Governance is a term in good currency, but there are still too few detailed empirical analyses of the precise extent to which it has or has not eclipsed government. This article explores the temporal and spatial characteristics of the governance transition by charting the deployment of new policy instruments in eight industrialised states and the European Union. The adoption and implementation of (‘old’ and ‘new’) policy instruments offer a useful analytical touchstone because governance theory argues that regulation is the quintessence of government. Although there are many ‘new’ environmental policy instruments in these nine jurisdictions, this article finds that the change from government to governance is highly differentiated across political jurisdictions, policy sectors and even the main instrument types. Crucially, many of the new policy instruments used require some state involvement (that is, ‘government’), and very few are entirely devoid of state involvement (that is, pure ‘governance’). Far from eclipsing government, governance therefore often complements and, on some occasions, even competes with it, although there are some cases of fusion. Future research should thus explore the many complex and varied ways in which government and governance interact in public policy‐making.

No abstract

This article distinguishes between states acting as environmental leaders or pioneers. While leaders usually actively seek to attract followers, this is not normally the case for pioneers. Dependent on their internal and external ambitions states may take on the position of a laggard, pioneer, pusher or symbolic leader. When doing so, states employ various combinations of types and styles of leadership or pioneership. Four types of leadership/pioneership -structural, entrepreneurial, cognitive and exemplary -and two styles of leadership/pioneership -transactional/humdrum and transformational/heroic -are used to assess leaders and pioneers. The novel analytical framework put forward is intended to generate greater conceptual clarity which is urgently needed for more meaningful theoryguided cumulative empirical research on leaders and pioneers.

This article examines the use of 'new' environmental policy instruments (NEPIs), particularly market-based instruments (for example, eco-taxes) and voluntary agreements, in the European Union (EU). It focuses on the actor motivation behind the recent increase in the adoption of new and innovative instruments in EU (and member state) environmental policies while also taking account of the external international arena. The article assesses whether new ideas put forward by policy entrepreneurs, such as member governments, EU institutions, expert groups and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), are main motivation behind the EU adoption of NEPIs, or whether market and harmonization pressures are the main driving forces. It concentrates on eco-taxes, voluntary agreements and eco-labels, using the following three theoretical perspectives: (1) policy learning and transfer/ideational; (2) garbage can; and (3) institutional approaches

No abstract