Global forest governance

This book identifies the fundamental legal principles and the governance requirements of sustainable forest management. An analytical model for assessing forest regulation is created which identifies the doctrinal concepts that underpin forest regulation (justice, property, sovereignty and governance). It also highlights the dominant public international institutions involved in forest regulation (UNFF, UNFCCC and WB) which is followed by analysis of non-state international forest regulation (forest certification and ecosystem markets). The book concludes by making a number of practical recommendations for reform of global forest governance arrangements and suggested reforms for individual international forest institutions.

Collaborative governance and innovation in social enterprises

While social enterprises have gained increasing policy attention as vehicles for generating innovative responses to complex social and environmental problems, surprisingly little is known about them. In particular, the social innovation produced by social enterprises (Mulgan, Tucker, Ali, & Sander, 2007) has been presumed rather than demonstrated, and remains under-investigated in the literature. While social enterprises are held to be inherently innovative as they seek to response to social needs (Nicholls, 2010), there has been conjecture that the collaborative governance arrangements typical in social enterprises may be conducive to innovation (Lumpkin, Moss, Gras, Kato, & Amezcua, In press), as members and volunteers provide a source of creative ideas and are unfettered in such thinking by responsibility to deliver organisational outcomes (Hendry, 2004). However this is complicated by the sheer array of governance arrangements which exist in social enterprises, which range from flat participatory democratic structures through to hierarchical arrangements. In continental Europe, there has been a stronger focus on democratic participation as a characteristic of Social Enterprises than, for example, the USA. In response to this gap in knowledge, a research project was undertaken to identify the population of social enterprises in Australia. The size, composition and the social innovations initiated by these enterprises has been reported elsewhere (see Barraket, 2010). The purpose of this paper is to undertake a closer examination of innovation in social enterprises – particularly how the collaborative governance of social enterprises might influence innovation. Given the pre-paradigmatic state of social entrepreneurship research (Nicholls, 2010), and the importance of drawing draw on established theories in order to advance theory (Short, Moss, & Lumpkin, 2009), a number of conceptual steps are needed in order to examine how collaborative governance might influence by social enterprises. In this paper, we commence by advancing a definition as to what a social enterprise is. In light of our focus on the potential role of collaborative governance in social innovation amongst social enterprises, we go on to consider the collaborative forms of governance prevalent in the Third Sector. Then, collaborative innovation is explored. Drawing on this information and our research data, we finally consider how collaborative governance might affect innovation amongst social enterprises.

Network governance in US airport taxicab planning activities

This thesis examines the use of network governance in US airport transportation planning activities involving taxicab services for airport patrons. The research provides US airports with new insights whereby they can successfully engage with both transportation regulatory agencies and taxicab service providers in developing mutually agreeable policies that foster the development of supply-side taxicab service improvements. A mix of quantitative and qualitative research methods is used to unearth how US airports interact with these actors, and to identify attitudes held by airport staff in their engagements involving airport taxicab planning matters. The research may ultimately lead to the achievement of sustainable increases in the air passenger ground transportation modal share at US airports, resulting in both desirable long-term operational and environmental benefits for airport management, those involved with the provision of airport taxicab services, and the traveling public.

Responding to a transformative stressor : climate change and the institutional governance of Australian cities

This paper understands climate change as a transformative stressor that will prompt responses from institutional governance frameworks in Australian cities. A transformative stressor is characterised as a chronic large-scale phenomenon which triggers a process of institutional change whereby institutions seek to reorientate their activities to better manage the social, economic and environmental impacts created by the transformative dynamic. It is posited that institutional change will be required as Australian metropolitan institutional governance frameworks seek to manage climate change effects in urban environments. It is argued that improved operationalisation of adaptation is required as part of a comprehensive urban response to the transformative stresses climate change and its effects are predicted to create in Australian cities. The operationalisation of adaptation refers to adaptation becoming incorporated, codified and implemented as a central principle of metro-regional planning governance. This paper has three key purposes. First, it examines theoretical and conceptual understandings of the role of transformative stressors in compelling institutional change within urban settings. Second, it establishes a conceptual approach that understands climate change as a transformative stressor requiring institutional change within the metropolitan planning frameworks of Australia's cities. Third, it offers early results and conclusions from an empirical investigation into the current prospects for operationalisation of climate adaptation in planning programs within Southeast Queensland (SEQ) via changes to institutional governance. A significant emerging conclusion is that early climate stresses appear not to be leading to episodic institutional change in the metropolitan planning frameworks of SEQ.

Towards networked governance : improving interagency communication and collaboration for disaster risk management and climate change adaptation in Australia

Major disasters, such as bushfires or floods, place significant stress on scarce public resources. Climate change is likely to exacerbate this stress. An integrated approach to disaster risk management (DRM) and climate change adaptation (CCA) could reduce the stress by encouraging the more efficient use of pooled resources and expertise. A comparative analysis of three extreme climate-related events that occurred in Australia between 2009 and 2011 indicated that a strategy to improve interagency communication and collaboration would be a key factor in this type of policy/planning integration. These findings are in accord with the concepts of Joined-up Government and Network Governance. Five key reforms are proposed: developing a shared policy vision; adopting multi-level planning; integrating legislation; networking organisations; and establishing cooperative funding. These reforms are examined with reference to the related research literature in order to identify potential problems associated with their implementation. The findings are relevant for public policy generally but are particularly useful for CCA and DRM.

A method for risk analysis across governance systems : a great barrier reef case study

Healthy governance systems are key to delivering sound environmental management outcomes from global to local scales. There are, however, surprisingly few risk assessment methods that can pinpoint those domains and sub-domains within governance systems that are most likely to influence good environmental outcomes at any particular scale, or those if absent or dysfunctional, most likely to prevent effective environmental management. This paper proposes a new risk assessment method for analysing governance systems. This method is then tested through its preliminary application to a significant real-world context: governance as it relates to the health of Australia's Great Barrier Reef (GBR). The GBR exists at a supra-regional scale along most of the north eastern coast of Australia. Brodie et al (2012 Mar. Pollut. Bull. 65 81-100) have recently reviewed the state and trend of the health of the GBR, finding that overall trends remain of significant concern. At the same time, official international concern over the governance of the reef has recently been signalled globally by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). These environmental and political contexts make the GBR an ideal candidate for use in testing and reviewing the application of improved tools for governance risk assessment. © 2013 IOP Publishing Ltd.

A jurisprudential model for sustainable water resources governance

The legal arrangements for the management of water resources are currently a complex matrix of rules of various kinds. These rules perform a diverse range of functions. Some are part of what may be described as the macro-legal system for the governance of water resources. This includes paralegal rules in the form of statements of value, objective, outcome or principles . Others are part of the micro-legal system for the governance of water resources. This includes traditional legal rules in the form of statements of standards in relation to individual conduct, behaviour or decision making. These legal arrangements may be international, regional, national or local. Accordingly some apply to nation states within the international community. Others apply to the regulatory agencies making decisions about water resources within nation states. Ultimately most of these legal arrangements apply to those who use and develop water resources for particular purposes and in particular locations. In accordance with this framework, rules explain how water resources should be used in particular circumstances and how decisions should be made to ensure the effective planning and regulation of water resources.

Governance Systems Analysis (GSA) : a framework for reforming governance systems

Most commentators understand that contemporary social, economic and environmental challenges require quality governance from global to local scales. While public scrutiny of governance has increased in recent years, the literature on frameworks and methods for analysis in complex, poly-centric and multi-thematic governance systems remains fragmented; displaying many disciplinary or sectoral biases. This paper establishes a stronger theory-based foundation for the analysis of complex governance systems. It also develops a clear analytical framework applicable across a vast array of differing governance themes, domains and scales (GSA). The key methodological steps and evaluative criteria for the GSA framework are determined and practical guidance for its application in reform is provided.

Exploring the usefulness of structural–functional approaches to analyse governance of planning systems

Existing planning theories tend to be limited in their analytical scope and often fail to account for the impact of many interactions between the multitudes of stakeholders involved in strategic planning processes. Although many theorists rejected structural–functional approaches from the 1970s, this article argues that many of structural–functional concepts remain relevant and useful to planning practitioners. In fact, structural–functional approaches are highly useful and practical when used as a foundation for systemic analysis of real-world, multi-layered, complex planning systems to support evidence-based governance reform. Such approaches provide a logical and systematic approach to the analysis of the wider governance of strategic planning systems that is grounded in systems theory and complementary to existing theories of complexity and planning. While we do not propose its use as a grand theory of planning, this article discusses how structural–functional concepts and approaches might be applied to underpin a practical analysis of the complex decision-making arrangements that drive planning practice, and to provide the evidence needed to target reform of poorly performing arrangements.

Analysing governance of Australia's system of landscape-based greenhouse gas abatement

Healthy governance systems are key to delivering effective outcomes in any broad domain of natural resource management (NRM). One of Australia's emerging NRM governance domains is our national framework for greenhouse gas abatement (GGA), as delivered through a wide range of management practices in the Australian landscape. The emerging Landscape-Based GGA Domain represents an innovative governance space that straddles both the nation's broader NRM Policy and Delivery Domain and Australia's GGA Domain. As a point-in-time benchmark, we assess the health of this hybrid domain as it stood at the end of 2013. At that time, the domain was being progressed through the Australian government's Clean Energy Package and, more particularly, its Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI). While significant changes are currently under development by a new Australian government, this paper explores key areas of risk within the governance system underpinning this emerging hybrid domain at that point in time. We then map some potential reform or continuous improvement pathways required (from national to paddock scale) with the view to securing improved landscape outcomes over time through widespread GGA activities.

The evolving landscape of natural resource planning and governance in Australia

Australia’s governance of land and natural resources involves multiple polycentric domains of decision-making from global through to local levels. Although certainly complex, these arrangements have not necessarily translated into better decision-making or better environmental outcomes as evidenced by the growing concerns over the health and future of the Great Barrier Reef, (GBR). However within this system, arrangements for natural resource management (NRM) and reef water quality, which both use Australia’s integrated regional NRM model, have showed signs of improving decision-making and environmental outcomes in the GBR. In this paper we describe the latest evolutions in the governance and planning for natural resource use and management in Australia. We begin by reviewing the experience with first generation NRM as published in major audits and evaluations. As our primary interest is the health and future of the GBR, we then consider the impact of changes of second generation planning and governance outcomes in Queensland. We find that first generation plans, although developed under a relatively cohesive governance context, faced substantial problems in target setting, implementation, monitoring and review. Despite this, they were able to progress improvements in water quality in the Great Barrier Reef Regions. Second generation plans, currently being developed, face an even greater risk of failure due to the lack of bilateralism and cross-sectoral cooperation across the NRM governance system. The findings highlight the critical need to re-build and enhance the regional NRM model for NRM planning to have a positive impact on environmental outcomes in the GBR.

Planning and governance approaches for protecting World Heritage Areas: A comparison of the Great Barrier Reef and the Florida Everglades

The focus of this paper is on two World Heritage Areas: the Great Barrier Reef in Queensland, Australia and the Everglades in Florida. While both are World Heritage listed by the UNESCO, the Everglades is on the "World Heritage in Danger" list and the Great Barrier Reef could be on this list within the next year if present pressures continue. This paper examines the planning approaches and governance structures used in these two areas (Queensland and Florida) to manage the growth and development pressures. To make the analysis manageable, given the scale of these World Heritage areas, case studies at the local government level will be used: the Cairns Regional Council in Queensland and Monroe County in Florida. The case study analysis will involve three steps: (1) examination of the various plans at the federal, state, local levels that impact upon environmental quality in the Great Barrier Reef and Everglades; (2) assessing the degree to which these plans have been implemented; and (3) determine if (and how) the plans have improved environmental quality. In addition to the planning analysis we will also examine the governance structures (Lebel et al. 2006) within which planning operates. In any comparative analysis context is important (Hantrais 2009). Contextual differences between Queensland and Florida have previously been examined by Sipe, et al. (2007) and will be used as the starting point for this analysis. Our operating hypothesis and preliminary analysis suggests that the planning approaches and governance structures used in Florida and Queensland are considerably different, but the environmental outcomes may be similar. This is based, in part, on Vella (2004) who did a comparative analysis of environmental practices in the sugar industry in Florida and Queensland. This research re-examines this hypothesis and broadens the focus beyond the sugar industry to growth and development more broadly.

Exploring the usefulness of structural-functional approaches to systematically assess the functionality of governance arrangements for natural resource management planning in two Australian case studies

This research developed and applied an evaluative framework to analyse multiple scales of decision-making for environmental management planning. It is the first exploration of the sociological theory of structural-functionalism and its usefulness to support evidence based decision-making in a planning context. The framework was applied to analyse decision-making in Queensland's Cape York Peninsula and Wet Tropics regions.

Corporate-cooperative management of fisheries: A potential alternative governance structure for low value small fisheries?

While the economic and environmental benefits of fisheries management are well accepted, the costs of effective management in low value fisheries, including the research necessary to underpin such management, may be considerable relative to the total economic benefits they may generate. Co-management is often seen as a panacea in low value fisheries. Increasing fisher participation increases legitimacy of management decision in the absence of detailed scientific input. However, where only a small number of operators exist, the potential benefits of co-management are negated by the high transaction cost to the individual fishers engaging in the management process. From an economic perspective, sole ownership has been identified as the management structure which can best achieve biological and economic sustainability. Moving low value fisheries with a small number of participants to a corporate-cooperative management model may come close to achieving these sole ownership benefits, with lower transaction costs. In this paper we look at the applicability of different management models with industry involvement to low value fisheries with a small number of participants. We provide an illustration as to how a fishery could be transitioned to a corporate-cooperative management model that captures the key benefits of sole management at a low cost and is consistent with societal objectives.

Not learning from the past: Adaptive governance challenges for Australian natural resource management

Australia’s governance arrangements for NRM have evolved considerably over the last thirty years. The impact of changes in governance on NRM planning and delivery requires assessment. We undertake a multi-method program evaluation using adaptive governance principles as an analytical frame and apply this to Queensland to assess the impacts of governance change on NRM planning and governance outcomes. Data to inform our analysis includes: 1) a systematic review of sixteen audits/evaluations of Australian NRM over a fifteen-year period; 2) a review of Queensland’s first generation NRM Plans; and 3) outputs from a Queensland workshop on NRM planning. NRM has progressed from a bottom-up grassroots movement into a collaborative regional NRM model that has been centralised by the Australian Government. We found that while some adaptive governance challenges have been addressed, others remained unresolved. Results show that collaboration and elements of multi-level governance under the regional model were positive moves, but also that NRM arrangements contained structural deficiencies across multiple governance levels in relation to public involvement in decision-making and knowledge production for problem responsiveness. These problems for adaptive governance have been exacerbated since 2008. We conclude that the adaptive governance framework for NRM needs urgent attention so that important environmental management problems can be addressed.