160
7.5.2.1 Multi-scale
First, multi-scale aspects include the possible need to shift scales – rescale – and
deal with problems that go beyond existing geographical boundaries. There is no
universal model here. Functional spaces may differ between risk areas, which can
lead to considerable problems for the governance system. ‘In short, the interaction
space needs to be congruent with the problem space’ (Voss et al. 2006a : 427). It is
more the rule than the exception that environmental risks are transnational in character, implying that the robust handling of such risks necessitates the parallel development of new kinds of political and regulatory arenas, frameworks, actors and
interactions that better correspond with the problem structures (cf. Lidskog et al.
2009 ). The cases of overfi shing and eutrophication are most clearly regional problems and collective bads , which require regional collaboration. Yet, existing regulatory failures in these areas (see relevant chapters in the book) are not only due to the
fact that the Baltic Sea countries are different. They are also due to the fact that
these countries are affected differently, which poses more challenges to joint collaboration at the regional level. Depending on the size of costs and benefi ts
(increased/improved ecosystem services ), governments tend to adopt somewhat
different strategies and have different ambitions when it comes to implementation,
monitoring and enforcement.
Key EU directives and strategies may help to establish a regional approach to
problem handling. We see in the cases of agriculture (Karlsson et al. 2016 ) and fi shing (Sellke et al. 2016 ) a comparatively integrated approach at the European level
to problem handling. A platform exists for the search for improved environmental
risk governance. The EU can thus potentially help to move beyond a merely national
view on what are regional problems. The fact that Baltic Sea countries have joined
the EU in different enlargement phases and thus have had unequal amounts of time
to adapt to EU regulations and practices, and also have very different political and
economic backgrounds, makes it complicated to assess the full impact of the
EU. One stated problem is that the relatively centralised EU regulatory framework
has prevented sustainable regional solutions in these two sectors, although there are
signs of regionalisation in the case of overfi shing .
The cases of invasive alien species , oil spills and chemical pollution (see relevant Smolarz et al. 2016 ; Karlsson et al. 2016 ; Hassler 2016 ) exemplify regional
risks relating to global fl ows of raw material, products and people. The management
of these risks is more than in the other cases dependent on linking regional governance to global frameworks. For example, there are some elements in the European
chemical regulation that serve to combine regional governance with a global kind
of horizontal governance (along global product chains). Importers (public and private) need to be better aware of the chemical contents in products, which in turn
means that they have to facilitate steering mechanisms, dialogue and information
sharing with suppliers in other parts of the world (Boström et al. 2012 ; Boström and
Karlsson 2013 ). However, this kind of combination of regional/global as well as
vertical/horizontal aspects of governance is only in an embryonic stage. There is
still a strong unmet demand for institutional/international cooperation.
M. Boström et al.
7.5.2.1 Multi-scale
First, multi-scale aspects include the possible need to shift scales – rescale – and
deal with problems that go beyond existing geographical boundaries. There is no
universal model here. Functional spaces may differ between risk areas, which can
lead to considerable problems for the governance system. ‘In short, the interaction
space needs to be congruent with the problem space’ (Voss et al. 2006a : 427). It is
more the rule than the exception that environmental risks are transnational in character, implying that the robust handling of such risks necessitates the parallel development of new kinds of political and regulatory arenas, frameworks, actors and
interactions that better correspond with the problem structures (cf. Lidskog et al.
2009 ). The cases of overfi shing and eutrophication are most clearly regional problems and collective bads , which require regional collaboration. Yet, existing regulatory failures in these areas (see relevant chapters in the book) are not only due to the
fact that the Baltic Sea countries are different. They are also due to the fact that
these countries are affected differently, which poses more challenges to joint collaboration at the regional level. Depending on the size of costs and benefi ts
(increased/improved ecosystem services ), governments tend to adopt somewhat
different strategies and have different ambitions when it comes to implementation,
monitoring and enforcement.
Key EU directives and strategies may help to establish a regional approach to
problem handling. We see in the cases of agriculture (Karlsson et al. 2016 ) and fi shing (Sellke et al. 2016 ) a comparatively integrated approach at the European level
to problem handling. A platform exists for the search for improved environmental
risk governance. The EU can thus potentially help to move beyond a merely national
view on what are regional problems. The fact that Baltic Sea countries have joined
the EU in different enlargement phases and thus have had unequal amounts of time
to adapt to EU regulations and practices, and also have very different political and
economic backgrounds, makes it complicated to assess the full impact of the
EU. One stated problem is that the relatively centralised EU regulatory framework
has prevented sustainable regional solutions in these two sectors, although there are
signs of regionalisation in the case of overfi shing .
The cases of invasive alien species , oil spills and chemical pollution (see relevant Smolarz et al. 2016 ; Karlsson et al. 2016 ; Hassler 2016 ) exemplify regional
risks relating to global fl ows of raw material, products and people. The management
of these risks is more than in the other cases dependent on linking regional governance to global frameworks. For example, there are some elements in the European
chemical regulation that serve to combine regional governance with a global kind
of horizontal governance (along global product chains). Importers (public and private) need to be better aware of the chemical contents in products, which in turn
means that they have to facilitate steering mechanisms, dialogue and information
sharing with suppliers in other parts of the world (Boström et al. 2012 ; Boström and
Karlsson 2013 ). However, this kind of combination of regional/global as well as
vertical/horizontal aspects of governance is only in an embryonic stage. There is
still a strong unmet demand for institutional/international cooperation.
M. Boström et al.