The Motion for the Ocean: scaling marine citizenship through local government declarations

1 Introduction

In the UK, the governance system provides limited formal power in marine decision-making for local governments creating an implementation gap, yet since 2021, 40 UK councils, with a quarter of those inland, are emerging as unexpected leaders by formally committing to recover ocean health. The grass-roots Local Government Ocean Recovery Declaration—demonstrates how marine-citizenship science can leap from PhD thesis to local government council chamber. In this case study we trace the pathway from research insight, co-creation of the ‘Local Government Ocean Recovery, the “Motion for the Ocean,” to council adoption, distilling key lessons for scaling place-based marine citizenship.

A “motion” is a political tool in which a new commitment or policy is proposed, debated, and voted upon by the council. In 2020, when the Motion for the Ocean (hereafter the Motion) was conceived, there was a lack of policy recognition that successful climate change mitigation requires the inclusion of ocean action, highlighting the need for political action with an ocean-climate perspective. The aim of the Motion was to replicate the international success of the climate emergency declaration (CACE, 2020) whilst generating a new marine focus at the local government level which, in the United Kingdom (UK) at least, does not usually have administrative powers that extend beyond mean low water and often do not own the foreshore.

The Motion for the Ocean acts as a policy and governance delivery mechanism for promoting marine citizenship and delivering Ocean Literacy at a local governance level. “Ocean literacy is an outcome—a society that understands, values, and cares for the ocean” (Glithero et al., 2024; p10). The UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021-2030)—the UN Ocean Decade—identifies 10 challenges for achieving its vision (United Nations, 2023). The Motion contributes to the Decade Vision by supporting capacity building, promoting participatory equity, and fair access to ocean knowledge (Challenge 9, Arbic et al., 2024), whilst offering a public sector pathway to restore society's relationship with the ocean (Challenge 10, Glithero et al., 2024).

At a national level, Wales is the first UK nation to adopt an ocean literacy strategy, “Y Môr a Ni” (Welsh Ocean Literacy Coalition, 2025), which emphasizes the need for connection to place and identity. This aligns with Pledge 6 of the Motion, with Monmouthshire County Council—the first council in Wales to pass the Motion—having developed an action plan focused on driving behavior change and strengthening ocean thinking. A strategy is also being developed for England where 38 councils have already made steps toward ocean thinking through the Motion. Y Môr a Ni comes after the Ocean and Society Survey that sought to glean the nations' perceptions of how the general population understand, value, and engage with the ocean (McRuer et al., 2025). The survey revealed that to 80% of 8,440 responses, marine protection is crucial (Defra Ocean Conservation Trust, and Natural Resources Wales, 2022).

In this Perspective article, we present a case study of research impact that applies theories of marine citizenship and ocean literacy to local government policy processes. We make visible the often un-resourced labor, sustained relationships, and institutional interfaces required to translate marine social science research into local governance action. We provide a reflexive and practice-informed interpretation of the mechanisms through which the initiative sought to influence local policy through application of (Boswell and Smith (2017)) policy impact framework. The case study does not evaluate the implementation of Motion declarations but provides insight and describes mechanisms of utility for other marine researchers seeking to influence local policy.

2 The Motion for the Ocean—a tool to reconnect society with ocean thinking

The story of the Motion for the Ocean begins with a PhD project investigating marine citizenship (Buchan, 2021a). Marine citizenship is defined as “exercising the right to participate in the transformation of the human-ocean relationship for sustainability” (Buchan et al., 2023; p18). Building on previous research (McKinley and Fletcher, 2011), Buchan's research advanced the concept of marine citizenship beyond individual behavior change to recognize the social contract between citizens and the state in respect of the natural environmental and corresponding participatory rights, and emphasized the importance of local scale decision-makers as most accessible, transparent, and trusted (Buchan et al., 2023).

Buchan was elected as a Councillor to local government during her PhD, giving her direct experience of and insight into policy-setting and marine environmental decision-making at the local scale. The Motion was born from the intersection of direct governance experience and the desire to create a practical and tangible vehicle through which people could exercise their marine citizenship rights locally, whilst also supporting decision-makers at the local level with evidence-based pledges that would further ocean recovery and a blue economy that is sustainable and equitable. The Motion was also intended to promote access to the marine environment, creating opportunities to develop and nurture thalassophilia and marine identity, in recognition of the role of human-ocean connections in motivating marine citizenship responsibilities (Buchan et al., 2024).

3 The Motion as a policy mechanism

A new collaboration was established first with the Local Government Association Coastal Special Interest Group (Coastal SIG), and later with the charity the Ocean Conservation Trust (OCT), to respectively reach local councils and marine citizens. Through the leadership of Cunningham and MacDonald-Lofts, former and current Coastal SIG Lead Officers respectively, and Bridge, Head of Ocean Advocacy and Engagement at the OCT.

Emulating the climate emergency declaration (CACE, 2020), the first model Motion was drafted in 2021 with three key parts:

• Background context about the need for ocean recovery, linked to ocean-climate action and UNFCCC COP26 (UNFCCC, 2021), and reflecting local marine priorities.
• A set of council pledges based on marine citizenship research (Buchan et al., 2024, 2023), aiming to embed ocean recovery into core decision-making and budgeting, and to provide access to the ocean and opportunity to develop ocean literacy and marine citizenship.
• A set of national policy asks to be sent in a letter from the council to the national government, informed by further marine scientific research (Rees et al., 2020).

Buchan proposed the first Motion to Plymouth City Council, which passed in November 2021 (P. M. Buchan, 2021b), helping to embed marine citizenship as a core principle of the Plymouth Sound National Marine Park (Plymouth Sound National Marine Park, 2024).

Adapted versions of the Motion were subsequently co-developed for the policy and geographical context of inland councils and the devolved nations of Wales and Scotland. As of June 2026, 40 councils in the UK have passed the declaration, representing almost 5.4 million people in the UK (Figure 1), and has also been declared by the Local Government Association (membership of 315 of the 317 councils in England). Of these, nine are inland, shifting the paradigm of where ocean responsibility lies and demonstrating that marine citizenship does not require ocean-proximity. Councils have adapted the model Motion to frame the pledges around their local priorities and are responsible for structuring the Motion pledges across business-as-usual and internal evaluation mechanisms such as action plans that are annually reviewed and scrutinized by elected members.

4 Mobilizing change: effort, engagement and impact

The pace of declarations masks sometimes lengthy periods of engagement that precede a council's decision. We have supported every conversation request, alongside proactive approaches, resulting in a continuous programme of direct engagement with relevant people and organizations (Figure 2). A voluntary and in-kind time commitment is estimated at around 200 days over 4 years.

We have briefed Councillors context and Council Officers and presented to public committee and full council meetings, enabling knowledge exchange and support for councils considering declaring. Our engagement activities have provided feedback that has helped us to refine the model Motion. Engagement has extended to regional coastal management forums and national environmental decision-making agencies. The Coastal SIG supports the Motion tirelessly, hosting documents and declarations on its websites, regularly updating its 58 member councils on progress through their quarterly meetings, and engaging with governmental bodies and equivalent organizations across the UK, as well as raising the Motion's profile through several national conference presentations.

We have also engaged with marine citizens, typically local marine user and campaign groups, environmental charities, public events, marine industry, and port authorities. The OCT hosts the main interface with the public, encouraging people to be marine citizens and write to their local Councillor asking them to propose the Motion. We know this route to be successful as at least 6 Declarations arose from marine citizen contact and thousands of people interact with the Motion through the engagement programme at the National Marine Aquarium (OCT headquarters). As traction has grown, we have developed relationships with other like-minded organizations, such as Healthcare Ocean (Healthcare Ocean Ltd, n.d.) connecting us to a more international audience, and the British Sub-Aqua Club, the UK's governing body for scuba diving, whose members' toolkit has led to at least 2 Declarations to date.

A core principle in our engagement has been to be apolitical. This approach has been successful, with politicians from across the political spectrum having proposed and supported a local Motion. We have also strived to avoid the trap of politicized environmentalism. The marine citizenship origin of the Motion sees people as part of the marine environment, not excluded from it, and this means sustainable marine business and development sectors are needed as much as marine conservation and protection.

The Motion is cited as a case study example of good practice in the latest High Level Ocean Panel Paper on Blue Health (Fleming et al., 2024) and in the leading Oceans and Human Health textbook (O'Halloran et al., 2023) and has gained national impact prizes and recognition (Economic and Social Research Council, 2022; ENDS, 2024; Women of the Future Awards, 2024). It has featured at the 2024 UN Ocean Decade Conference (Institut de Ciències del Mar - CSIC, 2024) and the 2024 European Week of Regions and Cities' ‘Strengthening Blue Citizenship in Europe: Regions and Cities Get Mobilised' round table (European Commission, 2024). Such successes do not arise passively but have been borne from the sustained contributions of time and effort by the co-authors, Coastal SIG, and OCT.

5 Discussion

The Motion is a powerful case study of doctoral research creating impact for coastal communities and their environment through the institution of local government. UK research impact approaches have been criticized for centering academic publications and focusing on measurable outputs (Boswell and Smith, 2017). Indeed, our experience with the Motion is that impact began long before any academic manuscripts made it to publication, reflecting not the outcomes of a single research study but rather of a living programme of research and relationships created over a long period of time.

Impact is highly valued in the UK, with approaches to research-policy relations that have been characterized as four models of research-policy relations: knowledge shapes policy; politics shapes knowledge; co-production of knowledge and governance; or science and policy as autonomous systems in which distinct institutional logics shape how knowledge is selected, interpreted, and used (Boswell and Smith, 2017). Here we consider the Motion case study in light of this typology.

5.1 Knowledge shapes policy

Research dissemination is not always in a form easily utilizable by policy. Here we have gone beyond designing concise policy briefs or delivering webinars about research findings, to construct a mechanism by which research evidence is translated into actionable knowledge (Räsänen et al., 2024) that directly interacts with policy action. The Motion enables scientific knowledge to shape policy by bringing a package of novel findings to a local government sector which has had only limited involvement in marine matters due, in part, to administrative geographical and governmental boundaries.

Marine citizenship research identifies that local scale decision-making is more accessible, transparent and trusted than at other scales (Buchan et al., 2023). The Motion as a mechanism is therefore fundamentally rooted in evidence when it asks councils to consider their role in the human-ocean system and take a political position on marine sustainability. It challenges policy to recognize the emotional and identity-based connections between people and the sea (Buchan et al., 2024) in holistic ways that break down traditional policy silos. All of this is achieved through a model motion format that clearly explains the policy proposition; sets out recommended council actions that are achievable within local government powers and leverage council soft-powers; and sets out asks of national or devolved Government which the council can request.

5.2 Politics shapes knowledge

The science-policy boundary is not a one-way communication but a political space where values and ideology feature in action and decisions (Wiegleb and Bruns, 2023). Born from the influence of experience in politics, the Motion initiative exemplifies the role of politics in impactful research. Every Ocean Recovery Declaration made is the product of a political negotiation before it even gets to a debate and a vote, which shapes how pledges are selected and articulated. Even at the point of declaration, the Motion wording can be revised in response to amendments proposed at the council meeting, and the pledges are scrutinized by councils on an annual basis through their subsequent action plans. A few declarations have varied from the model Motion to reflect local priorities and community perspectives, as seen in Monmouthshire, the first to amend to include Rivers.

The model Motion undergoes regular revision to reflect policy, political, socio-economic, and ecological changes, to rearticulate the research evidence in new contexts. The problem, and proposed solutions, remain informed by best-available knowledge, but the political and socio-economic contexts are in constant flux. For example, the approach from Blandford Forum, which is both a smaller-scale town council and inland, led to the co-development of the inland version of the model Motion which emphasizes actions associated with source-to-sea thinking due to the lack of a coastline in the administrative area. Based on the same underpinning science, a suite of model Motions has developed over time to recognize different political drivers.

5.3 Co-production

Boswell and Smith conceptualize co-production as the mutual constitution of knowledge and governance, whereby research contributes to the framing of political problems and the possible responses to them. The Motion creates a mechanism through which a political response to ocean degradation can be facilitated and guided by the evidence. Co-production of the Motion is evident at multiple stages. In the earliest instance, the Motion was written through a transdisciplinary team with academic, local government, and marine conservation expertise. Each version of the model Motion has been shared and discussed extensively with one or more councils. The first version was shared with councils in the LGA Coastal SIG, those developed for inland or devolved contexts were adapted through dialogue between the Motion authors and councils in those settings. Through sustained dialogue and iterative adaptation, the Motion operates as a dynamic, ‘living' knowledge exchange mechanism through which research evidence and local governance context shape how ocean recovery is pursued.

5.4 Autonomous spheres

Recognition of difference in motivation and procedure between the spheres of science and policy is implicit in the political motion approach to impact. The Motion does not remove the institutional differences between research and policy systems, but increases mutual relevance through adaptive case-by-case conversations which broker knowledge between these two spheres to co-produce a new outcome (Cvitanovic et al., 2025). For this reason, the Motion itself is focused on influencing governance processes rather than measurable targets, which are determined by declaring councils.

We would also contest, from our experience, that it is not only research and policy actors that are important in delivering research impact, but other interests and perspectives help to co-create a robust and accessible message that achieves impact. Collaborations are foundational for this co-production process—ongoing and sustained relationships that can navigate changes within organizations and individuals' lives. Whilst science and policy might be two distinct systems, they exhibit transience and uncertainty which command adaptation to make progress. The Motion initiative emphasizes the value of boundary spanners (Goodrich et al., 2020)—people who have worked in multiple sectors or settings who are able to translate between worlds, have better understanding of constraints, and can develop innovative but pragmatic approaches to transformation—whose efforts are the source of the Motion's success to date.

5.5 Effective impact through plurality in approach

Rather than acting through discrete research-policy relations, the Motion case study illustrates that effective impact can involve all approaches through supplying knowledge, bridging production and use of knowledge, and facilitating the co-production of knowledge (Maas et al., 2022). We propose that research impact cannot always be understood through a single approach and that these conceptually distinct approaches may be interacting dynamics within one impact process. The Motion is founded on evidence-based content; local approaches to the declarations are politically negotiated; iterative co-production makes the Motion responsive to policy shifts and new evidence; and uptake is shaped by the differing logics of research and council politics.

5.6 International relevance and transferability

The gap between local government and marine policy is not unique to the UK. For example, even in the EU where there is marine planning policy and a history of Integrated Coastal Zone Management, this gap remains evident (Fabbri et al., 2025; Tocco et al., 2024). Indeed, Papageorgiou (2022) calls for more meaningful local government engagement in marine planning. The principal basis of the Motion therefore has relevance around the world for leveraging municipal government tiers in the ocean recovery cause.

A key lesson from this project is that policy necessarily must shape the Motion mechanism and any new policy context requires new dialogue and engagement with those who work within it to shape the initiative. Whilst the specific wording of the model Motion for the Ocean is unlikely to be directly transferable to other national policy contexts, the principles and practice of research-policy relations that are shared in this article will facilitate the co-creation of locally relevant political mechanisms in other geographical settings.

A key motivation for the development of the Motion was the then lack of ocean action present in COP agreement, which was first addressed in the Glasgow Climate Pact (UNFCCC, 2021). We placed some responsibility on a lack of political ocean literacy for that historical situation and centered ocean literacy as a desirable outcome of both the Motion and our policy dialogues. Numerous transnational networks are already in place connecting cities or local governments in climate action which are well placed structurally to champion the Motion internationally, however ocean literacy persists as a political barrier (Dumała et al., 2021). There is a clear opportunity here to build ocean literacy and deliver local government ocean action through the mechanisms of a Local Government Ocean Recovery Declaration.

5.7 Author's reflection

Whilst we take pride in the growing number of councils making Declarations, these are the starting points. The Motion brings together academic and governance institutions, supporting councils to review their current ocean-thinking and has highlighted the endemic under-resource of coastal capacity and ocean literacy at the local government level. Remodeling the local government approach to marine and coastal recovery and sustainability, albeit on a council-by-council basis, will support impact that moves beyond pre-existing institutional policy framings, breaks down policy silos, and quickens the pace, to create material change to ocean governance over time. To deliver that programme of work, more resource and capacity in both research and local government is needed to enable the gathering of knowledge from across sectors and disciplines and co-produce its translation into practice.

We find that the promotion of system change requires system change itself and so we conclude our article with some key questions about future research-policy relationships and impact:

For local scale governance and policy, there is a new social problem—how can councils effectively change their processes of governance to effect the outcome of ocean recovery? How can this be achieved in a way which enables the human right of access to environmental decision-making in the marine context? How can any of this be achieved with chronic underfunding of local government, low ocean literacy, and the endemic undervalue given to the marine environment?

For academia, how can we move toward true collaboration and co-design of effective impact research? How can funding be re-designed to enable the flexibility and longevity needed to support the development of relationships and collaborations that provide the foundations for effective impact? How can flexible funding and career pathways support boundary-spanning early-career researchers? How can academic pathways in education, scholarship, and research sustainably enable the kinds of impact that universities and research funders wish to encourage?

By definition, research impact will produce a diversity of outcomes that are achieved through an even greater diversity of methodologies. Whilst the Motion for the Ocean project faces challenges and raises issues for wider research impact, we hope that it nonetheless offers hope and inspiration to people in research and practice that evidence-based transformation is possible and at any career stage.

Correction note

A correction has been made to this article. Details can be found at: 10.3389/focsu.2026.1972401.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. ChatGPT 4o was used to support generation of tailored icons for use in Figure 2.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Footnotes

Edited by: Gerardo Damonte, Pontifical Catholic University of Peru, Peru

Reviewed by: Yi-Che Shih, Institute of Marine Technology and Affairs, College of Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan