Suchergebnisse

This paper hypothesizes the future of Saskatchewan power production based on the theory of transition management. Power generation law and policy in Saskatchewan over the last century to the present is analyzed as a key component of a socio-technical regime. Understanding the legacy of law and policy is important given sustainability concerns and the realization that significant changes will be required in trajectories of development putting less strain on natural capital and ecosystem services. This paper examines the critical relationship between governance strategies at the macro socio and political landscape level and the particular policy mix that is found in the socio-technical regime of power generation in Saskatchewan. This exercise is informed by transition management theory and also the alternative explanations of path dependency. Switch points critical to the trajectory of power generation development are identified and used to illustrate and assess the plausibility of these theoretical concepts. Current landscape developments in Saskatchewan, including the emergence of concerns for human-induced climate change, the development of wind power and even the re-emergence of nuclear power generation as a policy option, may facilitate a transition towards greater sustainability. These sustainability paths are juxtaposed against the development of Saskatchewan's oil sands and the development of carbon capture sequestration technology. Possible future alternative pathways to sustainable power production are outlined and critiqued in the current Saskatchewan governance context.

This book is the result of a seven-year project that involved the countries of Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Canada in assessing climate change, climate change vulnerability, and adaptive capacity. It employs a unique methodology for integrating the findings brought together here, and fills a gap in academic literature in relation to case studies on South America in English, comparative case studies of the global North and South and vulnerability assessment.

AbstractThe purpose of this article is to examine the research advanced in the journal, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics that represents key insights into international agreements on water and their political, legal, economic and cross-disciplinary dimensions for water governance. The article analyses evidence and lessons learnt over the last twenty years to inform policy through a review of theoretical advances, innovations in principles and policy instruments, outcomes of problem-solving and knowledge gained regarding water agreements and associated institutions. Important international agreement principles of no significant harm and economic frames of water as a 'commons' advance equity and community of interest in relation to water. The studies on water, sanitation and hygiene point to the ways the role of the state can be advanced in achieving Sustainable Development Goals and in complex contexts of water scarcity and public private partnerships. Cross-disciplinary learnings substantiate the existence and utility of multiple water frames in legal arrangements and use of multiple policy instruments. Cross-disciplinary insights are significant in addressing equity, whether through the nascent development of water indicators or in advancing social learning. Water governance frameworks increasingly focus on adaptation by incorporating multiple stakeholders. These findings that advance equity and inclusivity are tempered by crucial lessons in our understanding of the very contested, power-laden nature of water governance that impact agency at multiple scales and policy coordination across sectors of water, food and energy.

The purpose of this article is to examine the research advanced in the journal, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics that represents key insights into international agreements on water and their political, legal, economic and cross-disciplinary dimensions for water governance. The article analyses evidence and lessons learnt over the last twenty years to inform policy through a review of theoretical advances, innovations in principles and policy instruments, outcomes of problem-solving and knowledge gained regarding water agreements and associated institutions. Important international agreement principles of no significant harm and economic frames of water as a 'commons' advance equity and community of interest in relation to water. The studies on water, sanitation and hygiene point to the ways the role of the state can be advanced in achieving Sustainable Development Goals and in complex contexts of water scarcity and public private partnerships. Cross-disciplinary learnings substantiate the existence and utility of multiple water frames in legal arrangements and use of multiple policy instruments. Cross-disciplinary insights are significant in addressing equity, whether through the nascent development of water indicators or in advancing social learning. Water governance frameworks increasingly focus on adaptation by incorporating multiple stakeholders. These findings that advance equity and inclusivity are tempered by crucial lessons in our understanding of the very contested, power-laden nature of water governance that impact agency at multiple scales and policy coordination across sectors of water, food and energy.

As climate change impacts result in more extreme events (such as droughts and floods), the need to understand which policies facilitate effective climate change adaptation becomes crucial. Hence, this article answers the question: How do governments and policymakers frame policy in relation to climate change, droughts, and floods and what governance structures facilitate adaptation? This research interrogates and analyzes through content analysis, supplemented by semi‐structured qualitative interviews, the policy response to climate change, drought, and flood in relation to agricultural producers in four case studies in river basins in Chile, Argentina, and Canada. First, an epistemological explanation of risk and uncertainty underscores a brief literature review of adaptive governance, followed by policy framing in relation to risk and uncertainty, and an analytical model is developed. Pertinent findings of the four cases are recounted, followed by a comparative analysis. In conclusion, recommendations are made to improve policies and expand adaptive governance to better account for uncertainty and risk. This article is innovative in that it proposes an expanded model of adaptive governance in relation to "risk" that can help bridge the barrier of uncertainty in science and policy.