Evaluating Global Environmental Governance of Climate Change - Essay Example

?Running head: Critical Evaluation of Global Environmental Governance of Climate Change Critical Evaluation of Global Environmental Governance of Climate Change Insert Name Insert Grade Course Insert Tutor’s Name 15 March 2012 Critical Evaluation of Global Environmental Governance of Climate Change Introduction The world’s human population has been increasing, and this means that economic activities have to be explored and exploited. The human population has exerted great pressure on local, national, regional, and global environment (Speth and Haas, 2007). Generally, this increasing population has been undertaking various activities, which have had impact on the physical environment. Observation made is that, as the number of people on the planet continues to grow and consumer aspirations of people continue to increase, the collective impact of human behaviours on the planet is becoming increasingly heavy and global in nature (Speth and Haas, 2007). With all these aspects evident in modern society, various stakeholders in the society have become increasingly involved in looking for the best ways to address global environmental threats. The global strategies that have been identified and used in addressing environmental threats constitute various approaches adopted and facilitated by communities, environmental groups, international businesses, and organizations (Speth and Haas, 2007). These global strategies constitute global environmental governance, which constitutes diverse efforts and strategies aimed at policy-making and government initiatives. The primary objective of such initiatives is to look and suggest for ways of preserving global environment while ensuring environmental sustainability (Speth and Haas, 2007). The performance of global environmental governance across the world varies, and the process has been characterised by numerous challenges, instances of success, and moments of failures. Therefore, it becomes important to evaluate the global environmental governance with the aim of identifying and suggesting strategies that can be used to improve the process. Global Environmental Governance Evidence is profound concerning the geometric increase in human population, while resources available remain constant or increase arithmetically. The net effect of this increasing imbalance in the world is the pressure exerted on the available resources and constant degradation of the environment. Human activities in modern world are characterised by increased degradation of the environment, including deforestation and reduction in vegetation to give way for infrastructural development, pollution of air and water resources, and destruction of natural fauna and flora habitats and water catchment sources. Increase in these problems has forced different stakeholders at the global level to come out and strongly advocate for proper resource management and adequate preservation of the environment through adoption of diverse strategies at the global level (Harris, 2012). Global environmental governance has numerous definitions. For example, Speth and Haas (2007) regard global environmental governance to be the total sum of all different strategies that individuals, institutions, and other stakeholders initiate in order to manage the common affairs of environmental matters. In most cases, global environmental governance involves a collaborative cooperation between governments, NGOs, citizens’ movements, multinational corporations, global mass media, and global capital markets in undertaking management, preservation, and sustainability of the environment through rule and regulation enforcement and compliance (Winter, 2006). Similarly, Levy and Newell (2005) perceive global environmental governance to constitute a broad range of political, economic, and social structures and processes that largely shape and limit actors’ behavior towards the environment. In this manner, environmental governance at global level can be seen to include different strategies that are used to order, regulate, and sometimes direct human impacts on the natural environment (Levy and Newell, 2005). The process of creating and implementing global environmental governance is always long and challenging, since it involves creating rules and regulations, building key institutions, as well as monitoring and carrying out enforcement (DeSombre, 2006). Moreover, this process is likely to involve attempts to create and institutionalise soft infrastructure of norms, expectations, and social understanding of acceptable behaviours that should be manifested in relation to the environment (DeSombre, 2006). As a result, this entire process has to involve collaborations, cooperation, and coordination of key stakeholders. Performance of Global Environmental Governance Global response to environmental issues has not been disappointing since the issues of environment and climate change became important and of great concern as early in 1970s (Winchester, 2009). At the global stage, numerous institutions have been created, and the primary objective of these institutions has been to see efficient management of environments within the precepts of sustainable development. The United Nations has been the basic face of global environmental governance, especially with regard to the great role it has played through United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) Agency (Speth and Haas, 2007). UNEP has, over time since its formation, acted as the primary custodian in instituting and sometimes overseeing the implementation of environmental laws and regulations aimed at ensuring wide compliance to environmental protection and sustenance of global environment through reduced activities of climate change (Speth and Haas, 2007). UNEP was formed from the Stockholm Conference, and the vision for the new environmental body was to act as international entity responsible in undertaking numerous environmental initiatives at global level. Key tasks of the organization were formulated to include developing environmental information and assessment programmes and to participate actively in the exchange and dissemination of data concerning the seriousness of particular environmental and social problems (Held, 2011). Moreover, UNEP was to cultivate and nurture international cooperation that aims to find solutions to the shared environmental problems in the entire world (United Nations Environment Programme, 2007). When analysis and evaluation is conducted on the above primary tenets upon which UNEP was established, it becomes clear that the agency has succeeded in numerous efforts of mitigating consequences of climate change. UNEP has been at forefront in initiating, coordinating, advising, and sometimes implementing numerous environmental agreements, convections, charters, and various resolutions (Hughes, 2009). All these developments have seen major individual, institutional, and societal behaviour change in regard to issues of climate change and efficient environmental management. At the same time, UNEP has not worked or conducted its functions in isolation. The agency has received and sometimes invited efforts and initiatives of key partner agencies such as the Commission on Sustainable Development, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), World Metrological Organization (WMO), and International Oceanographic Commission (Ivanova, 2005). All these agencies have participated in broad efforts of proposing, planning, coordinating, executing, and monitoring and evaluating diverse environmental initiatives at global level aimed at ensuring the environmental governance is effectively carried out. At the same time, there is need to recognise the role that UNEP has played in creation and capacity support of critical environmental governance convection and treaties such as Montreal Protocol, Basel Convection, the Convection on International Trade in Endangered Species and the Climate Change Convection (Ivanova, 2005). These convections and treaties have been at forefront in ensuring that environmental governance is effectively achieved through policy initiatives, as well as encouraging and demanding for government and leadership regimes’ participation in policy formulation and rule setting in their respective jurisdictions about environment issues. Moreover, the conventions have been the primary grounds upon which knowledge, awareness, behaviour, and perception change in the larger international community have been achieved with regard to climate change and ways to reduce impacts of climate change. The recognition that can be extended to global environmental governance systems and structures is the role they play in knowledge generation and dissemination about climate change (Hughes, 2009). These efforts have been backed up by detailed research-based reports about assessment, planning, monitoring, executing, and evaluating different environmental initiatives across the world (Hempel, 1996). As a result, the agencies have participated positively in suggesting and formulating recommendations, which, upon implementation, have seen robust positive results in the global effort of conserving and preserving environment and tackling the issues of climate change. Despite these efforts, it should be known that, although global environmental governance structures and systems experience some challenges and problems, there is need to consider the greater role the bodies have played. This exactly shows that, the level of know-how, awareness, and conceptualization of climate change, together with regulations and enforcement of laws has seen global environmental initiatives achieve numerous positive results. Challenges Global environmental governance institutions, structures, and systems are not insulated from challenges in the wider global environment. The challenges have acted in such a way that, efforts of these institutions have been constrained greatly. The wider perception, especially from critics of the environmental governance institutions is that, the institutions have achieved poor performance, and the overall scenario has not changed as far as climate change is concerned. In fact, the argument advanced by this group is that, climate change continues to deteriorate in midst of these diverse environmental governance institutions. Comparative analysis of the major international institutions and agencies involved in the issues of global environmental issues indicates that, primary challenges faced by the institutions have to do with complex and unclear mandate of operation, inadequate budget, limited political support, and lack of knowledge in the world’s population. According to Ivanova (2005), global environmental governance has largely suffered, primarily due to lack of cooperation and collective actions among key stakeholders both at micro and macro level. This lack of cooperation sometimes leads and encourages non-commitment behaviours, especially among the nations and other critical players who are vital in the success of environmental governance at global stage. Lack of collective action is contributed by a myriad of factors such as clear divide between North and South nations concerning strategies and means of addressing climate change issues. This problem is further made complex by recent behaviours of some North countries, which remain non-committal to some of the global environmental governance initiatives. In addition, lack of cooperation and commitment among key stakeholders is likely to be fueled by absence of critical data, information, and transparency, which largely tend to discourage, de-motivate and sometime leads to certain stakeholders pulling out of the initiatives of environmental governance. Lastly, it can be observed that, lack of collective action and commitment has been motivated by existing scenario in the present world, where majority of those tasked with responsibilities of implementing climate change policies have used much of the available time and resources to talk a lot and achieve little on action-based initiatives to facilitate effective governance of global climate. Another challenge that does not auger well with global environmental governance has to do with widespread fragmentation of different systems and structures, together with institutions involved in the management of global environment (Park, Conca and Finger, 2008). The fragmentation has meant that, conflicts, bureaucratic inefficiencies, inadequate resources, and overlapping of roles is what characterises many of the global environmental governance institutions and structures. For example, take the case of UNEP, which is seen to compete for time and resources with other agencies supposed to take part in the whole initiative of global environmental governance. Such agencies include UNDP, UNESCOOECD, and even World Metrological Organization. Fragmentation among key institutions and stakeholders sometimes moves to national level, whereby, the government and existing agencies mandated separately to coordinate environmental issues may have or pursue conflicting roles for the same course. Another challenge emanates from critical aspects such as deficiency, insufficiency, and legitimacy issues. Deficiency is manifested in many forms; for example, many of the international environmental governance institutions are limited in scope, have limited mandate and powers, operate within limited budgets, and receive minimal political support (Barbara, Ivanova, and Chee, 2002). Global climate change issues are huge matters that require adequate financial and non-financial resources in order to execute mandates and roles more effectively. Political support is also key in the wider process of environmental governance (Kutting, 2010). Insufficiency is largely manifested by different efforts and inputs of developed and developing nations in the entire process of environmental governance. Moreover, critical input is likely to be contributed by commitment, and when input is not adequate, then commitment diminishes, thus derailing and sometimes weakening legitimacy of environmental governance institutions. Recommendations Global environmental governance is critical in ensuring that climate change is addressed in the most sustainable way. In this regard, environmental governance has the primary role of collectively facilitating productive interdependence of ecological, economic, social, cultural, and political aspects concerned with environmental management. This is a complex process and initiative that no one agency or organization can undertake in isolation or in disregard of other stakeholders. As a result, it is recommended that global environmental governance should be built on strong and functional collective interdependence of key stakeholders. This initiative should encourage and involve cooperation and collaboration (Chatterjee, 2011).There has to be wide participation of key stakeholders in the entire process of governing global environment. Input of all stakeholders has to be valued in creating systems and infrastructures that intend to govern global environments initiatives. Conclusion The 21st century presents the world with myriad of challenges and opportunities. Environmental management is one area that calls for collaboration of key stakeholders and all those concerned to ensure effects of climate change are mitigated effectively. Subsequently, in order to have effective global environmental governance policies and structures, there is need for good governance to be established based on leadership, appropriate collaboration, effective incorporation, and integration of political support and will. At the same time, there is need to create clear functions and roles of diverse stakeholders involved in the governance process in order to reduce the likelihood of conflict, inefficiency, and overlap of roles. More importantly, the vision of key institutions should not be lost in the entire process of global environmental governance. Reference List Barbara, G., Ivanova, M., & Chee, Y. L., 2002. Designing a New Architecture for Global Environmental Governance. International Institute for Environmental and Development. [Online]. Available from: http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/11023IIED.pdf [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Chatterjee, D. K., 2011. Encyclopedia of Global Justice. NY: Springer. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=2swUg4ZKTgsC&pg=PA304&dq=global+environmental+governance+of+climate+change&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vNBhT4bKBtPD8QOIzu2xCA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=global%20environmental%20governance%20of%20climate%20change&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. DeSombre, E. R., 2006. Global Environmental Institutions. NY: Routledge. [Online]. Available from: http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/barkin/Global%20Env%20Institutions.pdf [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Harris, F., 2012. Global Environmental Issues. MA: John Wiley & Sons. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=4qa1Io0-zW0C&pg=PT65&dq=challenges+in+global+environmental+governance&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Z-5hT6aZE-Kj0QX6n72mCA&ved=0CFgQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=challenges%20in%20global%20environmental%20governance&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Held, D., 2011. The Governance of Climate Change. USA: Polity. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=hINnzPAx9ZEC&pg=PA206&dq=global+environmental+governance+of+climate+change&hl=en&sa=X&ei=V89hT-WlOcm18QO8_PSsCA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=global%20environmental%20governance%20of%20climate%20change&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Hempel, L. C., 1996. Environmental Governance: The Global Challenge. WA: Island Press. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=0_w7HKGUY-sC&printsec=frontcover&dq=challenges+in+global+environmental+governance&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Z-5hT6aZE-Kj0QX6n72mCA&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=challenges%20in%20global%20environmental%20governance&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Hughes, J. D., 2009. An Environmental History of the World: Humankind's Changing Role in the Community of Life. PA: Taylor & Francis. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=deb1ixo2MBQC&pg=PA249&dq=achievement+of+UNEP&hl=en&sa=X&ei=j_JhT8_ZHOPQ0QXrucyTCA&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=achievement%20of%20UNEP&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Ivanova, M., 2005. Assessing UNEP as Anchor Institution for the Global Environment: Lessons for the UNEO Debate. Yale Centre for Environmental Law and Policy Working Paper Series, Working Paper, No. 05/01. [Online]. Available from: http://www.unep.org/environmentalgovernance/Portals/8/AnchorInstitutionGlobalEnvironment.pdf [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Kutting, G., 2010. Global Environmental Politics: Concepts, Theories and Case Studies. PA: Taylor & Francis. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WiSUyp0hzWAC&pg=PA32&dq=challenges+in+global+environmental+governance&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Z-5hT6aZE-Kj0QX6n72mCA&ved=0CF0Q6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=challenges%20in%20global%20environmental%20governance&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Levy, D. L., & Newell, P. J., 2005. The Business of Global Environmental Governance. MA: MIT Press. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=mnBfQVStSYsC&pg=PA1&dq=introduction+to+global+environmental+governance&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JrZhT6SBO4qN8gPskInJBw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=introduction%20to%20global%20environmental%20governance&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Park, J., Conca, K., & Finger, M., 2008. The Crisis of Global Environmental Governance: Towards A New Political Economy of Sustainability. NY: Routledge. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=lrr3K50r144C&pg=PA197&dq=challenges+in+global+environmental+governance&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Z-5hT6aZE-Kj0QX6n72mCA&ved=0CFMQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=challenges%20in%20global%20environmental%20governance&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Speth, J. G., & Haas, P. M., 2007. Global Environmental Governance. New Delhi: Pearson Education India. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=-wyX_uba-o0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=global+environmental+governance+of+climate+change&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RqlhT4q1LIPU0QXeu9mjCA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=global%20environmental%20governance%20of%20climate%20change&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. United Nations Environment Programme. 2007. Global environment outlook: environment for development, GEO 4. UNEP/Earthprint. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WVauGYae-tEC&pg=PA377&dq=stakeholders+in+global+environmental+governance&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cPRhT6qREILS0QWi6vigCA&ved=0CFIQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=stakeholders%20in%20global%20environmental%20governance&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Winchester, N. B., 2009. Emerging Global Environmental Governance. Indian Journal of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 16, No. 1. [Online]. Available from: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1382&context=ijgls&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.ke%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3Dhas%2Bglobal%2Benvironmental%2Bgovernance%2Bsucceeded%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D16%26ved%3D0CFAQFjAFOAo%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.repository.law.indiana.edu%252Fcgi%252Fviewcontent.cgi%253Farticle%253D1382%2526context%253Dijgls%26ei%3DwcFhT9m3L4qY8QOK1vWWCA%26usg%3DAFQjCNE2nvBnt4PbVKlg74Fq_41K2XQzVg%26cad%3Drja#search=%22has%20global%20environmental%20governance%20succeeded%22 [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Winter, G., 2006. Multilevel Governance of Global Environmental Change: Perspectives from Science, Sociology and the Law. UK: Cambridge University Press. [Online]. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Lf0iU8KtItIC&pg=PA135&dq=stakeholders+in+global+environmental+governance&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cPRhT6qREILS0QWi6vigCA&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=stakeholders%20in%20global%20environmental%20governance&f=false [Accessed 15 March 2012]. Read More