Chapter VIII.3: Public and private interactions in global environmental governance

Author(s):  
Orr Karassin ◽  
Oren Perez
2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 33-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina M. Balboa

As the latest iteration of leveraging private resources to protect and sustain our natural resources, the environmental impact bond (EIB) reflects the growing trend in sustainable development that makes financing available to projects based on the verifiable results of an intervention. These new instruments in global environmental governance are not actually bonds but pay-for-success contracts, in which the risk of success is shouldered by the investor, and financial savings, pegged to the intervention outcome, are prioritized. This examination of EIBs through the lens of accountability aims to elicit debate on some areas of concern and consideration for the design and implementation of outcome-based financing for global environmental governance, including the prioritizing of private over public accountabilities and potential perverse incentives these instruments create. As both public and private accountability goals are evident in EIB, this governance tool runs the risk of exacerbating the paradox of increased accountability but decreased environmental gains.


Author(s):  
مديحة بخوش ◽  
لزهر فارس

After the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, the environmental dimension of development was established to achieve sustainable development. It changes the perception of organizations to harmonize their economic effectiveness with their social and environmental profitability on the one hand. Recent attention has shifted to researching mechanisms to help promote sustainable development, especially the environmental dimension, across the world on the other hand. This study details these mechanisms, in particular environmental governance and citizenship, by providing a framework known as global environmental governance and environmental citizenship. With the presentation of a number of tools that environmental governance and citizenship can activate in the service of sustainable development to allow the transition from theoretical frameworks to the application on the ground based on the descriptive analytical approach. It is expected that the study will identify these two modern concepts in studies (environmental governance and environmental citizenship) and highlights the most important tools used by these concepts in practice to increase attention to the environmental dimension of sustainable development to reach a number of results. Perhaps the most important of which is global environmental governance requires an international, local legal and institutional framework starts from the citizen. To focus environmental citizenship on pro-environmental behaviors in the public and private sectors, this concept should extend beyond the State to the adoption of general international environmental law through several dimensions, beginning with special responsibility: justice in the distribution of resources and collective action to protect the environment. The study concludes with a number of recommendations to alert the importance of these two variables in activating the environmental dimension of sustainable development around the world.


2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 369-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric F. Lambin ◽  
Tannis Thorlakson

New partnerships between governments, private companies, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are reshaping global environmental governance. In particular, there has been a rise of voluntary sustainability standards in an attempt to manage social and environmental impacts of global supply chains. We analyze the large spectrum of interactions between private, public, and civil society actors around voluntary sustainability standards, primarily for tropical agriculture and forestry. This review uncovers a policy ecosystem dominated by a proliferation of standards that complement, substitute, or compete against each other, with coordination mechanisms beginning to arise. Contrary to widely held views, interactions between governments, NGOs, and private companies surrounding the adoption of sustainable practices are not generally antagonistic, and public and private environmental governance regimes rarely operate independently. The influence of these interactions on the effectiveness of sustainability standards needs more attention. Better understanding how private regulations interact with the policy ecosystem will help design more effective interventions.


2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Bretherton

Environmental governance may be distinguished from environmental management by the implication that, in the former, some form of participatory process is involved. Here, the focus is upon the potential for women's movements and networks to influence the principles and practices of global environmental governance (GEG). It is contended that, in principle, women are uniquely placed to oppose the dominant norms informing GEG; and that women's participation would, in consequence, be crucial to the achievement of equitable and environmentally sound forms of governance. In practice, however, a number of factors combine to create divisions between women, and hence to impede transnational mobilization by women around environmental issues. This article examines these issues.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document