Disentangling Puzzles of Spatial Scales and Participation in Environmental Governance—The Case of Governance Re-scaling Through the European Water Framework Directive
Disentangling Puzzles of Spatial Scales and Participation in Environmental Governance—The Case of Governance Re-scaling Through the European Water Framework Directive
复制标题
解开空间尺度和环境治理参与的难题——通过欧洲水框架指令重新调整治理规模的案例
DOI：
10.1007/s00267-016-0753-8
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Schulz
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Schulz
本文试图就治理系统的民主合法性和环境有效性问题，对多层次参与式治理中普遍存在的空间尺度之谜作出新的解释。我们专注于欧洲水框架指令的治理调整，该指令引入了新的治理尺度(强制要求的流域管理)，并要求公民进行磋商，并鼓励利益攸关方积极参与。这使得能够审查通过刻意的治理干预重新调整规模是否以及如何影响民主合法性和有效的环境政策交付。为了指导调查，本文将现有的关于规模、民主合法性和环境有效性之间关系的部分相互矛盾的主张组织成三组机制，整合了来自多层次治理、社会生态系统和公众参与的见解。我们根据所建议的机制，在多层次系统的比较案例研究中，对水框架指令的实施进行了实证检验。我们比较了德国的两个规划区：北莱茵威斯特伐利亚州和下萨克森州。调查结果表明，《水框架指令》确实对将水文尺度和参与制度化产生了一些影响。地方参与总体上似乎比更高级别的参与更有效和更合法，这表明需要更有针对性的多层次治理办法，这取决于是寻求环境知识还是宣传。我们发现，关于参与弥合生态和行政治理规模之间的空间“不匹配”的潜力，我们发现结果喜忧参半，这取决于生态规模治理的历史制度化。最后，多中心性在有效性方面似乎有些有利，在规划的多中心性与执行的多中心性方面有一些明显的差异。
This article attempts to shed new light on prevailing puzzles of spatial scales in multi-level, participatory governance as regards the democratic legitimacy and environmental effectiveness of governance systems. We focus on the governance re-scaling by the European Water Framework Directive, which introduced new governance scales (mandated river basin management) and demands consultation of citizens and encourages ‘active involvement’ of stakeholders. This allows to examine whether and how re-scaling through deliberate governance interventions impacts on democratic legitimacy and effective environmental policy delivery. To guide the enquiry, this article organizes existing—partly contradictory—claims on the relation of scale, democratic legitimacy, and environmental effectiveness into three clusters of mechanisms, integrating insights from multi-level governance, social-ecological systems, and public participation. We empirically examine Water Framework Directive implementation in a comparative case study of multi-level systems in the light of the suggested mechanisms. We compare two planning areas in Germany: North Rhine Westphalia and Lower Saxony. Findings suggest that the Water Framework Directive did have some impact on institutionalizing hydrological scales and participation. Local participation appears generally both more effective and legitimate than on higher levels, pointing to the need for yet more tailored multi-level governance approaches, depending on whether environmental knowledge or advocacy is sought. We find mixed results regarding the potential of participation to bridge spatial ‘misfits’ between ecological and administrative scales of governance, depending on the historical institutionalization of governance on ecological scales. Polycentricity, finally, appeared somewhat favorable in effectiveness terms with some distinct differences regarding polycentricity in planning vs. polycentricity in implementation.
登录
查看更多内容
综述：“Young、Oran R.、Leslie A. King 和 Heike Schroeder，编辑：机构与环境变化：主要发现、应用和研究前沿”
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
D. Bray
通讯作者：
D. Bray
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2000
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
B. Flynn
通讯作者：
B. Flynn
地方民主对沿海地区管理的影响——挪威南部的案例研究
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
K. Soma;A. Vatn
通讯作者：
A. Vatn
欧盟环境政策的实施；
DOI：
--
发表时间：
1999
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Andrew J. Jordan
通讯作者：
Andrew J. Jordan
不确定性和参与性民主
影响因子：
2.2
作者：
L. Pellizzoni
通讯作者：
L. Pellizzoni