Agency and Knowledge in Environmental Governance: A Thematic Review

Milkoreit, Manjana; Bansard, Jennifer S.; Hel, Sandra van der

doi:10.1017/9781108688277.007

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 551 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Authority and knowledge are important non-material resources for (sustainability) discourses. On an individu-al level, they can provide actors with discursive power and the ability to set and steer a discourse and persuade other actors of a certain sustainability understanding (Milkoreit, Bansard, & van der Hel, 2020). On a collective level, the representation and combination of different types of authority and knowledge systems can facilitate the development of an aligned and practically implementable sustainability understanding (Norström et al, 2020;Tengö, Brondizio, Elmqvist, Malmer, & Spierenburg, 2014).…”

Section: Explanatory Factor I: Non-materials Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aligned Sustainability Understandings? Global Inter-Institutional Arrangements and the Implementation of SDG 2

Breitmeier

Schwindenhammer

Checa

et al. 2021

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article asks whether inter-institutional arrangements (IIAs) can facilitate norm understandings of sustainability in the global food regime complex to ensure the implementation of SDG 2. It refers to theories of norm implementation and regime complexes and focuses on two explanatory factors: non-material resources (authority and knowledge) and interplay management (participation and interaction). The article deals with three case studies: The Codex Alimentarius Commission, the Sustainable Food Systems Programme, and the Standards and Trade Development Facility. Qualitative empirical analysis is based on documents and expert interviews. The article assumes that both explanatory factors are beneficial for the development of an aligned sustainability understanding. The findings indicate that IIAs serve as discursive fora for institutional exchange and can, thus, facilitate the development of aligned sustainability understandings in the global food regime complex. However, the article also identifies some structural factors that provide more scope for certain actors to enforce their normative views and interests, which ultimately hampers the implementation of SDG2.

show abstract

Section: Explanatory Factor I: Non-materials Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aligned Sustainability Understandings? Global Inter-Institutional Arrangements and the Implementation of SDG 2

Breitmeier

Schwindenhammer

Checa

et al. 2021

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Overall, scholars that understand science and science institutions as part of environmental governance pay attention to the way science institutions, directly or indirectly, shape political debates and actions from the local to the global level (Bauer & Stringer, 2009;Eimer, 2014;Gupta & Möller, 2019;Hughes & Vadrot, 2019;van der Molen, van der Windt, & Swart, 2016). These perspectives show that science and governance are always intertwined, even if organised as separate activities (Lidskog & Sundqvist, 2015;Milkoreit, Bansard, & van der Hel, 2020).…”

Section: Science As Part Of Environmental Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

New Science Institutions for Global Sustainability

Hel¹

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In addressing this question, I am focusing specifically on the principle of co-production and related participatory ideals. The principle of co-production is relatively novel and different perspectives on its meaning, desirability and implementation exist. This allows me to study how different perspectives shape the development of global science institutions. I will address this question in Chapter 5 and Chapter 9.

show abstract