From inst to gov part 1 2013
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


From inst to gov part 1 2013

Uploaded on


  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 421 421

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. From Institutions to Governance
  • 2. Why does this matter? Because governance is becomingincreasingly complex, and provides more space for self-organization! Compare with Folke et al (2005)
  • 3. Global changes in the politicallandscape Decentralization Public Private Partnerships Non-governmental organizations International agreements
  • 4. Centralized decision-makingCentral policy-maker (e.g. environmental Decision-makingministry) Implementation and monitoringRegional or local state authorities Local natural resource users Behavioral response
  • 5. Decision-making in complexgovernance systems International norms, agreements Central policy-maker (e.g. environmental ministry) Decision-making, implementation, negotiations, Non-state actors partnerships Regional or local state authorities Implementation, monitoring, negotiations, partnerships Decentralization Local natural resource users
  • 6. Adaptive Management Adaptive Co-management Holling (1978): AM, iterated process in the face ofuncertainty, experimentation, continuous evaluations Fikret Berkes and colleagues Co-management! Adaptive, learning, sharing of decision-making btw stakeholders
  • 7. Adaptive Governance Extension of adaptive co-management:* not place bound* can include and explore, several place boundattempts of ACM at the same time* polycentric* higher levels of social organization, up to global* explorative framework!
  • 8. Illustrations of adaptive governance
  • 9. Making Sense of Complexity in Governance All systems don’t look the same! Two main approaches i) Box typologies ii) Network typologies
  • 10. Box typology, example - Urban Governance Jon Pierre Participants Objectives Instruments Outcomes .....
  • 11. Box typology, example 1999388 URBAN AFFAIRS REVIEW / January - Urban GovernanceTABLE 1: Models of Urban Governance: Defining Characteristics Models of Urban GovernanceDefining Characteristics Managerial Corporatist Progrowth WelfarePolicy objectives Efficiency Distribution Growth RedistributionPolicy style Pragmatic Ideological Pragmatic IdeologicalNature of political exchange Consensus Conflict Consensus ConflictNature of public-private exchange Competitive Concerted Interactive RestrictiveLocal state-citizen relationship Exclusive Inclusive Exclusive InclusivePrimary contingency Professionals Civic leaders Business The stateKey instruments Contracts Deliberations Partnerships NetworksPattern of subordination Positive Negative Positive NegativeKey evaluative criterion Efficiency Participation Growth Equity From Pierre (1999), Urban Affairs Review
  • 12. ii) Network typologies - polycentric systems Vincent OstromPolycentric systems - manycenters of decision making that areformally independent of each other.“Many elements are capable ofmaking mutual adjustments forordering their relationships withone another within a generalsystem of rules where eachelement acts with independence ofother elements.”
  • 13. ocean acidification climate changemarine biodiversity
  • 14. UNEP World Bank IUCN UNESCO WorldFish Centre Global Forum on Oceans Coasts and Islands ICES FAO UN OceanICRI GPA-Marine PacFa
  • 15. FAO WB World Fish UNEP
  • 16. Other examples Cybersecurity Climate policy Urban governance
  • 17. What do we want “adaptive governance” to achieve? “The Problem of Fit”