Search

The environment acquis are, by common consent, amongst the most technically and politically demanding that a state aspiring to EU membership must transpose. SEE states confront a major ‘gap’ between the policies and institutions they have and what they must achieve. Transposition requires the creation of policy networks involving a broad range of state and non-state actors. This paper examines the efforts of Croatia and Macedonia to adapt to EU environmental policy. Using social network analysis the paper focuses on institutional creation and evolution and argues that effective governance depends on the prior creation of effective hierarchies. Networks exist but capacities and capabilities are in short supply and this reinforces the centre and government over civil society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With this paper I seek to identify the conditions under which a shift occurs from hierarchical decision making towards new modes of environmental governance in a case of weak statehood (Bosnia-Herzegovina), where an external agency (the EU) exerts significant influence alongside foreign consultants and international financial institutions (the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development--EBRD). The Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) undertaken as part of the development of the trans-European road network across the country are used here as case studies for examining emerging patterns of environmental governance in a state under the shadow of EU conditionality. The data suggest that whilst over a period of time the adoption of new EU-compliant formal procedures and frameworks (eg, EIA laws) does seem to be generating new modes of governance interaction and citizen involvement, the impact is contingent upon the critical didactic role played by (in this case) the EBRD in making the formal procedures effective and in building knowledge capacity within the state administration. Thus, a simple correlation between EU conditionality and substantive political change cannot be assumed, particularly where state agencies possess limited policy knowledge and nonstate actors (environmental NGOs) lack mobilisation capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]