52
3 Governance: Solving or Reproducing Inequalities
procedural aspects (e.g., procedures for decision-making, enforcement, and dispute
settlement) (Dimitrov et al. 2007). At the international level, regimes are generally
assumed to lead to a process of learning conducive to convergent policies (Haas 1989,
p. 377). They are expected to promote rule-consistent behavior from governments
and non-state actors (Rittberger 1993, p. 11).
Several competing or synergistic regimes may co-exist in the same issue-area
(e.g., biodiversity, climate change), possibly based on different norms and involving
different actors (Biermann et al. 2009a). This observation has drawn research to a
broader level of analysis, that of governance architectures (Biermann et al. 2009b).
Architecture refers to the whole interlocking web of institutions at all levels in a
given issue-area, possibly comprising several regimes (Biermann et al. 2009b, p. 31).
Alternatively, there may be issue-areas where no regime has been formed (Dimitrov
et al. 2007). Furthermore, there may be instances of “non-governance”, where no
institutions have been agreed upon and concerted behavior does not exist (Bastos
Lima and Gupta 2013).
In order to identify such instances, however, it may be necessary first to define
governance. Although it has no single, consensual definition, governance generally
implies managing collective affairs beyond only governments only and including
non-state actors.
1 The Commission on Global Governance (1995, p. 2) stated that
Governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private,
manage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse
interests may be accommodated and cooperative action may be taken.
Thus, unlike regimes, governance does not necessarily require consensus—it can
have room for many social actors making competing rules. Still, it can be argued
that governance refers to a qualified type of institutional framework, not just any
institutional landscape. Rosenau (1992, p. 4) has argued that both government and
governance
[R]efer to purposive behaviour, to goal-oriented activities, and to systems of rule, but government suggests activities that are backed by formal authority whereas governance refers to
activities backed by shared goals that may or may not derive from formally prescribed
responsibilities and do not require police powers to ensure compliance.
That argumentation is in line with the definition of earth system governance,
described as
[T]he interrelated and increasingly integrated system of formal and informal rules, rulemaking systems, and actor-networks at all levels of human society (from local to global) that
are set up to steer societies towards preventing, mitigating, and adapting to global and local
environmental change and, in particular, earth system transformation, within the normative
context of sustainable development. (Biermann et al. 2009b, p. 4, emphasis added)
1 See Biermann and Pattberg (2008) for a review of the concept and a variety of meanings.
3 Governance: Solving or Reproducing Inequalities
procedural aspects (e.g., procedures for decision-making, enforcement, and dispute
settlement) (Dimitrov et al. 2007). At the international level, regimes are generally
assumed to lead to a process of learning conducive to convergent policies (Haas 1989,
p. 377). They are expected to promote rule-consistent behavior from governments
and non-state actors (Rittberger 1993, p. 11).
Several competing or synergistic regimes may co-exist in the same issue-area
(e.g., biodiversity, climate change), possibly based on different norms and involving
different actors (Biermann et al. 2009a). This observation has drawn research to a
broader level of analysis, that of governance architectures (Biermann et al. 2009b).
Architecture refers to the whole interlocking web of institutions at all levels in a
given issue-area, possibly comprising several regimes (Biermann et al. 2009b, p. 31).
Alternatively, there may be issue-areas where no regime has been formed (Dimitrov
et al. 2007). Furthermore, there may be instances of “non-governance”, where no
institutions have been agreed upon and concerted behavior does not exist (Bastos
Lima and Gupta 2013).
In order to identify such instances, however, it may be necessary first to define
governance. Although it has no single, consensual definition, governance generally
implies managing collective affairs beyond only governments only and including
non-state actors.
1 The Commission on Global Governance (1995, p. 2) stated that
Governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private,
manage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse
interests may be accommodated and cooperative action may be taken.
Thus, unlike regimes, governance does not necessarily require consensus—it can
have room for many social actors making competing rules. Still, it can be argued
that governance refers to a qualified type of institutional framework, not just any
institutional landscape. Rosenau (1992, p. 4) has argued that both government and
governance
[R]efer to purposive behaviour, to goal-oriented activities, and to systems of rule, but government suggests activities that are backed by formal authority whereas governance refers to
activities backed by shared goals that may or may not derive from formally prescribed
responsibilities and do not require police powers to ensure compliance.
That argumentation is in line with the definition of earth system governance,
described as
[T]he interrelated and increasingly integrated system of formal and informal rules, rulemaking systems, and actor-networks at all levels of human society (from local to global) that
are set up to steer societies towards preventing, mitigating, and adapting to global and local
environmental change and, in particular, earth system transformation, within the normative
context of sustainable development. (Biermann et al. 2009b, p. 4, emphasis added)
1 See Biermann and Pattberg (2008) for a review of the concept and a variety of meanings.