marine habitats: an analysis of mapped resources, Mar. Policy 98 (2018) 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.08.038. [25] Debrah, J.S., Ofori-Danson, P.K., Waerebeek, K.V., 2010. An update on the catch composition and other aspects of cetacean exploitation in Ghana, in: Scientific Committee Meeting, Agadir, Morocco, June 2010. pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/ 10.13140/RG.2.1.4537.9928. [26] F. Diawuo, A.K. Issifu, Exploring the African traditional belief systems (totems and taboos) in natural resources conservation and management in Ghana, J. Pan Afr. Stud. 8 (2015) 115–131. [27] Dika, J.L., 2017. Effect of pollution on coastal socio-economic life of the people of Elmina. University of Ghana. [28] Dosu, G., 2017. Perceptions of socio-cultural beliefs and taboos among the Ghanaian fishers and fisheries authorities: A case study of the Jamestown fishing community in the Greater Accra, Region of Ghana. The Arctic University of Norway. [29] Economic Commission for Africa, 2017. Country profile -Ghana. Addis Ababa. [30] Economist Intelligence Unit, 2015. The blue economy: Growth opportunity and a sustainable ocean economy. [31] B. El Mahrad, S. Abalansa, A. Newton, J.D. Icely, M. Snoussi, I. Kacimi, Social- environmental analysis for the management of coastal lagoons in North Africa, Front. Environ. Sci. 8 (2020) 1–17, https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.00037. [32] G. Eshun, T.M. Tichaawa, D.O. Appiah, Towards a sustainable coastal tourism development in Ghana, Afr. J. Hosp. Tour. Leis. 8 (2019) 1–18. [33] European Parliament, 2019. The African Union’s blue strategy. [34] M. Fabinyi, K. Barclay, Fishing livelihoods and fisheries governance. in: Asia- Pacific Fishing Livelihoods, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2022, pp. 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79591-7_1. [35] M. Fabinyi, K. Barclay, Fisheries governance. in: Asia-Pacific Fishing Livelihoods, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2022, pp. 65–90, https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-030-79591-7_4. [36] FAO, 2022. The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2022, In Brief to The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/ cc0463en. [37] FAO, 2016. Effort rights in fisheries management: General principles and case studies from around the world. Bilbao. [38] C.F. Gaymer, A.V. Stadel, N.C. Ban, P.F. Cárcamo, J. Ierna, L.M. Lieberknecht, Merging top-down and bottom-up approaches in marine protected areas planning: experiences from around the globe, Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 24 (2014) 128–144, https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.2508. [39] Ghana Investment Promotion Council, 2023. Ghana’s recreation and tourism sector report. [40] Ghana News Agency, 2021. Fisheries crime and prosecution: How Ghana’s alternative dispute resolution (ADR) proven effective? [WWW Document]. URL 10/10/2023. [41] E. Gilman, A. Perez Roda, T. Huntington, S.J. Kennelly, P. Suuronen, M. Chaloupka, P.A.H. Medley, Benchmarking global fisheries discards, Sci. Rep. 10 (2020) 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71021-x. [42] Glover, B., 2015. Tema New Town fishermen, navy personnel clash over illegal fishing methods [WWW Document]. URL https://www.graphic.com.gh/news/ general-news/tema-new-town-fishermen-navy-personnel-clash-over-illegal- fishing-methods.html (accessed 4.30.20). [43] P.W. GLYNN, Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and implications, Glob. Chang. Biol. 2 (1996) 495–509, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.1996. tb00063.x. [44] G. Griggs, Human settlement of the coastal zone. in: Coasts in Crisis, University of California Press, 2019, pp. 1–20, https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520966857-003. [45] K. Grorud-Colvert, J. Sullivan-stack, C. Roberts, V. Constant, B. Horta, E.P. Pike, N. Kingston, D. Laffoley, E. Sala, J. Claudet, A.M. Friedlander, D.A. Gill, S. E. Lester, J.C. Day, E.J. Gonçalves, G.N. Ahmadia, M. Rand, A. Villagomez, N. C. Ban, G.G. Gurney, A.K. Spalding, N.J. Bennett, J. Briggs, L.E. Morgan, R. Moffitt, M. Deguignet, E.K. Pikitch, E.S. Darling, S. Jessen, S.O. Hameed, G. Carlo, Di, P. Guidetti, J.M. Harris, J. Torre, Z. Kizilkaya, T. Agardy, P. Cury, N. J. Shah, K. Sack, L. Cao, M. Fernandez, J. Lubchenco, The MPA guide: a framework to achieve global goals for the ocean, Science 373 (80) (2021) 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abf0861. [46] E. Gürel, SWOT analysis: a theoretical review, J. Int. Soc. Res. 10 (2017) 994–1006, https://doi.org/10.17719/jisr.2017.1832. [47] Hersoug, B., Johnsen, P., 2015. Report from fact-finding mission to Ghana 8-21 August 2015. [48] M.R.W. Hiebl, Sample selection in systematic literature reviews of management research, Organ. Res. Methods 26 (2023) 229–261, https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1094428120986851. [49] R. Hoschke, N. Pauli, T. Langlois, A.T. Knight, H. Davies, M. Navarro, Navigating diverse commercial fisher perspectives for effective knowledge exchange in fisheries research and management, Environ. Sci. Policy 158 (2024) 103798, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103798. [50] Y. Huang, P. Jin, Impact of human interventions on coastal and marine geological hazards: a review, Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 77 (2018) 1081–1090, https://doi. org/10.1007/s10064-017-1089-1. [51] Hutniczak, B., Delpeuch, C., 2018. Combatting illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing: Where countries stand and where efforts should concentrate in the future. [52] P.G.S.A. JeyaSundar, A. Ali, D. Guo, Z. Zhang, Waste treatment approaches for environmental sustainability. in: Microorganisms for Sustainable Environment and Health, Elsevier, 2020, pp. 119–135, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12- 819001-2.00006-1. [53] T.R. Johnson, W.L.T. Van Densen, Benefits and organization of cooperative research for fisheries management, ICES J. Mar. Sci. 64 (2007) 834–840, https:// doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsm014. [54] Jonah, F.E., 2015. The state of Ghana’s coasts: Human impacts, management and way forward. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36600.65280. [55] F.E. Jonah, D. Adjei-Boateng, N.W. Agbo, E.A. Mensah, R.E. Edziyie, Assessment of sand and stone mining along the coastline of Cape Coast, Ghana, Ann. GIS 21 (2015) 223–231, https://doi.org/10.1080/19475683.2015.1007894. [56] F.E. Jonah, K. Adu-Boahen, Coastal environmental injustice in Ghana: the activities of coastal sediment miners in the Elmina, Cape Coast and Moree area, GeoJournal 81 (2014) 185–196, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-014-9612-4. [57] F.E. Jonah, N.W. Agbo, W. Agbeti, D. Adjei-Boateng, M.J. Shimba, The ecological effects of beach sand mining in ghana using ghost crabs (ocypode species) as biological indicators, Ocean Coast. Manag. 112 (2015) 18–24, https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.05.001. [58] Kameri-Mbote, P., 2004. The impaxt of international treaties on land and resource rights, in: Saruchera, M. (Ed.), Securing Land and Resources Rights: Pan-African Perspectives. International Environmental Law Research Centre, Cape Town, p. 15. [59] Kaswamila, A., 2011. Sustainable natural resource management. InTech, Rijeka. [60] K. Kelleher, M.L. Weber, Toward sustainable management of world fisheries and aquaculture, : Glob. Issues Glob. Citiz. (2006) 1–20. [61] C. Kelly, G. Ellis, W. Flannery, Conceptualising change in marine governance: Learning from transition management, Mar. Policy 95 (2018) 24–35, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.06.023. [62] J.J. Kiszka, M.R. Heithaus, A.J. Wirsing, Behavioural drivers of the ecological roles and importance of marine mammals, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 523 (2015) 267–281, https://doi.org/10.3354/meps11180. [63] S.S. Kuzakbirdiev, Implementation of law as a factor of ensuring the legal security of modern society, SHS Web Conf. 134 (2022) 1–6, https://doi.org/10.1051/ shsconf/202213400095. [64] Kwawukume, V., 2017. Prez outlines plans to protect fish stock [WWW Document]. URL 〈https://www.graphic.com.gh/news/general-news/prez-outl ines-plans-to-protect-fish-stock.html〉 (accessed 10.7.23). [65] E.T. Lawson, C. Gordon, W. Schluchter, The dynamics of poverty-environment linkages in the coastal zone of Ghana, Ocean Coast. Manag. 67 (2012) 30–38, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.05.023. [66] Lazar, N., Yankson, K., Blay, J., Ofori-Danson, P.K., Markwei, P., Agbogah, K., Bannerman, P., Sotor, M., Yamoah, K.K., Bilisini, W.B., 2018. Status of Ghana’s small pelagic stocks and recommendations to achieve sustainable fishing 2017. Accra. [67] P. Loizia, I. Voukkali, A.A. Zorpas, J. Navarro Pedreño, G. Chatziparaskeva, V. J. Inglezakis, I. Vardopoulos, M. Doula, Measuring the level of environmental performance in insular areas, through key performed indicators, in the framework of waste strategy development, Sci. Total Environ. 753 (2021) 141974, https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141974. [68] Marine Resources Assessment Group, n.d. Fisheries and governance. [69] Mia, R., 2019. An assignment on role of institutions in natural resource management. [70] Ministry of Environment Science Technology and Innovation, 2022. Environmental and and social management framework, West Africa Coastal Areas Resilience Investment Project II. Accra, Ghana. [71] Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources, 2016. Framework on tree tenure and benefits sharing scheme. Accra. [72] MoFAD, 2021. Medium term expenditure framework for 2022-2025. Accra, Ghana. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-96042-2_5436. R. Takyi et al. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 11 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.544440 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00310 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00310 https://doi.org/10.5038/2640-6489.6.1.1148 https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206 https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815764-0.00027-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815764-0.00027-7 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref16 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref16 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.08.038 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref18 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref18 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref18 https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.00037 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref20 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref20 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79591-7_1 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79591-7_4 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79591-7_4 https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.2508 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71021-x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.1996.tb00063.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.1996.tb00063.x https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520966857-003 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abf0861 https://doi.org/10.17719/jisr.2017.1832 https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120986851 https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120986851 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103798 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-017-1089-1 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-017-1089-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819001-2.00006-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819001-2.00006-1 https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsm014 https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsm014 https://doi.org/10.1080/19475683.2015.1007894 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-014-9612-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.05.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.05.001 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref37 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref37 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.06.023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.06.023 https://doi.org/10.3354/meps11180 https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202213400095 https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202213400095 https://www.graphic.com.gh/news/general-news/prez-outlines-plans-to-protect-fish-stock.html https://www.graphic.com.gh/news/general-news/prez-outlines-plans-to-protect-fish-stock.html https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.05.023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141974 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141974 [73] MoFAD, 2020. Co-management policy for the fisheries sector. Accra, Ghana. [74] MoFAD, 2018a. Medium term expenditure framework (MTEF) for 2018 - 2021 ministry of fisheries and aquaculture, Programme Based Budget Estimates for 2018. Accra,Ghana. [75] MoFAD, 2018b. The people’s fish- A crisis for Ghana’s canoe sector. Accra. [76] J. Nakamura, International fisheries law: Past to future, in: S. Partelow, M. Hadjimichael, A.K. Hornidge (Eds.), Ocean Governance. MARE Publication Series, 2023, pp. 175–207, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20740-2_8. [77] NDPC, 2014. Ghana shared growth and development agenda (GSGDA) II, 2014- 2017, Medium-Term National Development Policy Framework. Accra. [78] Nielsen, J.R., 1996. Fisheries co-management: Theoretical aspects, international experiences and future requirements. [79] Northrop, E., Schuchmann, P., Burke, L., Fysll, A., Alvarez, S., Spenceley, A., Becken, S., Kato, K., Roy, J., Some, S., Veitayaki, J., Markandya, A., Galarraga, I., Greno, P., Ruiz-Gauna, I., Curnock, M., Wood, M.E., Yin, M.Y., Riedmiller, S., Carter, E., Haryanto, R., Holloway, E., Croes, R., Ridderstaat, J., Godovykh, M., 2022. Opportunities for transforming coastal and marine tourism - Towards sustainability, regeneration and resilience. Washington DC. [80] F.K.E. Nunoo, B. Asiedu, K. Amador, D. Belhabib, V. Lam, R. Sumaila, D. Pauly, Marine fisheries catches in Ghana: Historic reconstruction for 1950 to 2010 and current economic impacts, Rev. Fish. Sci. Aquac. 22 (2014) 274–283, https://doi. org/10.1080/23308249.2014.962687. [81] F.K.E. Nunoo, B. Asiedu, J. Olauson, G. Intsifu, Achieving sustainable fisheries management: a critical look at traditional fisheries management in the marine artisanal fisheries of Ghana, West Africa, J. Energy Nat. Resour. Manag. 2 (2018) 15–23, https://doi.org/10.26796/jenrm.v2i0.40. [82] P.K. Ofori-Danson, S. Addo, C.A. Animah, A. Abdulhakim, J.O. Nyarko, Length at first capture (LC50) of “Sardinella aurita” and “Sardinella maderensis” landed from purse seines at the Tema fishing Harbour, Ghana. Int. J. Fish. Aquat. Res. 3 (2018) 8–13. [83] P.K. Ofori-Danson, J. Debrah, K. Van Waerebeek, The status and trends of small cetacean landings at Dixcove artisanal fishing port, western Ghana, PeerJ (2019) 1–19. [84] L. Onofri, P.A.L.D. Nunes, Beach ‘lovers’ and ‘greens’: a worldwide empirical analysis of coastal tourism, Ecol. Econ. 88 (2013) 49–56, https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.01.003. [85] Patterson, H., 2023. International fishery management arrangements, in: Fishery Status Reports 2023. pp. 313–316. [86] Pazzaglia, A.M., Stafford, E.T., Rodriguez, S.M., 2016. Survey methods for educators: Analysis and reporting of survey data (part 3 of 3). Washington, DC. [87] M.I. Pozzo, A. Borgobello, M.P. Pierella, Using questionnaires in research on universities: Analysis of experiences from a situated perspective, REIRE 12 (2019) 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1344/reire2019.12.227010. [88] Pratikto, W.A., 2016. Expert meeting in preparation for HLPF 2017: Readying institutions and policies for integrated approaches to implementation of the 2030. [89] B.J. Preston, C. Hanson, The globalisation and marmonisation of environmental law: an Australian perspective. Asia Pacific, J. Environ. Law 16 (2013) 36. [90] L. Ramón, M.A. Toman, Political economy and natural resource use. in: Economic Development and Environmental Sustainability, Oxford University PressOxford, 2006, pp. 122–153, https://doi.org/10.1093/0199298009.003.0005. [91] S. Satumanatpan, P. Moore, A. Lentisco, H. Kirkman, An assessment of governance of marine and coastal resources on Koh Tao, Thailand, Ocean Coast. Manag. 148 (2017) 143–157, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ocecoaman.2017.08.001. [92] M. Shaheen, S. Pradhan, Ranajee, Sampling in Qualitative Research, IGI Global, 2019, pp. 25–51, https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5366-3.ch002. [93] L. Shasha, C. Feng, Q. Hongshuai, L. Jianhui, Y. Wei, L. Gen, Economic contribution of beach resources and their sustainable development in China, Ocean Coast. Manag. 239 (2023) 106598, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ocecoaman.2023.106598. [94] Silva, J.P., Toland, J., Eldridge, J., Potter, J., Jones, S., Nottingham, S., Severon, M., Geater, M., Jones, W., Martínez, E., 2017. Life and coastal habitats. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. https://doi.org/ 10.2779/443494. [95] J.J. Silver, J.S. Stoll, How do commercial fishing licences relate to access? Fish Fish 20 (2019) 993–1004, https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12393. [96] J. Springer, J. Campese, B. Nakangu, Improving governance for equitable and effective conservation. Gland, Switzerland, Nat. Resour. Gov. Framew. (2021). [97] D. Stepputtis, J. Santos, B. Herrmann, B. Mieske, Broadening the horizon of size selectivity in trawl gears, Fish. Res. 184 (2016) 18–25, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. fishres.2015.08.030. [98] M. Stylianou, P. Shiakallis, I. Papamichael, I. Voukkali, A.A. Zorpas, Analyzing the SWOT of circular economy development in established industrial zones: a case study from Cyprus, Sustain. Chem. Pharm. 39 (2024) 101513, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.scp.2024.101513. [99] R. Takyi, C. Addo, B. Mahrad, El, R. Adade, M. ElHadary, F.K.E. Nunoo, J. Essandoh, E.O. Chuku, F. Iriarte-Ahon, Marine fisheries management in the Eastern Central Atlantic Ocean, Ocean Coast. Manag. 244 (2023) 1–16, https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106784. [100] R. Takyi, B. El Mahrad, C. Addo, J. Essandoh, M. ElHadary, R. Adade, E.J. Buadi, B.O. Botwe, F.K.E. Nunoo, Assessment of coastal and marine ecosystems in West Africa: the case of Ghana, Mar. Pollut. Bull. 197 (2023) 115735, https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.115735. [101] Tedsen, E., Boteler, B., Mcglade, K., Abhold, K., 2014. Marine resource management and coastal livelihoods: An Atlantic perspective, Atlantic Future Scintific Paper. [102] L.C.L. Teh, U.R. Sumaila, Contribution of marine fisheries to worldwide employment, Fish Fish. 14 (2013) 77–88, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 2979.2011.00450.x. [103] The Presidency, 2018. About Ghana [WWW Document]. Pres. Repub. Ghana. URL 〈http://www.presidency.gov.gh/index.php/about-ghana〉 (accessed 4.15.20). [104] A. Tilley, K.J. Hunnam, D.J. Mills, D.J. Steenbergen, H. Govan, E. Alonso- Poblacion, M. Roscher, M. Pereira, P. Rodrigues, T. Amador, A. Duarte, M. Gomes, P.J. Cohen, Evaluating the fit of co-management for small-scale fisheries governance in timor-leste, Front. Mar. Sci. 6 (2019) 1–17, https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fmars.2019.00392. [105] Tobey, J., Normanyo, A.K., Osei, P., Beran, K., Crawford, B., 2016. Subsidies in Ghana’s marine artisanal fisheries sector. Accra. [106] Tsamenyi, M., 2013. Analysis of the adequacy of legislative framework in Ghana to support fisheries co-management and suggestions for a way forward. [107] UN, 2019a. The sustainable development goals report. New York. [108] UN, 2019b. Oceans and the Law of the Sea [WWW Document]. URL 〈https: //www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/oceans-and-law-sea/〉 (accessed 9.10.19). [109] UN, 2016. World economic and social survey 2014/2015- Learning from national policies supporting MDG implementation. UNited Nations. [110] UNCTAD, 2022. 5 global actions needed to build a sustainable ocean economy [WWW Document]. [111] UNDESA, UNDP, UNESCO, 2020. UN system task team on the post-2015 UN development agenda: governance and development, High-level Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly on the Millennium Development Goals. [112] UNDP, 2021. Governance and politics in Ghana, Policy Brief. Accra, Ghana. [113] UNECA, 2016. Legal, regulatory, and institutional framework for the blue economy situation, Africa’s Blue Economy: A policy handbook. [114] UNEP, 2022. Post-2020 global biodiversity framework. [115] Ushie, V., 2013. The management and use of natural resources and their potential for economic and social development in the Mediterranean (No. 13). [116] T. Vallejos B, A. Engler P, L. Nahuelhual, S. Gelcich, From past behavior to intentions: Using the Theory of planned behavior to explore noncompliance in small-scale fisheries, Ocean Coast. Manag. 239 (2023) 1–9, https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106615. [117] Van Waerebeek, K., Debrah, J.S., Ofori-Danson, P.K., 2014. Cetacean landings at the fisheries port of Dixcove, Ghana in 2013-14: A preliminary appraisal, in: IWC Scientific Committee Annual Meeting, SC65B, Slovenia, May 2014 SC/65b/SM17. pp. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4079.2401. [118] Verite, 2018. Ghana. [119] S. Wallner-Hahn, F. Molander, G. Gallardo, S. Villasante, J.S. Eklöf, N.S. Jiddawi, M. de la Torre-Castro, Destructive gear use in a tropical fishery: Institutional factors influencing the willingness-and capacity to change, Mar. Policy 72 (2016) 199–210, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.07.001. [120] K. Williamson, Research techniques: Questionnaires and interviews. in: Research Methods for Students, Academics and Professionals, Elsevier, 2002, pp. 235–249, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-876938-42-0.50023-X. [121] World Bank, 2019. The World Bank in Ghana [WWW Document]. URL 〈http s://www.worldbank.org/en/country/ghana/overview〉 (Accessed 3.24.19). [122] WWF, BirldLife, Eupopean Youth Forum, Eupropean Environmental Bureau, SDG Watch, 2019. Governance, coherence and rule of law. R. Takyi et al. Marine Policy 170 (2024) 106398 12 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20740-2_8 https://doi.org/10.1080/23308249.2014.962687 https://doi.org/10.1080/23308249.2014.962687 https://doi.org/10.26796/jenrm.v2i0.40 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref46 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref46 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref46 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref46 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref47 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref47 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref47 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.01.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.01.003 https://doi.org/10.1344/reire2019.12.227010 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref50 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref50 https://doi.org/10.1093/0199298009.003.0005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.08.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.08.001 https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5366-3.ch002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106598 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106598 https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12393 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref56 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0308-597X(24)00396-8/sbref56 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2015.08.030 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2015.08.030 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scp.2024.101513 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scp.2024.101513 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106784 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106784 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.115735 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.115735 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2979.2011.00450.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2979.2011.00450.x http://www.presidency.gov.gh/index.php/about-ghana https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00392 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00392 https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/oceans-and-law-sea/ https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/oceans-and-law-sea/ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106615 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106615 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.07.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-876938-42-0.50023-X https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/ghana/overview https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/ghana/overview Charting sustainable waters: Governance challenges and opportunities for fisheries and coastal beach resources in a West Af ... 1 Introduction 2 Theoretical background 3 Materials and methods 3.1 Study area 3.2 Method 3.2.1 Data collection 3.2.2 Data analysis 3.2.3 SWOT analysis 4 Results 4.1 Fisheries and beach management measures 4.2 Strength, weakness, and opportunities with resource governance 4.2.1 Fisheries and beach governance 4.2.1.1 Strengths 4.2.1.2 Weakness 4.2.1.3 Opportunities 4.2.1.4 Threats 5 Discussion 6 Conclusion CRediT authorship contribution statement Data Availability Acknowledgements References