The Existing System of International Environmental Governance - Essay Example

Running head: Intеrnаtiоnаl Envirоnmеntаl Gоvеrnаnсе Can Never Be Effесtive Student’s name Institution Course Professor Date Introduction International environmental governance (IEG) comprises the sum of all environmental agencies, policies, frameworks, financial mechanisms and procedures regulating global environmental protection. Comprehensive institutional IEG machinery has been built, but the environmental sustainability is far from being achieved. Peichert, (2007), argues that despite the high machinery of IEG the state of environment seems not to have improved. While the system of global environmental governance is growing in scope and size it has not been effective in its main role of improving conditions of global environment as a measure towards attainment of sustainable development, (Simon, 2012). It has also not even reversed major trends of environmental degradation. This is a threat to human survival since Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change shows that continual climatic degradation is a threat to both the current and future generation. The existing system of international environmental governance is ineffective in the achievement of its goals. There are various challenges within it that makes it never to be effective in achievement of its roles and objectives. This essay analyses the factors that has and will make the governance never to be effective. Some of the factors include, lack of corporation and coordination among international environmental agencies, fragmentation of IEG system and proliferation of multilateral environmental agreements, lack of implementation, enforcement, compliance and effectiveness, inefficient use and management of financial resources, lack of mainstreaming environmental concerns among other concerns. These factors individually and collectively make international environmental governance never to be effective in its roles. Description and analysis Lack of cooperation and good coordination among international environmental agencies makes it ineffective in carrying out their duties. Given the fact that environmental problematic issues are global problems, there is high need of coordination and cooperation among different agencies and nations fighting to achieve environmental sustainability. The emergence of different global bodies has made it hard to coordinate and cooperate with other organisations. Many organisations in this sector have made it hard for IEG to have general policy guidance in the field of environment. This makes it not to have a clear direction on what it intends to achieve hence affecting its performance. United Nations environmental programme (UNEP) has failed to bring the necessary guidance and leadership necessary for coordination of environmental issues. As the umbrella body of international environmental governance, UNEP has the mandate of coordinating all environmental matters given that it has the support of United Nations countries, (Nagai, 2009). There are over 30 agencies in UN that deal with environmental matters has made it impossible to coordinate. Failure of provision of political support and enough materials has made it impossible for UNEP to perform its work. Emergence of turf wars among various environmental agencies due to poor leadership and cooperation makes it hard for international environmental governance to be effective. Formulation of effective policies, laws and agreements among various international countries and environmental organisations without coordination and cooperation in their implementation is a big headache in realisation of environmental sustainability, (Skodvin & Andresen, 2006). The champion of self-interest and goals by different states and environmental agencies is a great challenge that seems hard to solve in the near future. These problems of lack of effective cooperation and coordination on environmental matters will make international environmental governance never to be effective in their roles and objectives. The fragmentation of the IEG system and proliferation of multinational environmental agreements is hindrance to effectiveness of international environmental governance. The challenges of environmental treaty congestion, national report overloading, institutional fragmentation, duplication and conflicting agendas and fragmented roles of science are great challenge in workability of IEG. Many agreements (more than 500 multilateral environmental agreements MEAs) have been signed among United Nations, (Knigge 2005, Roch and Perrez 2005, Najam, Papaet al. 2006). Too many agreements create problems in their implementation and coordination. Fragmentation leads to conflicting agendas, incompatibility and inconsistency in agreements hence difficulties in implementation. The high geographical distributions of different secretaries and stakeholders in environmental agencies creates reporting constraints, high financial burdens, minimise interaction and cooperation. The developing countries find it hard to cope with financial burdens resulting from the need to cope with the demands of many institutions and treaty agreements, (Biermann, 2011). Fragmentation and proliferation will make international environmental governance never to be effective in their functions. This is because it creates big challenges in their functionality. To deal with this problem is nearly impossible making it a big challenge to the achievement of environmental sustainability. The lack of implementation (enforcement, compliance and effectiveness) of environmental policies, laws, norms and agreements is key factor in making international environmental governance never to be effective, (Michael, 2005). IEG system is very good in negotiating and coming up with agreements rather than being an implementation system. It lacks good enforcement mechanisms, and has low performance in ground. Many treaties have been created within the international environmental governance arena but there have been little follow-up in their performance. Implementation deficit is due to lack of enforcement mechanism and absence of compliance enforcement mechanisms. This has made implementation of agreements to depend mainly on goodwill of the members. Politicization of agreements and policies among different nations prevent their implementation, (Andersen, 2001). Emergence of north-south division on view on environmental matters prevents their implementation, (Hovi, Skodvin & Andresen, 2003). Developing countries are more concern about coming up with economic development measures rather than looking into environmental sustainability. Some countries lack political will to implement environmental laws and policies while others wants to maintain the status quo. Generally, without implementation of environmental laws no step towards the realisation of environmental sustainability is made. Lack of turning agreements into practicability is a contributing factors making international environmental governance never to be effective. Lack of financial resource contributes to failure of international environmental governance, (Ekbom et al, 2012). Financial are key to running any project or activity. International governance requires high finance resources to run all of their activities. For instance, resources are required in negotiation and implementation of agreements, putting in place preventive measures towards pollution, sensitising the population on environmental matters among other areas. Lack of funds to environmental agencies is an obstacle to their functionality. Majority of these agencies depends on donations and government funding to carry out their functions. Many governments consider investing on economic activities rather than environmental sustainability measures. This is because they look at funding hunger reduction, job creation, infrastructure and education as too demanding than on environment. This makes it hard for international environmental governance institutions to have enough funding to carry out their functions. Lack of funds hinders effective international environmental governance. Many of its institutions will achieve little with no funds. Given the current trend where little funding is directed towards these institutions, no internal fund generation by these institutions and the high need for funds by these institutions means if the trend continuous much will not be achieved. Lack of mainstreaming environmental concerns and ever-emerging technology is another hindrance to their functionality. Many environmental pollutants or threats mainly result from other areas of the economy like trade, security, industrialisation and development and not directly from environmental variables. These sectors highly influence the success in the realisation of environmental sustainability. Many of the international environmental governance institutions and mechanisms have found it hard to incorporate these sectors successfully in their functioning. Lack of mainstreaming of these sectors into environmental matters makes it hard to achieve success, (Falkner, 2011). The ever-emergence of new forms of technologies comes with different forms of pollution that require new means of dealing with them. New forms of challenges and environmental threats mean that IEG can never achieve to be effective. As it tries to cope with current forms of environmental threats, industrialisations and innovations comes with other forms making it hard to find solutions for environmental solutions. This has made it hard to have lasting solutions to environmental threats. These challenges of ever-emerging technologies and impossibilities in mainstreaming all other sectors to effective come up with means of dealing with environmental threats means international environmental governance will never be effective. Conclusion Challenges existing in the operations of international environmental governance are the main reasons why it can never be effective in their objectives of realisation of environmental sustainability. Despite achieving some success, international environmental governance has never been effective in its operations. Poor leadership in international environmental governance has resulted into poor cooperation and coordination of their activities making it ineffective. Fragmentation and proliferation of institutions and treaties makes the performance of functions by various environmental agencies ineffective since agenda are too many, inconsistent and require more resources in their running. It also makes it hard to have a clear guidance and leadership in implementation of policies and measures. Lack of implementation of treaties and environmental policies and laws is a challenge since more treaties, agreements remain to be paper work, and very little steps are only made towards sustainability. Other challenges like lack of policy mainstreaming, lack of funds and ever-emergence of new forms of technologies makes international environmental governance ineffective. Given that it is hard for permanent and complete solutions to these problems international environmental governance will never be effective. Reference Andresen, S., 2001. “Global Environmental Governance: UN Fragmentation and Co-ordination.” In Yearbook of International Co-operation on Environment and Development 2001/2002.London: Earthscan Publications, 19–26. Bierman, F. 2011. Reforming Global Environmental governance:The Case for a United Nations Environment Organisation (UNEO). The Netherlands: VU University Amsterdam, . Esty, Daniel C., and Porter, Michael E. 2005. “National Environmental Perfor-mance: An Empirical Analysis of Policy Results and Determinants” in Environ-ment and Development Economics 10 (4): 391-434. Falkner. 2011. Structural Impediments to Effective International Environmental Governance. . London: London School of Economics. Gunilla Ölund Wingqvist, Olof Drakenberg, Daniel Slunge Martin Sjöstedt, Anders Ekbom, 2012. The role of governance for improved environmental outcomes.The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency . Hovi, J., Skodvin, T. & Andresen, S. 2003. The persistence of the Kyoto Protocol: Why other Annex 1countries move on without the United States. Global Environmental Politics, 3(4), 1-24. . Knigge ,2005. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policy. Boston, Addison Wesley. . Masa Nagai , 2009. Envoronmental governance. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi, kenya. Najam, A., M. Papa, et al. 2006. Global Environmental Governance: A Reform Agenda. Winnipeg, CA, International Institute for Sustainable Development. . Peichert, H. 2007. International Environmental Governance. London: Chatham House Workshop . Roch, P. and F. X. Perrez, 2005. "International Environmental Governance." Colorado Journal of International Law and Policy 16(1). Simon, N. 2012. International Environmental Governance for 21st century. Berlin: Germany Institute for International and Security Affairs. Skodvin T. & Andresen, S. 2006. Leadership revisited. Global Environmental Politics, Special Issue: theNegotiations and Effectiveness of International Environmental Agreements, 6(3), 13-28. . Read More