Suchergebnisse

This article examines a mode of hybrid governance in which sovereign states and nonstate parties collaborate as equal partners to address complex problems that are beyond the problem-solving capacities of states acting alone. Under conventional state-centric approaches, environmental policy is the exclusive province of territorially delimited sovereign states, subject only to such obligations as states incur through voluntary inter-sovereign agreements. In contrast, "post-sovereign" governance is non-exclusive, non-hierarchical, and post-territorial. These arrangements emerge from recognition of the limitations of top-down domestic regulation and rules of inter-sovereign obligation as means to address such complex environmental problems as ecosystem management. Examples are drawn from the US experience in the Chesapeake Bay region, and the joint US-Canadian Great Lakes ecosystem management effort.

This article examines a mode of hybrid governance in which sovereign states & nonstate parties collaborate as equal partners to address complex problems that are beyond the problem-solving capacities of states acting alone. Under conventional state-centric approaches, environmental policy is the exclusive province of territorially delimited sovereign states, subject only to such obligations as states incur through voluntary inter-sovereign agreements. In contrast, "postsovereign" governance is nonexclusive, nonhierarchical, & postterritorial. These arrangements emerge from recognition of the limitations of top-down domestic regulation & rules of intersovereign obligation as means to address such complex environmental problems as ecosystem management. Examples are drawn from the US experience in the Chesapeake Bay region, & the joint US-Canadian Great Lakes ecosystem management effort. 52 References. Adapted from the source document.

This article develops a model of environmental regulation that promises to be at once more flexible, democratic, and effective than the familiar methods of central command or market-based control. Local units—such as firms, factories, or regional ecosystem management authorities—enjoy the autonomy to determine their environmental protection goals and methods to reach them. In exchange for this latitude, they report their plans and progress to central authorities that monitor local planning efforts and pool the information generated by them to formulate minimum performance standards and identify effective practices. This arrangement produces contextually tailored regulation, rich information feedback, and continuous adjustment of ends and means in light of new learning. Elements of this model have been adopted in large-scale reforms in areas as diverse as toxics use reduction, endangered species protection, and ecosystem management. Writ large, this model entails a fundamental reorientation of government institutions that the authors call neo-Madisonian.