Seeing power in international development cooperation: environmental policy integration and the World Bank

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to sharpen the ways in which power dynamics can be analytically 'seen' in complex governance contexts where particular ways of governing, and their associated horizons of thought, shape and are in turn shaped by intricate interactions between actors. A theoretical approach is proposed, combining a governmentality perspective with Stewart Clegg's theory of circuits of power. The framework is applied in a case study of experimentation by the World Bank with a new tool for Environmental Policy Integration (EPI). Rather than conceptualising the EPI tool as a governmental technology through which the World Bank could promote its favoured vision of political culture in a local setting (here urban planning in Dhaka, Bangladesh), an alternative account is generated that reveals a will to power among the international development community, realised through the construction of knowledge. This alternative approach suggests that the primary motivation for the will to power is not, as a neo-colonial perspective might suggest, power over developing countries, but relational power at the international scale. It is concluded that the narrative generated through our hybrid analytical perspective demonstrates the usefulness of multi-theoretic approaches and offers a useful extension to the analytical purchase of governmentality.

From environmental policy concepts to practicable tools: Knowledge creation and delegation in multilevel systems

“…The concept of SEA, however, dates back to the 1969 United States National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which required an environmental assessment of proposed federal legislation (Fundingsland Tetlow and Hanusch , p. 15). Given the similarity between EIA and SEA, the 1969 NEPA is also seen as the origin of EIA (see Cashmore et al , p. 157). In 2003, the EU adopted the SEA Protocol to the Espoo Convention, which introduces a non‐mandatory application of SEA to policies and legislation in addition to public plans and programmes (Fundingsland Tetlow and Hanusch , p. 17).…”

“…The literature has attributed to the WB a significant role in the diffusion of EIA (see Busch and Jörgens ) and SEA (see Fundingsland Tetlow and Hanusch ; Cashmore et al ). Has the EU served as a model for the WB's approach to EIA and/or SEA?…”

The impact assessment ‘arms race’ and visions for the future

“…We have suggested that the substantial investment made by the World Bank in delineating Policy SEA from other IA practices was linked to the way the organization maintains its position internationally. The delineation of Policy SEA as something new buttresses claims that the organization holds privileged, cutting-edge knowledge on development issues (Cashmore et al 2013).…”

Intervening aspects on the influence of Strategic Environmental Assessment on the development of Plans and Programs in Brazil

“…In Brazil for example, SEA is commonly being used voluntarily or as part of loan schemes (PELLIN et al, 2011). In this latter context, MDAs are considered major players in the SEA practice, once it has become a standard tool used in the preparation and implementation of Bank-financed development projects to safeguard environmental interests and contribute to environmental governance (ALSHWAIKHAT, 2005;CASHMORE, 2011;AXELSSON, 2013;CASHMORE et al, 2014).…”

“…According to interviewee #6 (consultant), without a legal framework, SEA is systematically required only by MDAs, and randomly required by private companies, state or federal governments. SEA is part of the funding policy of a MDA and is meant to safeguard environmental interests and contribute to environmental governance (RICHARDSON; CASHMORE, 2011;AXELSSON, 2013;CASHMORE et al, 2014). Regarding private initiatives, society and governments, SEA is applied when there is not any other option, mostly when EIA could not support PPPs decision-making.…”