Page 3 - 5th TERI-KAS Environmental Governance Policy Dialogue
P. 3
Policy Paper
dominated the validity and creation of new knowledge’ (Fergus institutional motivations and actions (Lemos & Agrawal,
& Rowney, 2005). 2006). Environmental governance can also be understood
At the same time, there has been environmental as the establishment, affirmation or change in institutional
degradation and appearance of environmental problems. arrangements to resolve environmental conflicts – not
This has led to the conclusion that natural resource essentially violent conflicts but conflicts in opinions and
management requires an overarching framework that can motives (Lemos & Agrawal, 2006).
deal with the complex characters of environmental systems Addressing environmental governance may also
and is agreed upon by various stakeholders at different involve addressing the problems of fit, interplay and scale,
levels. but it should be understood that within the concept of
institutional diagnostics, one size does not fit all, especially
Environmental Governance when we face large scale environmental problems or govern
human dominated ecosystems (Young, 2003). Complex
When perspectives on ‘governance’ are coupled with ecosystems require an adaptive governance strategy to
issues of the ‘environment’ and “sustainable development”, deal with frequent changes within the system. But adaptive
the picture may get quite confusing, since not only is there governance requires dealing with uncertainty in the system
no agreement on what sustainable development is, but itself, as well as diversity and conflict among stakeholders.
there is often disagreement about the nature, allocation, This requires an understanding of ecosystem dynamics as
distribution and use of resources, about the consumption well as an understanding of socio-ecological interactions
patterns of society, and the sustainability of lifestyles that (Osterblom, et al., 2010).
emerge. Perspectives on ‘governance’ emerge from several Within governance frameworks, government is seen
perspectives: as the most influential actor in providing necessary public
that of institutions, agencies and organizations - be services and creating a level playing field for competing
agendas; with other actors only playing the role of agents
these corporates, government departments, courts, and stakeholders promoting their own agenda. This notion
community based organizations, non-government of a single producer of services for public purposes has put
organizations, etc., where the emphasis is on design an onus on the government (at different levels) to make
characteristics, such as formulating procedures, decisions that are in public interest resulting in a ‘top down’
establishing jurisdictions, initiating decision-making approach of decision making and few actors (with access to
mechanisms, reporting and audit systems, etc., and knowledge and monetary resources) impacting decisions
also with practices such as reflexivity, responsiveness, for the larger population based on their own cognitive and
efficiency, transparency, etc.; normative frames. This was acceptable when a larger part
that of groups who make different demands on these of the population was either unaware or did not see the
institutions and participate in them with different need to participate in decision making, but this paradigm
expectations; and has not resulted in the human progress we wished it would.
that of outcomes where the consequences of the Elinor Ostrom in her article describing the concept of
interaction between institutional design and group Co-production has said,
demands and expectations is examined and evaluated.
The yardsticks by which such evaluation is done are not “As long as public officials and citizens in
commonly shared, in fact, they are contested. They are developing countries continue to see a great
the domain of politics, of conflict and negotiation. divide between them, potential synergies will
In this context, environmental governance has come remain mere potentialities…. (textbooks in
to be understood as interventions aiming at changes in the fields of public administration, economics,
environment related incentives, knowledge, institutions, political science) seldom discuss how services are
decision-making and behaviours. It refers to regulatory produced and delivered, or how agencies work at
processes, mechanisms and organizations through which levels below that of national government. The
different stakeholders influence environmental actions and role of citizens is depicted as casting ballots and
outcomes. These stakeholders include the government, watching the action…. No mention is made of
businesses, communities, civil society and NGOs. village governance or local governance, which is
These mechanisms are affected by the socio-political the only governance that has an impact on the
relationships between these stakeholders, the national lives of most people…” (Ostrom, 1996)
and international policy and legislative frameworks and
3
dominated the validity and creation of new knowledge’ (Fergus institutional motivations and actions (Lemos & Agrawal,
& Rowney, 2005). 2006). Environmental governance can also be understood
At the same time, there has been environmental as the establishment, affirmation or change in institutional
degradation and appearance of environmental problems. arrangements to resolve environmental conflicts – not
This has led to the conclusion that natural resource essentially violent conflicts but conflicts in opinions and
management requires an overarching framework that can motives (Lemos & Agrawal, 2006).
deal with the complex characters of environmental systems Addressing environmental governance may also
and is agreed upon by various stakeholders at different involve addressing the problems of fit, interplay and scale,
levels. but it should be understood that within the concept of
institutional diagnostics, one size does not fit all, especially
Environmental Governance when we face large scale environmental problems or govern
human dominated ecosystems (Young, 2003). Complex
When perspectives on ‘governance’ are coupled with ecosystems require an adaptive governance strategy to
issues of the ‘environment’ and “sustainable development”, deal with frequent changes within the system. But adaptive
the picture may get quite confusing, since not only is there governance requires dealing with uncertainty in the system
no agreement on what sustainable development is, but itself, as well as diversity and conflict among stakeholders.
there is often disagreement about the nature, allocation, This requires an understanding of ecosystem dynamics as
distribution and use of resources, about the consumption well as an understanding of socio-ecological interactions
patterns of society, and the sustainability of lifestyles that (Osterblom, et al., 2010).
emerge. Perspectives on ‘governance’ emerge from several Within governance frameworks, government is seen
perspectives: as the most influential actor in providing necessary public
that of institutions, agencies and organizations - be services and creating a level playing field for competing
agendas; with other actors only playing the role of agents
these corporates, government departments, courts, and stakeholders promoting their own agenda. This notion
community based organizations, non-government of a single producer of services for public purposes has put
organizations, etc., where the emphasis is on design an onus on the government (at different levels) to make
characteristics, such as formulating procedures, decisions that are in public interest resulting in a ‘top down’
establishing jurisdictions, initiating decision-making approach of decision making and few actors (with access to
mechanisms, reporting and audit systems, etc., and knowledge and monetary resources) impacting decisions
also with practices such as reflexivity, responsiveness, for the larger population based on their own cognitive and
efficiency, transparency, etc.; normative frames. This was acceptable when a larger part
that of groups who make different demands on these of the population was either unaware or did not see the
institutions and participate in them with different need to participate in decision making, but this paradigm
expectations; and has not resulted in the human progress we wished it would.
that of outcomes where the consequences of the Elinor Ostrom in her article describing the concept of
interaction between institutional design and group Co-production has said,
demands and expectations is examined and evaluated.
The yardsticks by which such evaluation is done are not “As long as public officials and citizens in
commonly shared, in fact, they are contested. They are developing countries continue to see a great
the domain of politics, of conflict and negotiation. divide between them, potential synergies will
In this context, environmental governance has come remain mere potentialities…. (textbooks in
to be understood as interventions aiming at changes in the fields of public administration, economics,
environment related incentives, knowledge, institutions, political science) seldom discuss how services are
decision-making and behaviours. It refers to regulatory produced and delivered, or how agencies work at
processes, mechanisms and organizations through which levels below that of national government. The
different stakeholders influence environmental actions and role of citizens is depicted as casting ballots and
outcomes. These stakeholders include the government, watching the action…. No mention is made of
businesses, communities, civil society and NGOs. village governance or local governance, which is
These mechanisms are affected by the socio-political the only governance that has an impact on the
relationships between these stakeholders, the national lives of most people…” (Ostrom, 1996)
and international policy and legislative frameworks and
3
