O GoConqr está de visual novo! Conte para nós o que você achou.

Registre-se grátis

Flashcards

Environmental Governance and Policy

Claire s Environmental Studies Inglês 104 flashcards

Flashcards do conjunto (104)

  1. 1Sustainable development paradigm face resistance from capitalist power structures Need scientists as policymakers to reduce uncertainty – but scientists might have their own agenda – self interestCARTER, N. 2007.
  2. 2• Issue Attention Cycle:public concern the government responds – not typically short-lived interest – sudden crisis – pressure groups
  3. 3• Advocacy Coalition Frameworkshare same belief of how policy should be achieved – a policy network
  4. 4• Little progress in terms of the consumption of resources – as energy producers are powerfulCARTER, N. 2007.
  5. 5• Predict transport policy sector will grow – sustainable policy target supply and demand – few governments have the same paradigmCARTER, N. 2007.
  6. 6• Fear tax on basic needs provoke public hostility – like yellow Gillet FranceCARTER, N. 2007.
  7. 7• Bridge sustainable development and governance • Huge differences in forms of governance: approach, opinion and human valueJORDAN, A. 2008.
  8. 8• Governance means multi-actors, travel between periods of times and locations • Co-ordinate power of networks and markets, decentralized approach • Never be a grand theory of governanceJORDAN, A. 2008.
  9. 9• Private companies directed in ways which are accountable to their stakeholders • Better to interact with stakeholders during the process to reflect • Need newer forms of governance to SDJORDAN, A. 2008.
  10. 10• Long-term decline of state steering power – do little to change the dynamic of a capitalist economic system • Governance is messy due to sustainability and concern for future civilisationJORDAN, A. 2008.
  11. 11• Hybrid governance required rather than market and state taking the lead • Share knowledge and technology – positive participation • Incorporate lower level policy makers o Colonised countries depend on existing structuresLEMOS, C. AND AGRAWAL, A. 2006.
  12. 12Bias view – indication of power – push own agenda and not benefit all – cynicism • Distribution of benefits not a hierarchyLEMOS, C. AND AGRAWAL, A. 2006.
  13. 13• Market involvement inefficiency of the state, no longer important actor – but will make profitLEMOS, C. AND AGRAWAL, A. 2006.
  14. 14• Climate impacts not felt for years so no urgency, even though responsibility lies with developed countriesLEMOS, C. AND AGRAWAL, A. 2006.
  15. 15• NGOs influence the design and implementation of mechanism – monitor progress and use their scientific knowledgeLEMOS, C. AND AGRAWAL, A. 2006.
  16. 16• Bureaucratic societies resilient to change – discourage behaviour change as it would be a long processHOLLING, C.S. and MEFFE, G.K. 1996
  17. 17• Several ranges of scale, not a linear process to change from one to anotherHOLLING, C.S. and MEFFE, G.K. 1996
  18. 18• Fundamental source is human population growth and consumption – manage this behaviour towards sustainable actionsHOLLING, C.S. and MEFFE, G.K. 1996
  19. 19• Fix rules lose of resilience need flexible management – require consistent monitoring of systems • Need to accept natural variation and constraints for long-term sustainable accessHOLLING, C.S. and MEFFE, G.K. 1996
  20. 20• Mechanism depends on the environmental problem • Mix of EI and C&C, to exceed policy-makers’ original expectationsHARRINGTON, W. and MORGENSTERN R.D. 2004.
  21. 21• Governance can compete, merge, complement and replacement government • Need to go beyond theory and test instead to see what works – like china • Govern in a globalized and networked way – change order of rule, trial new methods, new eraJORDAN, A., WURZEL, R.K.W. AND ZITO, A. 2005.
  22. 22• Government losing ability to steer society, too extremes of single state or self-organising – resistance • Governance designed and implemented by non-state actors which may work alongside the stateJORDAN, A., WURZEL, R.K.W. AND ZITO, A. 2005.
  23. 23• UK have fused VAs, eco-taxes and tradeable permits togetherJORDAN, A., WURZEL, R.K.W. AND ZITO, A. 2005.
  24. 24• Regulation: still widely used, provides a function for other instruments to perform, address specific targetsJORDAN, A., WURZEL, R.K.W. AND ZITO, A. 2005.
  25. 25• VAs can be complex to negotiate across borders, experience implantation problemsJORDAN, A., WURZEL, R.K.W. AND ZITO, A. 2005.
  26. 26• Governance driven from privatisation, - may generate a new form of government • Change relationship between government, and non-governmental actors as they interact to steer society using different policy instruments – softer tools • Lines of governance, governments and regulation blurredJORDAN, A., WURZEL, R.K.W. AND ZITO, A. 2005.
  27. 27• Decisions are evidence based to promote confidence • Transparency complements governance, tackle, corruption, accountability, MBIsGUPTA, A. 2010.
  28. 28• Private sector getting off lightly • Power imbalance and conflicts over norms make transparency incomplete and limited, even with open participation, will it overcome this?GUPTA, A. 2010.
  29. 29• Global governance does not solve problems, just copes with them, will it transform existing norms?GUPTA, A. 2010.
  30. 30• Information Disclosure: Better than nothing, but doesn’t have high impactGUPTA, A. 2010.
  31. 31• Industry pollution information will spur better industrial performance • Industry driven by pre-empting regulations, to counter aggressive policiesSTEPHAN, M. 2002.
  32. 32• Citizens' ideologies: compel industries to perform well. More policy liberalism caused an increase in the percentage of risk reducersSTEPHAN, M. 2002.
  33. 33• Leon in Mexico national campaign to improve water quality – VA had little impact • VAs undermined by gaps in legal, needed to make regulation effective • Lack capacity to implement regulations as enforcement required for standardsBLACKMAN, A. AND SISTO, N.P. 2005.
  34. 34• VA created an appearance of progress – political cover to deflect public pressure • Need a range of structures to ensure commitments aren’t dodged • Threat to implement C&C if VA results in no complianceBLACKMAN, A. AND SISTO, N.P. 2005.
  35. 35• Created an equation for VEP effectiveness • VEP not affect polluting industries in the same way as regulation • VEP better for small environmental improvements that are relatively cheapBORCK, J.C. and COGLIANESE, C. 2008.
  36. 36• Linear links (clearly defined analysis) between agenda setting, decision-making and implementationKEEELEY, J. and SCOONES, I. 2000.
  37. 37• Policy-making is diverse and complicated, as policies compete and overlapKEEELEY, J. and SCOONES, I. 2000.
  38. 38• Rooted ideologies and history affect policy process and participation o This could however result in conflict over decisions, laws and implementation e.g. Promote tech to boost food production vs low input conservation agricultureKEEELEY, J. and SCOONES, I. 2000.
  39. 39• Things can change is established policies fragment, and other arguments are incorporated • Conflict of knowledge – whose position is established • Policy is determined by knowledge and powerKEEELEY, J. and SCOONES, I. 2000.
  40. 40• Rise and fall depends on the success of actors, and creation of networks to create policy space • Need to understand origins of the policy to understand what and how policy changes for good interventionKEEELEY, J. and SCOONES, I. 2000.
  41. 41• Prescriptive: analyse how to make a policy so public demands are put into government action o Unrealistic difficult to describe a meaningful model to policy-makers straightforwardly • Continuously cycle through stages, policy making is not a single eventCAIRNEY, P. 2013.
  42. 42• Agenda Setting:define and prioritise issues that require government attention
  43. 43• Policy Formulation:set objectives, costs, and policy instruments
  44. 44• Legitimisation:the chosen policy instrument has support through consent and approval of networks
  45. 45• Implementation:an organization takes responsibility for planned operation, ensure they have the resources
  46. 46• Evaluation:to what extent was the policy successful, was it correct, did it have the desired effect
    o Consider if the policy should be continued, modified, or discontinued
  47. 47• Multi-actors using the resource can affect the outcome • Works across disciplinary lines, linking broader contextual variable to situation variables to understand how social and ecological factors effect human behaviourOSTROM, E. 2011.
  48. 48• Some variables are more important that others, depends on research type • Need to develop methods to study evolution over timeOSTROM, E. 2011.
  49. 49• New actors to make sense of current socio-political transformationsBIERMANN, F. AND PATTBERG, P. 2008.
  50. 50• Increasing fragmentation and segmentation of governance system across levels o Governance has to co-exist between levels – vertically between national to local and horizontally between different rule making systems by different groups of actorsBIERMANN, F. AND PATTBERG, P. 2008.
  51. 51• New definition of governance implies some degree of self-regulationBIERMANN, F. AND PATTBERG, P. 2008.
  52. 52• May bring in private actors as a solution – but who holds them to account? Legitimacy might be questioned depending on donors, member and what environmental good they seek • Transnational actors like the IPCC can seek to balance view and interestsBIERMANN, F. AND PATTBERG, P. 2008.
  53. 53• Multiple actors coordinate action to make governance arrangements for a specific issue areaFALKNER, R. 2003.
  54. 54• 20th century state regulatory role in the provisions of GEG, through this re-emergence of economic private governance and restructured state function • Rise of private forms of governance linked with the downfall of state led governance – state failed to govern common pool resources – inadequateFALKNER, R. 2003.
  55. 55• Corporate regulation reflects a need to respond to public pressure • Private governance meant a shift in ideology and authority – are global markets able to correct their wrongsFALKNER, R. 2003.
  56. 56• Activists groups shape global, press private actors into action, which alters the identity as non-state actors • Private environmental governance strengthens liberal paradigm and promotes global self-regulation • Not a straightforward shift to firms, but complex, interdependence between private and public actors (mix)FALKNER, R. 2003.
  57. 57• To solve problems need co-management across scales – no longer a hierarchy overcome mismatchCASH, D. ET AL. 2006.
  58. 58• Knowledge is a scale between traditional and modernCASH, D. ET AL. 2006.
  59. 59o Ignorance: analysing complex human behaviour can be ignored because it is too tricky to fathomCASH, D. ET AL. 2006.
  60. 60Asymmetry of information in Tobago has meant the development of cross-level mechanism through regional and national networks of organisationCASH, D. ET AL. 2006.
  61. 61Require coordination and complementary expertise to cross knowledge over the boundaries • When scalar and linkage problems are addressed with sustainable solutions = successful managementCASH, D. ET AL. 2006.
  62. 62• Rethink dynamics by involving NGOs and movements to pursue goalsMcCARTHY, J. 2005.
  63. 63• Believes frameworks are too binary • NGOs enforce scalar relationships they are trying to reconfigure. Need a flexible approach, to engage with broaden scales, to not focus one single conceptions of scales.McCARTHY, J. 2005.
  64. 64• Concern whether NGO governance means more or less democracy • Capitalist ideologies are deeply interwoven – need to encompass this struggleMcCARTHY, J. 2005.
  65. 65• Scale assists addressing sustainability issues and a globalizing world through interdisciplinary approach • Problems with scales of public goods arise when scales don’t match boundaries of government authoritiesTERMEER, J.A.M, ET AL. 2010.
  66. 66o Understand complex processes, governance systems, norms that evaluate and judge governance o Insight into politics framing scales and improve design and arrangements of governanceTERMEER, J.A.M, ET AL. 2010.
  67. 67• Co-existence of approaches – both tradition and innovation are correct and can merge to allow varietyTERMEER, J.A.M, ET AL. 2010.
  68. 68• Activism comes from perceived risks and linked to emerging political conflicts over society and globalisationGARAVAN, M. 2007.
  69. 69• Social movements evolve and have a historical context – the nature of human societyGARAVAN, M. 2007.
  70. 70• Easier to mobilise present grievances in contrast to temporal, as they might not be easily solvedGARAVAN, M. 2007.
  71. 71• Community framing of the problem continually shifted with new knowledge – reflected on culture, as they had the threat of a large business taking that from themGARAVAN, M. 2007.
  72. 72• Environmental discourse in the background of extra concerns eg health risk and their version of development – environment centre stage for other issues – greater complexityGARAVAN, M. 2007.
  73. 73• Official environmentalism:Academic experts worked with state to establish environmental organisation
  74. 74• Populist environmentalismreflecting local community’s experience of development struggles
  75. 75• Conflict arises from control and defence of a place from outsiders, => locals formed an alliance/new social network to resist – maybe this will transcend to global network of resistanceGARAVAN, M. 2007.
  76. 76• A policy incorporating citizen preference will be implemented smoother = less cost, and diffuse opposition • Gain legitimacy and empower, social capital by being involvedIRVIN R.A. and STANSBURY, J. 2004.
  77. 77• Collaborative decision works best when the group is small and homogeneous, but this doesn’t = representation – might be selfishIRVIN R.A. and STANSBURY, J. 2004.
  78. 78• Lack of representation and authority are key to why it may backfire and left dissatisfiedIRVIN R.A. and STANSBURY, J. 2004.
  79. 79• Papillion Creek, USA, unsuccessful, one representative out of 15 showed up to the meetings. Project failed to define the problem, thus lack of public interest, meaning complacency occurred – the environment was not an issue people felt strongly aboutIRVIN R.A. and STANSBURY, J. 2004.
  80. 80• Azerbaijan: juggling resource wealth (huge revenues) with instability, used EITI to promote distrubtion of revenues within the country – to guarantee benefits for the communityWILSON, E. ET AL. 2009.
  81. 81c• Citizens scrutinize contracts between gov and industry to maximise contribution to sustainable developmentWILSON, E. ET AL. 2009.
  82. 82• Lack of long term participation has meant reliance on charitable supportWILSON, E. ET AL. 2009.
  83. 83• Land used as leverage in negotiations – IIED’s tools to help local groups that are facing threat to their land access, Mali used to empower communitiesWILSON, E. ET AL. 2009.
  84. 84• New communication technologies combined with traditional media – empower citizen journalism o Green-hotlines in Nigeria text message about ecological and human rights abuses o GPS assist indigenous groups to map out tribal land rightsWILSON, E. ET AL. 2009.
  85. 85• Participation in science is seen as resistance against percieved scientization of politics, to produce own knowledge – new relationship between science and citizensBACKSTRAND, K. 2003.
  86. 86• Triangular science-politics interface: experts, policy-makers and citizens – all 3 are actorsBACKSTRAND, K. 2003.
  87. 87• Exploitation of scientific uncertainty inhibits sustainable managements and science loses its credibilityBACKSTRAND, K. 2003.
  88. 88• Civic science participation, representation and democratization o It emerges from big planetary science and the legitimacy crisis for modern science o Restores public trust and response to the complexity of global environmental problemsBACKSTRAND, K. 2003.
  89. 89• Find balance between tradition and participation, and between technical and deliberative approachesBACKSTRAND, K. 2003.
  90. 90• Risk underlines modern environmental regulation • Risk is deeply woven in cultural values and beliefs concerning agency, causation and uncertainty, it is only accessible to experts and constructed out of history and experienceJASONOFF, S. 1999.
  91. 91• Controversies about risk resulted from how knowledge constructs the complexities of the environment • Risks interprets the relationship between others and the planet, not a description of nature • To often it is assumed that environmental risks will resonate in the same way with everyoneJASONOFF, S. 1999.
  92. 92• At the earliest stages need to intertwine science with politics in the decision-making process • In light of experience, need the ability to go back to initial problem frames – require flexibilityJASONOFF, S. 1999.
  93. 93• Risk shouldn’t be the basis of central authority with claims from superior expertise – regulation needs to be more open-ended to dissect multiple perspectives • Understanding risk need to acknowledge to own provisional statusJASONOFF, S. 1999.
  94. 94• Political reluctance to go above and beyond • Environment, society and economics is a nested modelGRIGGS, D. et al. 2013.
  95. 95• Sustainable Developmentmeet the needs of the present and future, through safeguarding the Earth’s systems
  96. 96• Credible studies behind not crossing these boundaries: climate change, ocean acidification, change in land useGRIGGS, D. et al. 2013.
  97. 97• Many knowledge gaps in regards to risk, enable societies to become resource efficient, sustainable and wealthyGRIGGS, D. et al. 2013.
  98. 98• Scientific basis of the risk that humans can do to destabilize the planetary boundaries • Human activity is affecting Earth systems – zone of uncertainty highlights increasing risk • Explore cross-scalar interactions and regional heterogeneity of boundary processesSTEFFEN, W. et al. 2015.
  99. 99• Develop science to understand these thresholds – need time for society to respond • If earth’s resilience is not maintained could result in a loss of genetic diversity – need to prepare • Increase frequency of heat waves and heavy rainfallSTEFFEN, W. et al. 2015.
  100. 100• Doesn’t identify social implications, changes in economy, or methods to prevent exceeding the planetary boundariesSTEFFEN, W. et al. 2015.
  101. 101• Problem wealthy countries are exploiting natural resources, not considering their limits • Policy has too much emphasis on GDP, economics shouldn’t have a monetary value, instead it should determine the nation’s distribution of benefits/wealth and consider the negative externalitiesRAWORTH, K. 2017.
  102. 102• Variety of regional and local thresholds of diversity and land/water useRAWORTH, K. 2017.
  103. 103• Economics might change who we become – can be a good and bad thing • Studying economics changes behaviour: helpfulness, honesty, and loyalty become less important traits o Assume everyone is selfish • This is not the case as humans are capable of cooperating – other things are able to motivate humans, not just moneyRAWORTH, K. 2017.
  104. 104• There is a lot of uncertainty in the real world do to human action • We are part of nature’s cycle not a separate entityRAWORTH, K. 2017.

Informações

Descrição
Remembering which author said what
Criado por
Claire s
Visualizações
11
Avaliação

Fale Conosco

Sobre o que é sua mensagem?

O que você acha do novo visual?

Você gostou?