Biodiversity laws: State experiences

The Western Governors' Association (WGA) includes both the public lands states with their issues and the plains states, which are 98% privately owned. WGA deals with most legislation affecting biodiversity, whether the effect is direct or tangential. It will probably not be possible, or desirable, for one entity to be in charge of biodiversity conservation. The Endangered Species Act, public lands laws, agricultural laws, water law, environmental laws, and funding legislation all affect biodiversity conservation and the responsibility for it. None of them on their own are enough, and most can cause harmful unintended consequences for biodiversity. The experience of western states in developing consensus principles for reauthorization of the Endangered Species Act provides an example of common-sense ways to improve management of biodiversity, notwithstanding the complexity and large stakes involved. The WGA's proposed changes call for increasing the role of states, streamlining the act, and increasing certainty for landowners and water users. To achieve sustainable conservation for biodiversity, the better question is not “Who is/should be in charge?”, it is “How do we get this done?” To answer this, we need goals, guidance, and bottom lines from federal laws, and management and oversight at the state level, but they all need to support local on-the-ground partnerships. Sustainable conservation requires the active participation of those who live there. WGA's experience in coordinating the Great Plains Partnership as well as its work with watershed efforts shed light on what to expect. Multilevel partnerships are not easy and require a different way of doing business. The ad hoc, sitespecific processes that result do not lend themselves to being legislated, fit into organizational boxes, or scored on a budget sheet. They do require common sense and a longterm perspective.     

The role of corporations in ensuring biodiversity

Corporations own approximately 25% of all private land in the United States and, therefore, play an essential role in protecting biodiversity and maintaining natural habitats. The Wildlife Habitat Council (WHC) is a unique joint venture between conservation organizations and corporations to utilize corporate lands for ensuring biodiversity. The following case studies demonstrate how corporations have helped ensure healthy ecosystems and provided critical leadership in regional efforts. Amoco Chemical Company's Cooper River Plant has been instrumental in developing a cooperative project that involves numerous corporations, plantation owners, private citizens, nonprofit organizations, government agencies, and community groups to develop a comprehensive, ecosystem-based management plan for part of the Cooper River in Charleston, South Carolina, USA. The second case focuses on the Morie Company, a national sand quarry operator headquartered in southern New Jersey, USA. Morie Company is working with WHC, community groups, the Pinelands Commission, and other state regulatory agencies to explore sustainable development opportunities for companies within the Pinelands regulations. The third case takes us to DuPont Company's Asturias, Spain, site. A win—win success story of improved habitat and cost savings is the result of DuPont's concern for the environment, ability to work with a variety of groups, and willingness to consider innovative restoration techniques. The fourth case discusses Consumers Power Company's Campbell Plant in West Olive, Michigan, USA. In addition to implementing projects that contribute to biodiversity, Consumers Power has developed an environmental education field station to teach others about the importance of natural habitats. The final case highlights Baltimore Gas & Electric Company's efforts to maintain habitat for endangered species at their Calvert Cliffs site in Maryland.     

Enhanced learning from multi-stakeholder partnerships: Lessons from the Enabling Rural Innovation in Africa programme

Despite increasing interest and support for multi‐stakeholder partnerships, empirical applications of participatory evaluation approaches to enhance learning from partnerships are either uncommon or undocumented. This paper draws lessons on the use of participatory self‐reflective approaches that facilitate structured learning on processes and outcomes of partnerships. Such practice is important to building partnerships, because it helps partners understand how they can develop more collaborative and responsive ways of managing partnerships. The paper is based on experience with the Enabling Rural Innovation (ERI) in Africa programme. Results highlight the dynamic process of partnership formation and the key elements that contribute to success. These include: (i) shared vision and complementarity, (ii) consistent support from senior leadership; (iii) evidence of institutional and individual benefits; (iv) investments in human and social capital; (v) joint resources mobilization. However, key challenges require coping with high staff turnover and over‐commitment, conflicting personalities and institutional differences, high transaction costs, and sustaining partnerships with the private business sector. The paper suggests that institutionalizing multi‐stakeholder partnerships requires participatory reflective practices that help structure and enhance learning, and incrementally help in building the capacity of research and development organisations to partner better and ultimately to innovate.     

有效参与城市生活垃圾治理的途径探讨

随着城市化进程加快,城市生活垃圾问题越来越严重。本文根据“利益相关者管理”理论提出参与治理途径来解决城市生活垃圾问题,并且对参与治理城市生活垃圾进行了深入分析。最后从实践角度讨论了参与治理的制度安排和模式选择。     

Building partnerships — the Ohio Materials Exchange

This paper discusses a method by which individuals working in government, private business, not-for-profit and educational organizations developed a collaborative statewide program involving the exchange of materials from manufacturers, commercial business and not-for-profit organizations in Ohio.     

Catalyzing Collaboration: Wisconsin’s Agency-Initiated Basin Partnerships

Experience with collaborative approaches to natural resource and environmental management has grown substantially over the past 20 years, and multi-interest, shared-resources initiatives have become prevalent in the United States and internationally. Although often viewed as “grass-roots” and locally initiated, governmental participants are crucial to the success of collaborative efforts, and important questions remain regarding their appropriate roles, including roles in partnership initiation. In the midst of growing governmental support for collaborative approaches in the mid-1990s, the primary natural resource and environmental management agency in Wisconsin (USA) attempted to generate a statewide system of self-sustaining, collaborative partnerships, organized around the state’s river basin boundaries. The agency expected the partnerships to enhance participation by stakeholders, leverage additional resources, and help move the agency toward more integrated and ecosystem-based resource management initiatives. Most of the basin partnerships did form and function, but ten years after this initiative, the agency has moved away from these partnerships and half have disbanded. Those that remain active have changed, but continue to work closely with agency staff. Those no longer functioning lacked clear focus, were dependent upon agency leadership, or could not overcome issues of scale. This article outlines the context for state support of collaborative initiatives and explores Wisconsin’s experience with basin partnerships by discussing their formation and reviewing governmental roles in partnerships’ emergence and change. Wisconsin’s experience suggests benefits from agency support and agency responsiveness to partnership opportunities, but cautions about expectations for initiating general-purpose partnerships.     

The mining industry and the community: joining forces for sustainable social development

This article joins the continuing policy debate over the social responsibility of corporations, particularly in the mining industry. The author argues that the 'old school mining orthodoxy'—approaching the exploitation of mineral deposits solely from the technical and economic points of view—is long dead. Mining companies must also encompass the social dimension.
New policies for the mining industry are discussed in terms of recent worldwide trends and movements, e.g. globalization, economic interdependence and decentralization of governmental authority, and the rise of civil society as a political factor. These trends, together with the United Nations policies in quest of sustainable development and the consensus expressed at international conferences during the last decade, have deepened social awareness and set the stage for enhanced social responsiveness from the private sector. Socially responsible corporate policies include decentralization of decision-making to the field level, reaching out to stakeholders and shareholders, supporting governments which provide official development assistance for good governance and building broad partnerships to reduce social exposures.     

Environmental leapfrogging in developing countries: A critical assessment and reconstruction

It has been suggested in recent years that developing countries need not pass through the dirty stages of industrial growth that marred the past of today's developed countries. Instead, they may be able to bypass these by leapfrogging straight to modern, clean technologies as an integral part of capacity addition. This article critically reviews existing approaches to leapfrogging. It argues that they are not only characterized by considerable ambiguity, but also based on an incomplete understanding of the technological and policy requirements of cleaner industrialization. Consequently, the article goes on to offer a number of suggestions as to how current approaches might be advanced so as to better meet the challenge of leapfrogging. Amongst these suggestions is greater clarification of the specific targets for leapfrogging and policy intervention to accelerate the development of technological capabilities needed to select, absorb and innovate leapfrog technologies.     

“A Kiss Here and a Kiss There”: Conflict and Collaboration in Environmental Partnerships

Multistakeholder collaboration in the environmental realm has been increasing steadily over the past decade. This trend is responding to several stimuli, including dissatisfaction with current regulatory regimes, a liberal economic climate emphasizing global competitiveness and short-term returns, and the growing roles of the business and nongovernmental organization sectors in the environmental policy arena. This paper grows out of ethnographic research conducted between 1994 and 1998 with four environmental partnerships in Europe and the United States. The research found all of these partnerships to be marked by practices of conflict minimization and diffusion. Drawing upon illustrative data from one of these case studies, a European Union level initiative aimed at enabling sustainable development in Europe, the paper asks why this was the case, especially given the diverse political and economic interests at stake and the history of contentious relations between the sectors in other venues. Employing a theoretical perspective highlighting the sociohistoric factors involved in these processes, the paper suggests that this proclivity toward nonconfrontational behavior stems in part from two sources: a prominent cultural model that conceptualizes the partnership process as fundamentally nonconflictual in nature, and the promotion of the discourse of ecological modernization over other competing discourses. The paper explores some of the implications of this finding and concludes that environmental partnerships characterized by such nonconfrontational practices risk inadvertently encouraging the delegitimization of conflictual approaches to environmental action and engendering a retreat from radical thinking and innovative environmental solutions.     

Managing for biodiversity: Emerging ideas for the electric utility industry—summary statement

The conference entitled Managing for Biodiversity: Emerging Ideas for the Electric Utility Industry was held in Williamsburg, Virginia, USA, during 19–20 March 1996. This paper provides an overview of the key points, conclusions, and recommendations from both the presentations/papers and the discussions throughout the conference.