Source paper: Unpacking power dynamics and actor interactions across fisheries and marine protected areas governance: a comparative study of Saint Louis and Sangomar, Senegal, Maritime Studies (2026). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-026-00501-z
Alert week: 2026-07-14 (from LITERATURE/2026-07-14.md)
Motivation
Fisheries/MPA governance networks exhibit significant power asymmetries — some governance actors are structurally central and dominate co-management decisions, while others are peripheral despite formal participation. The cited paper unpacks these power dynamics through comparative social-ecological network analysis of two Senegalese MPA sites.
SESPy currently detects whether governance actors are linked to ecological nodes (governance_gap(), open #13), but does not quantify how influential each governance actor is within the network. Computing centrality metrics restricted to governance-typed nodes (R = Responses, M = Management in DAPSIWR(M)) would reveal dominant vs. peripheral governance actors — directly useful to MarineSABRES practitioners diagnosing co-management imbalances.
This is a distinct diagnostic from:
Proposal
Add governance_actor_influence(g) to sespy/network.py:
- Filter the graph to nodes with
node_type in {'R', 'M'} (governance subsystem).
- Compute betweenness, eigenvector, and PageRank centrality on the full graph (not the subgraph), so cross-boundary influence is captured.
- Return a DataFrame indexed by node name with columns
betweenness, eigenvector, pagerank, and a composite influence_rank (z-score sum, analogous to leverage_scores).
- Expose as a new collapsible table in the Network Metrics Shiny module, shown only when at least one R/M node is present.
Acceptance criteria
Effort
Small–Medium (one new function ~25 LOC reusing existing centrality calls + module wiring). Depends on node_type attribute already required by governance_gap() (#13).
Source paper: Unpacking power dynamics and actor interactions across fisheries and marine protected areas governance: a comparative study of Saint Louis and Sangomar, Senegal, Maritime Studies (2026). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-026-00501-z
Alert week: 2026-07-14 (from
LITERATURE/2026-07-14.md)Motivation
Fisheries/MPA governance networks exhibit significant power asymmetries — some governance actors are structurally central and dominate co-management decisions, while others are peripheral despite formal participation. The cited paper unpacks these power dynamics through comparative social-ecological network analysis of two Senegalese MPA sites.
SESPy currently detects whether governance actors are linked to ecological nodes (
governance_gap(), open #13), but does not quantify how influential each governance actor is within the network. Computing centrality metrics restricted to governance-typed nodes (R = Responses, M = Management in DAPSIWR(M)) would reveal dominant vs. peripheral governance actors — directly useful to MarineSABRES practitioners diagnosing co-management imbalances.This is a distinct diagnostic from:
governance_gap()(Governance gap detection in sespy/network.py #13) — binary linked/unlinked detectionleverage_scores()— all-node composite centrality (betweenness + eigenvector + PageRank z-scores)Proposal
Add
governance_actor_influence(g)tosespy/network.py:node_typein{'R', 'M'}(governance subsystem).betweenness,eigenvector,pagerank, and a compositeinfluence_rank(z-score sum, analogous toleverage_scores).Acceptance criteria
network.governance_actor_influence(g)returns a DataFrame withbetweenness,eigenvector,pagerank, andinfluence_rankcolumns, indexed by node name, for all R/M-typed nodesleverage_scoresoutputEffort
Small–Medium (one new function ~25 LOC reusing existing centrality calls + module wiring). Depends on
node_typeattribute already required bygovernance_gap()(#13).