Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Linking modes of governance and social-ecological outcomes in environmental evaluation Outline of an evidence-based approach Edward Challies, Nicolas Jager,

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Linking modes of governance and social-ecological outcomes in environmental evaluation Outline of an evidence-based approach Edward Challies, Nicolas Jager,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Linking modes of governance and social-ecological outcomes in environmental evaluation Outline of an evidence-based approach Edward Challies, Nicolas Jager, Jens Newig, Ana Adzersen

2 Outline  Introduction: Participatory environmental governance  Hypotheses: Participation in environmental policy-making  Methodology: Meta-analysis  Key Contributions 2

3 Participatory environmental governance  Rise of participatory governance, 1970s →  State failure, ‘inclusive government’ and ‘good governance’  Instrumental and democratic/emancipatory value of participation  Tensions in citizen participation  Participatory environmental governance  From social side-effects to social-ecological synergies? 3

4 Hypotheses: Participation in environmental policy-making  Hypothesised causal links between:  participation and policy effectiveness (implementation, compliance)  participation and environmental standards of the output 4

5 Conceptualising goals of participation 5 instrumentalemancipatory quality of the decision itself quality of implmentation pre-emptive legal protection Procedural- Justice-effect balancing of interests addressing conflicts incorporation of local knowledge knowledge of stakeholder positions acceptance and identification transparency and accountability education and capacity building building trust democratic policy formulation

6 Participation  policy effectiveness 6 +/- Implementation & Compliance (outcomes) - Institutional fit/ compatibility - Knowledge for implementation - Conflict resolution - Representation of diverse interests (incl. veto players) - ‘Win-win’ scenarios - Discursive fairness - Procedural justice - Education of policy addressees - Network creation - Waking sleeping dogs - Demand-institutional misfit

7 Participation  environmental standards of output 7 +/- Environmental standards of the policy/decision (output) - Representation of environmental actors - Environmentally relevant knowledge - ‘Common good’ - ‘Positive sum game’ solutions - Innovative/creative solutions - Disadvantaging environmental actors - Co-optation of environmental interests - Increased likelihood of veto

8 Example: Procedural justice effects 8 Participatory process Perceived legitimacy & fairness Increased acceptance of the output Improved implementation and compliance

9 Example: Negotiation effects 9 Participatory process Communication & bargaining Optimal allocations & positive sum solutions Higher environmental standards of the output

10 Methodology  Meta-analysis - case survey  Systematic aggregation of single small-N case study data  Precise coding according to theoretically informed scheme  transforms qualitative into quantitative data  combines richness of case material with scientific rigour of large-N comparative analysis - seldom applied  Screening of 2,871 texts for possible cases  Population of 572 cases  Random sample of 200 cases 10

11 Conceptual framework for cross-case analysis 11

12 Case-survey analysis – variable coding  Description of the case material through semi-quantitative variables  Coding done by three coders  Resulting data set allows for statistical analysis, QCA, etc. 12

13 Counterfactual reasoning 13 Factor 1 ↑ Factor 2 ↓ - causal relationship Factor 1 ↓ Factor 2 ↑ current state counterfactual situation with lower intensity of factor 1 Factor 2 counterfactual situation with higher intensity of factor 1 Factor 1 ↑ Factor 2 ↑ + causal relationship Factor 1 ↓ Factor 2 ↓

14 Key contributions  Conceptual: Exploring mechanisms by which, and circumstances under which, participation can improve decision/policy-making effectiveness and environmental standard of policies.  Policy: Evidence-based insights to support decision/policy-makers to achieve environmental policy goals in a socially and environmentally sustainable way. Aid decision-makers in characterising policy contexts (e.g. environmental issue, stakeholder field, etc.) and selecting suitable modes of participation given specific goals.  Methodological: Large N meta-analysis; investigation of causality via hypotheses and counterfactual reasoning.  Proposition: Environmental policy evaluation should take stock of the role of public participation in securing both environmental and social outcomes, and not see the latter as mere side-effects. 14

15 EDGE Project Evaluating the Delivery of Environmental Governance using an Evidence-based Research Design (EDGE) Project team: Prof. Dr Jens Newig, Dr Edward Challies Nicolas Jager M.A. Research Group on Governance, Participation and Sustainability Leuphana University Scharnhorststraße 1 21335 Lüneburg Germany Project timeframe: 2011-2016 15

16 References  Bulkeley, H., & Mol, A. P. J. (2003). Participation and Environmental Governance: Consensus, Ambivalence and Debate. Environmental Values, 12(2), 143-154  Cooke, B. (2001). The Social Psychological Limits of Participation? In B. Cooke & U. Kothari (Eds.), Participation: the new tyranny? (pp. 102-121). London, New York: Zed Books.  Delli Carpini, M. X., Cook, F. L., & Jacobs, L. R. (2004). Public Deliberation, Discursive Participation, and Citizen Engagement: A Review of the Empirical Literature. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 315–344.  Fritsch, O., & Newig, J. (2009). Participatory governance and sustainability: Early findings of a meta-analysis of stakeholder involvement in environmental decision-making. In E. Brousseau, T. Dedeurwaerdere & B. Siebenhüner (Eds.), Reflexive governance for global public goods. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.  Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance. Public Administration Review, 66 (Special Issue), 66-75.  Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2004). Reframing public participation: Strategies for the 21st century. Planning Theory and Practice, 5(4), 419-436.  Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York, London.  Mitchell, R. B. (2008). Evaluating the Performance of Environmental Institutions: What to Evaluate and How to Evaluate it? In O. R. Young, L. A. King & H. Schroeder (Eds.), Institutions and Environmental Change. Principal Findings, Applications and Research Frontiers (pp. 79-114). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.  Newig, J. (2007). Does public participation in environmental decisions lead to improved environmental quality? Towards an analytical framework. Communication, Cooperation, Participation (International Journal of Sustainability Communication), 1(1), 51-71.  Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2005). A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 30(2), 251-290.  Swyngedouw, E. (2005). Governance Innovation and the Citizen: The Janus Face of Governance-beyond-the-State. Urban Studies, 42(11), 1991-2006.  Webler, T., & Tuler, S. (2000). Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation. Administration & Society, 32(5), 566-595. 16

Download ppt "Linking modes of governance and social-ecological outcomes in environmental evaluation Outline of an evidence-based approach Edward Challies, Nicolas Jager,"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google