Innovations in International Environmental Policy: A study of international organisations and policy change

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

This project is concerned with processes of environmental policy innovation within international organisations. Despite more than two decades of sustainable development policy, most indicators of environmental quality continue to decline. Against this background, some governments and international organisations have recently adopted new concepts and strategies to reconcile economic development and environmental sustainability. 'Green economy' and 'green growth' are becoming increasingly salient ideas, but there are numerous competing understandings of the environment-economy nexus captured in such terms as inclusive wealth (e.g. UNU-IHDP and UNEP 2012), de-growth (e.g. R&D n.d.), steady-state economy (e.g. CASSE n.d.), and buen vivir (e.g. Heinrich Böll Foundation 2011). International organisations frequently take a leadership role in advancing new sustainability concepts and strategies; therefore, these organisations are the focus of this study. The aims of the project are three-fold. The first is to identify and map the different contemporary discourses about the environment-economy nexus within civil society and the policy community. Discerning these discourses provides a complete picture of how the nexus is understood which enables us to move beyond the rhetorical labels used by actors themselves within international institutions, government agencies, and civil society and to identify points of agreement and disagreement. The second aim is to determine how international organisations deal with the internal and external plurality of positions and understandings of the environment-economy nexus in the process of developing new sustainability strategies. It is evident from three decades of environmental multilateralism that a plurality of positions and interpretations can complicate negotiations and make it difficult to devise mutual strategies and agreements. Nevertheless, there are important reasons for ensuring heterogeneity in discussion and decision-making. There is ample evidence to suggest that institutional enclaves and decision-making among like-minded individuals tend to impede rationality and produce weakly-reasoned decisions. Unless opposing positions are vocally represented, there is a danger that individuals will reinforce their commitment to existing convictions rather than consider the merits and weaknesses of those convictions in relation to others. It is important, then, that discussion and decision-making are exposed to competing perspectives. By analysing the prevalence of homogeneity and heterogeneity in international organisations' efforts to develop new sustainability strategies, I will be able to make assessments of the quality of these processes, and recommendations for improved processes. This will build on existing research carried out by the PI and John S. Dryzek on strategies for enhancing discursive representation in public deliberation on climate change and in multilateral climate change negotiations (Stevenson and Dryzek 2012a, 2012b). The third aim is to determine whether international organisations' efforts to advance new sustainability concepts and strategies reflect institutional learning, institutional adaptation, and/or rhetorical innovation. Learning entails behavioural change brought about by redefined goals and means; adaptation entails behavioural change brought about by redefined means to achieve existing goals; and rhetorical innovation signifies the use of new language to refer to existing or new goals and means. Four international organisations are proposed as cases studies for pursuing the institutional aims of the project: the Global Green Growth Institute; United Nations Environment Programme; United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific; and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Methodologically, this is an interpretivist study informed by three research methods: Q methodology, document analysis, and semi-structured interviews.