Search

In recent years the United Nations Environment Program, UN Conference on Environment and Development, and other international organizations have acknowledged the importance of civil society for engaging stakeholders in environmental change--especially at the local community level--and in promoting democracy. (1) In Russia, efforts by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to promote reform since 1991 have aimed at achieving both objectives and face numerous political, legal, and attitudinal hurdles. This article examines these hurdles and the factors that facilitate development of an environmentally conscious civil society in Russia through analysis of the views of 100 representatives of environmental NGOs, news media, scientific community, corporations, and public agencies. We also investigate three abbreviated but illustrative vignettes that illuminate civil society impediments. Our thesis is that successful efforts to ensure adequate protection of Russia's environment require a strengthening of civil society. KEY WORDS: civil society, energy, environment, governance, pollution, Civil Society and Environment in Russia--Context and Perspective The importance of a robust civil society (2) for democratization and policy reform is gaining recognition among students of post-Communist polities struggling [...]

Introduction In the United States, all levels of government manage waste. Protecting the public from waste-related hazards fails within the constitutional powers granted to states and their creations (cities, towns, [...]

Abstract: Knowledge networks are a recent innovation in global environmental governance. They provide a means for local and regional initiatives aimed at averting, mitigating, or adapting to climate change and other trans-boundary problems to join together in a system that: permits sharing of experiences, diffuses policy innovation across national borders, and spans divergent disciplinary boundaries so as to better communicate science to local decision-makers. We consider the role currently played by networks and the possibility that, over time, their soft power characteristics – a reliance on value change and policy emulation – may eventually place them in a position to globally coordinate local and regional environmental policy innovations. If successful, their efforts might supplant the need for national action to address climate change, even if they do not replace the nation-state system whose environmental management efforts will continue to rely on hard power: the use, primarily, of economic incentives to induce policy change. “ICLEI provides technical consulting, training, and information services to build capacity, share knowledge, and support local government in the implementation of sustainable development at the local level. Our basic premise is that locally designed initiatives can provide an effective and cost-efficient way to achieve local, national, and global sustainability objectives.” –International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives – website, 2010 “When California passed its global warming law two years ago, we were out there on an island, so we started forming partnerships everywhere we could. We teamed up with Great Britain, the Canadian provinces, and the Western and Northeastern states and with states like those of my co hosts – Illinois, Florida, Kansas, Wisconsin and more. And right here, for the first time, we have officials from China, India, Mexico, Brazil, and Indonesia and across the world in the same summit, working toward the same goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and growing green economies in our own backyards.” –Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Global Climate Summit. Los Angeles, California. November 18, 2008. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Analyzes public policy for the management of climate change. Interface between nature and public policy; Constraints and opportunities associated with global policy programs; Montreal protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer; Tradeoffs between economic and the environment.

States and regions provide flexibility and innovation in managing climate change. This is exemplified by energy conservation, transportation, forestry, land use, regional planning, waste management policiesand programmes to promote lifestyle changes. Problematically, however, sub-national government roles vary considerably among countries, depending on the division of authority between central government and regions. For example, in federal systems such as the USA, states can serve as policy `laboratories'. This may be less true in unitary systems. We explore sources of this variation and its significance for understanding sub-national climate change activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]