Governance for sustainable development

René Kemp

Presentation 8Environment and Sustainable Development course

UNU-MERIT PhD programme

Different meanings of governance

Governance as the complex ways in which order and orientation are maintained in socio-political systems (Meadowcroft et al., 2005)… a more cooperative mode where state and no-state actors participate in mixed public/private networks” (Mayntz, 1998)Governance as the structured ways and means in which the divergent preferences of inter-dependent actors are translated into policy choices to allocate values, so that the plurality of interests is transformed into co-ordinated action and the compliance of actors is achieved (Eising and Kohler-Koch 2000).

Governance structures organize negotiation processes, determine objectives, influence motivations, set standards, perform allocative functions, monitor compliance, impose penalties, initiate and/or reduce conflict, and resolve disputes among actors (Eden and Hampson 1997: 362)In political science and public administration the concept of governance has been suggested to broaden the narrow focused perspective on policy processes as hierarchically structured goal-oriented processes by explicitly bringing in the societal context in which these processes occur

Key requirements of governance for sustainable

developmentDeveloping political frameworks for future-visioning, goal-setting, policy design and implementation and adjustmentIntegrating the economic, social and environmental dimensions of decision-making across societyStructuring engagement as a learning processEvolving complex systems of multilevel governance (with cross connections among institutions at local, regional, national, international and global scales), where decision-makers remain responsible to citizens, communities and stakeholders

… Meadowcroft et al (2005)

Source: UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

Good governance: a model for SD?

According to the OECD GoSD means

Integration of economic, social and environmental objectives, and balance across sectors, territories and generationsBroad participation and effective partnershipCountry ownership and committmentDeveloping capacity and enabling environmentFocus on outcomes and means of implementation

Source: European Commission (2001)

Focussing governance for SD

Yes, indicators are needed for management: they add substance and allow for measurement and evaluationBut it should not be applied rigorously in a top-down mannerFor example the building of dams for hydoelectricity and nuclear reactors would be sustainable under the above definitionThere is the critical issue of dealing with tradeoffs

Is this a good approach?

In my view what is needed is an approach oriented towards system-

innovation

The adoption of available “sustainable” options at each moment in time (bioethanol or wind power) does not get us very farCorporate sustainability efforts strike only at the margin: they help to pick low-hanging fruit (pale greening)We need sociotechnical systems that are “inherently sustainable” in which we don’t have to think about sustainability when we make our choices (frame conditions are not enough)

The Dutch “transition approach”

Led by the Ministry of Economic Affairs (responsible for business, energy and innovation)Goal: to achieve a transition to a low-carbon economyIn a bottom-up, top-down manner, moving from programmes & experiments to alternative systems of energy, agriculture and mobility

Top-down elements

26 transition paths6 platforms for energy transitionGovernment support for experiments (35 million euro)Policy renewal

Selected transition paths

Bottom-up elements

Business alliancesExperimentsIdentification of barriers / opportunities informing private action and policy

How serious is all this?

Platform for “green resources” (one of official 6 platforms) 4 transition paths60 million euro for biofuelsIn 2007 2% blending requirement for gasoline and dieselCertification system

Why is NL interested in biomass?

Because NL is a gas country (biomass can be turned into a gas)

Because agriculture business and the logistic sector (Rotterdam harbour) are interested in it

Because the chemical industry thinks it may obtain an competitive edge from knowledge-intensive, green materials

Because ECN is a world leader in biomass gassification

The philosophy behind TM: Perspektivischer Inkrementalismus

or directed evolution

The use of multiple visions (because visions create better world together rather than apart)The use of experimental learningAdaptive portfolios: each option has to prove its worthPolicy as a facilitator of change (with government as partner of business)

Transition Management bifocal instead of myopic

Political margins for

change

State of development of solutions

Societal goals

Sustainability visions

Transition management: oriented towards long-term sustainability goals and visions, iterative and reflexive (bifocal)

Existing policy process: short-term goals (myopic)

Circular elements            

  

 

 Evaluating, monitoring and learning

 

Developing

sustainability

visions and

transition-agendas

Organising multi-actor networks

Mobilizing actors and executing projects and

experiments

 

Source: Loorbach (2004)

Portfolio of official transition paths

Transition experiments

Instrument choices

Policy coordination

The use of science and knowledge

Science, technology and innovation more oriented towards transition goals VisioningSustainability assessmentDiscussions about transition management

What is transition management really?

21st century corporatismA reflexive form of steering (reflexive goverance)

Organisational background of Taskforce Energy transition and

Platform membersGovernment

Industry

ScienceIntermediary

NGO

Compiled by Roel van Raak

Members of platform “green resources”

Paul Hamm (formerly at DSM, chair)Dhr. G.G. Bemer (Koninklijke Nedalco)  Dhr. A. van den Biggelaar (Stichting Natuur en Milieu) Mevr.dr.ir. M.J.P. Botman (Ministerie van Economische Zaken) Prof.dr. A. Bruggink (NWO-ACTS / Universiteit Nijmegen / DSM) Ir. K.W. Kwant (SenterNovem) Dhr. P. Lednor (Shell Global Solutions) Dr. Peter M. Bruinenberg (AVEBE) Prof.dr. E.M. Meijer (Unilever) Prof.dr. J.P.M. Sanders (Agrotechnology & Food Innovations) Prof.dr. W.P.M. van Swaaij (Universiteit Twente) Prof.dr. H. Veringa (ECN) Dr. J. Vanhemelrijck (EuropaBio) Prof.dr.ir. L.A.M. van der Wielen (Technische Universiteit Delft)  

Whatever it is -- it is getting attention

Transition activitiesOver a 100 researchers are working on transition issues in the research network KSIThere is a competence center for transitions (CCT) and two newly created knowledge centers (Drift and KCT)Various ministries, Senternovem (intermediary organization), provinces, regions and municipalities are involved in implementing transition management; secretary-generals meet to discuss issues of policy alignmentMany companies are involved and some NGOs (in particular SNM).Examples of organizations active in developing and implementing their own approach towards transition management are provincial environmental organizations of Flevoland, Zuid-Holland, Zeeland and Gelderland, and the Foundation for Nature and the Environment

Source: Loorbach 2006

1) Because of the barriers to system innovation -- which have to with uncertainty, the need for change at various levels and vested interests

2) Because public policy is highly fragmented and oriented towards short term goals

3) Because of the need for societal support for transition policies and for legitimising policies towards structural change

4) Because a gradual approach of small steps is economically not disruptive and politically and socially do-able

Why we need transition management

Is TM only appropriate for countries with well-developed systems of environmental protection & STI and high levels of affluence?Or also a useful approach for developing countries?

Question to you