• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Governance and Complexity, Part II
 

Governance and Complexity, Part II

on

  • 1,466 views

Lecture, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, part II. By Victor Galaz

Lecture, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, part II. By Victor Galaz

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,466
Views on SlideShare
1,466
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
3
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel

Governance and Complexity, Part II Governance and Complexity, Part II Presentation Transcript

  • The Quest for the Governance Möbius Strip
  • Adaptive Management Adaptive management management approach that promotes experimentation, and hypothesis testing. e.g. Everglades, Florida
  • Adaptive co-management Adaptive co-management; a combination that promotes multilevel institutional linkages, shared responsibility between a diversity of actors, combination of knowledge sources, as well as learning. (Olsson et. al. 2004, Berkes et. al. 2003)
  • Example: Kristianstad (SE), Krüger Park (SA), Bali water temples (Indonesia), Tiszra (Central Europe),… Network based governance relies heavily on social coordination and control, collective sanctions and reputations -> requires repeated interactions, restricting the numbers of actors in networks, often geographical proximity.
  • Fish and Ebola virus
  • Climate change Agro- ecosystems Coral reef Increased bushmeat hunting Fish stock decrease
  • Too Good to be True? “High Reliability Organizations” - organizations with the capacity to cope with both incremental change and catastrophic surprises.
  • Capacity to collect and analyze very large amounts of information, detect early warning signals, and facilitate fast coordination of large number of actors. Decision-making dependent on the type of change in environment. High capacity for learning after crises, strong incentives to report and take initiatives to repair mistakes and cope with surprises.
  • Global Environmental Governance after Kyoto 1. Weak signals bring about strong action 2. Decision-making dependent on type of change. 3. High investment in learning after “near-misses” and crises Think about the political challenges…
  • Successful crisis response require Early warnings (knowledge integration) • • Sense making (”What’s going on?”) • Prompt coordination and response • Crisis termination (”normal state”) • Learning and reform All this needs to be done despite institutional fragmentation, multilevel challenges, high uncertainty, and limited time to act.
  • Is it possible? Governing Epidemics Bild epidemics
  • Bubonic Plage, Surat (India)1994 In 1994 the spread of bubonic plague in the city of Surat deaths of 57 people, significant economic losses, and How small innovations and social and political effects. Over perceived crisis makes a 300,000 people deserted the city (in two days!) global difference!
  • ”atypical pneumonia”, ”unknown respiratory disease”
  • WHO Country A Country B
  • Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network (GOARN) - Collaboration between over 120 actors (governments, ministries, laboratories, NGO’s) - prompt coordination to secure fast response (SARS, Ebola, bird flu m.m.)
  • Pre-crises phase
  • Warning Confirmation phase
  • Warning Response phase
  • Not just theory… ”Early response” coordinators - legal frameworks that allow actors to act (e.g. International Health Regulations) - unhindered information flows between a diversity of actors, from local to global. - informal, personal contacts and trust, and ”low-tech” interactions.
  • We are far away from such a system… WHO/GOARN UNEP Division for Early Warning and Assement Early warnings: builds on both ”formal” and ”informal data” (GPHIN, ProMed). 1,1 builds on both formal data Early warnings: million Euro/Yr only. Acknowledged bias and lack of Response: Prompt in collaboration with WHO, regional offices, NGO’s,data. 77,5 million Euro/yr health ministries, technical labs. Response: Recommendations to Tools: coordinating arenas, adhoc groups, secure or non-existing governments -> slow webpages, teleconferences. Constant Tools: assessments, facilitation of ”disturbances”. knowledge production (GEO-4, etc.)
  • We are far away from such a system… The role of knowledge Early warnings - multiple knowledge domains and disciplines. Uncertainty is very high. Continous updates necessary. I. Infectious disease - ecological sciences, climate change, human medicine, veterinary sciences, urbanization experts, etc. II. Drivers and impacts of ”agflation” - financial market specialists, vulnerability experts, ecologists, crisis management scholars, biofuel experts, water management scholars, agricultural experts.
  • We are far away from such a system… The role of knowledge • Academics work in disciplinary ”silos” - incentives • Governments organizations work in ”silos”- efficiency • Local communities and NGO’s with detailed knowledge about social context, ecosystem change, and adaptive strategies not always integrated - mistrust, efficiency • Business community not targeted/not interested Incremental change gives room for mistakes. Abrupt irreversable ecological change does not.
  • The Dynamics of Early Warnings http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4rq53Ztvbg
  • No repeated global assessment of ecosystem change (c.f. IPCC) Fragmented social, economical and ecological Is there any hope? data – trends impossible, geographic gaps. Economic evaluation of ES incl. GEO-4, 'tipping points' not included.
  • International Panel for Ecosystem Services (IPES)?
  • Both incremental change and abrupt surprising change including cascading dynamics
  • Eco ”tipping points” A change at the tipping point sets in motion mutually reinforcing feedback loops that propel the system on a completely new course.
  • Governance for innovation • Innovation research tends to focus on innovations in business and technical systems • Can they be applied for SES innovations? • Institutional context? Policy interventions? • Global orchestration?
  • Summing up • Solutions at the interface - technology, ecology and social sphere • Positive ”tipping points” - escalating improvements, not only crises. • Quality of Governance - include dynamics of SES. • Information technology could have revolutionary impact on governance. • Building on past successes - HRO, WHO, prompt global actions. IPES!
  • Thank you! victor.galaz@stockholmresilience.su.se