Complexity and challenges of long-term environmental governance
Introduction
Some of the most important processes of social-ecological change – including those known as climate change and loss of biodiversity – share three characteristics that interact to make them extremely demanding challenges of governance. First, these challenges are long-term policy problems in which time-lags between policy measures (or ‘non-action’) and effects often extend beyond one human generation. Second, they are embedded in very complex systems of which our understanding is still incomplete and in part clouded by profound uncertainties. Third, they involve global collective goods of a nature that links them to a wide range of human activities and at the same time leaves them beyond the scope of ‘single best effort’ solutions.1
Social science research offers two essentially different models of collective response to severe challenges. One – prevalent in, inter alia, the study of international crisis management – portrays effective response as involving contraction of power, and centrally directed action guided by some synoptic master plan. The other – found in, inter alia, the study of adaptive management – conceives of collective response as involving a variety of ‘local’ activities undertaken by (sub)units of a diverse and complex system. The main argument of this paper is that both models have considerable merit, but also that they respond to different types of challenges. Therefore, useful insights can be gained by specifying the circumstances under which each of these strategies can be expected to work.
The next section explores how each of the three problem characteristics introduced above can render governance more difficult, and how they can interact to produce an extremely demanding challenge. Section 3 presents the two collective response models and begins to specify their respective domains of validity. The fourth and final section offers some suggestions as to how problem characteristics and governance approaches may be ‘matched’ to enhance the ability of governance systems to cope constructively with challenges such as global climate change and loss of biodiversity. My suggestions, I hope, will contribute to answering the first two questions formulated by the editors for this special issue.
Section snippets
The challenge
As indicated above, this paper deals with environmental change problems that share three main characteristics: very long time-lags between human action and environmental effect, embeddedness in highly complex systems that are not well understood, and provision of global collective goods. Each of these characteristics has important implications for governance.
Models of collective response
One of these models is concerned with the capacity for collective action. This capacity is seen as relying heavily on centralised leadership, guided by some synoptic master plan premised on the best knowledge and understanding available. The other model is concerned with adaptive and pluralistic modes of governance, highlighting the ability to monitor developments, learn from experience, and adjust flexibly to unforeseen change. This latter line of reasoning leads scholars to study, inter alia,
Concluding remarks
The analysis in this paper may now be summarized in two main propositions. First, to be effective, a response strategy must match the challenge. We need to think about challenge–response relationships in terms of fit (Young, 2002, Galaz et al., 2008). Arguably, the collective action model responds better to the challenge of climate change than to that of biodiversity loss. Moreover, for global climate change, policies of adaptation will by and large have higher aggregate scores on conditions
Acknowledgements
Discussions with Jon Hovi and Detlef Sprinz have helped clarify my own thinking about this topic. Comments and suggestions from two anonymous reviewers and from participants in the workshop organised by the Stockholm Resilience Centre in February 2009 are gratefully knowledged. Thanks also to Frank Azevedo for language editing.
References (42)
Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses
Global Environmental Change
(2006)- et al.
Governing epidemics in an age of complexity: narratives, politics and pathways to sustainability
Global Environmental Change
(2010) - et al.
Managing complex adaptive systems—a co-evolutionary perspective on natural resource management
Ecological Economics
(2007) Intergenerational discounting
Energy Policy
(1995)Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change
Economic Geography
(2003)Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis
(1971)The Evolution of Cooperation
(1984)Environment and Statecraft: The Strategy of Environmental Treaty-Making
(2003)Why Cooperate? The Incentive to Supply Collective Goods
(2007)
Analyzing International Environmental Regimes: From Case Study to Database
Connectivity and the governance of multilevel social-ecological systems: the role of social capital
Annual Review of Environment and Resources
Discounting the future
Philosophy and Public Affairs
Domestic Sources of International Environmental Policy
Up and down with ecology: the ‘issue-attention’ cycle
The Public Interest
Discursive representation
American Political Science Review
The problem of fit among biophysical systems, environmental and resource regimes, and broader governance systems: insights and emerging challenges
The tragedy of the commons
Science
International crisis as a situational variable
Cited by (173)
A multi-dimensional approach for analyzing risk-related decision problems to enhance decision making and prevent accidents
2024, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process IndustriesPathways to water sustainability? A global study assessing the benefits of integrated water resources management
2023, Journal of Environmental ManagementGaps review and improvement pathways in the assessment and management of collision risk in low Earth orbit
2023, Journal of Space Safety EngineeringDoes CEOs’ green experience affect environmental corporate social responsibility? Evidence from China
2023, Economic Analysis and Policy