Suchergebnisse

This book offers tools for the study of environmental conflicts, analyzes the current status of environmental policies and discusses why we are so far from resolving many of the issues we face. It also offers alternative directions for future environmental governance

Why are certain property regimes preferred? They cannot be chosen on the basis of efficiency considerations alone, as what is efficient depends on the institutional structures themselves and the interests they defend. The author highlights some important distinctions between various property regimes: whereas categories like private, common, and state property all may imply some degree of co – ownership and overlap along some dimensions, the logic of each system, ideally defined, may be quite distinct. The author shows that there is nothing inherent in a resource that demands a certain regime. Property regimes are social constructs and must be defended by judgment, not by necessity. The author demonstrates that the main role of property regimes is to defend certain interests. Furthermore, they seem to influence which interests are formed or become activated. The preferences which form the basis for efficiency evaluations are thus dependent upon the chosen system. In this way, technically oriented evaluations like cost – benefit analysis are caught in severe circularities. The implication of this for policy is that the evaluation of regimes implies taking a stand concerning what we want to become, both as individuals and as a society.

Preface; Acknowledgements; Further acknowledgements; Abbreviations; 1. Institutions: the web of human life; 2. Institutions: the individual and the society; 3. Institutions: coordination and conflict; 4. Institutional economics: different positions; 5. Rationality; 6. Preferences and values; 7. Explaining institutional change; 8. Evaluating institutional change: the normative aspect of institutions; 9. The environment; 10. Resource regimes; 11. Valuing the environment; 12. Comparing value articulating institutions; 13. Policy and policy measures

The European Union (EU) and Norway have assessed the release of genetically modified organisms as commercial products quite differently. Of twenty-four notifications approved by the EU, Norway has approved four, rejected ten, and has ten pending. We analyse whether these differences could be explained by different value judgments. Three aspects of the formulation and implementation of the regulations are discussed: the effects to be prevented and encouraged, response to uncertainty and ignorance, and the burden of proof necessary. Norwegian rejections are found to be explicable by the combination of no real benefit to society, lack of scientific knowledge, and involved risks. EU approvals are based upon seeing no reason to believe that there will be any adverse effects on health and the environment. We conclude that problems arise when value conflicts are understood and treated solely as technical issues, as normal in the EU.

The capacity of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) forests to sequestrate carbon has attracted interest from the international community to protect forests for carbon storage and alleviate rural poverty by establishing REDD+ (Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation). Using information gathered from interviews, focus groups, field observations, and policy document analysis, this paper demonstrates that REDD+ is not well adapted to the institutional structures of forest governance in the DRC, including both statutory and customary tenure. The lack of harmonization between these systems has created a situation of competition between state and customary authorities. This has created opportunities for powerful actors to 'shop' between the two systems to attempt to legitimize their expanded use and control over forest resources. As the REDD+ process evolves from the preparation to the implementation phase, competing institutional structures may negatively impact the effectiveness of REDD+, as well as the distribution of costs and benefits. While the newly enacted community forest law provides an opportunity to recognize customary rights to forestland, the lack of functional local government at the district and village levels has prompted REDD+ pilot project organizers to establish new village organizations for REDD+. ; publishedVersion