Innovations in International Environmental Policy: A study of international organisations and policy change

This project is concerned with processes of environmental policy innovation within international organisations. Despite more than two decades of sustainable development policy, most indicators of environmental quality continue to decline. Against this background, some governments and international organisations have recently adopted new concepts and strategies to reconcile economic development and environmental sustainability. 'Green economy' and 'green growth' are becoming increasingly salient ideas, but there are numerous competing understandings of the environment-economy nexus captured in such terms as inclusive wealth (e.g. UNU-IHDP and UNEP 2012), de-growth (e.g. R&D n.d.), steady-state economy (e.g. CASSE n.d.), and buen vivir (e.g. Heinrich Böll Foundation 2011). International organisations frequently take a leadership role in advancing new sustainability concepts and strategies; therefore, these organisations are the focus of this study. The aims of the project are three-fold. The first is to identify and map the different contemporary discourses about the environment-economy nexus within civil society and the policy community. Discerning these discourses provides a complete picture of how the nexus is understood which enables us to move beyond the rhetorical labels used by actors themselves within international institutions, government agencies, and civil society and to identify points of agreement and disagreement. The second aim is to determine how international organisations deal with the internal and external plurality of positions and understandings of the environment-economy nexus in the process of developing new sustainability strategies. It is evident from three decades of environmental multilateralism that a plurality of positions and interpretations can complicate negotiations and make it difficult to devise mutual strategies and agreements. Nevertheless, there are important reasons for ensuring heterogeneity in discussion and decision-making. There is ample evidence to suggest that institutional enclaves and decision-making among like-minded individuals tend to impede rationality and produce weakly-reasoned decisions. Unless opposing positions are vocally represented, there is a danger that individuals will reinforce their commitment to existing convictions rather than consider the merits and weaknesses of those convictions in relation to others. It is important, then, that discussion and decision-making are exposed to competing perspectives. By analysing the prevalence of homogeneity and heterogeneity in international organisations' efforts to develop new sustainability strategies, I will be able to make assessments of the quality of these processes, and recommendations for improved processes. This will build on existing research carried out by the PI and John S. Dryzek on strategies for enhancing discursive representation in public deliberation on climate change and in multilateral climate change negotiations (Stevenson and Dryzek 2012a, 2012b). The third aim is to determine whether international organisations' efforts to advance new sustainability concepts and strategies reflect institutional learning, institutional adaptation, and/or rhetorical innovation. Learning entails behavioural change brought about by redefined goals and means; adaptation entails behavioural change brought about by redefined means to achieve existing goals; and rhetorical innovation signifies the use of new language to refer to existing or new goals and means. Four international organisations are proposed as cases studies for pursuing the institutional aims of the project: the Global Green Growth Institute; United Nations Environment Programme; United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific; and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Methodologically, this is an interpretivist study informed by three research methods: Q methodology, document analysis, and semi-structured interviews.

The project is intended to benefit those who are actively engaged in formulating, promoting, and influencing policies for reconciling economic development and environmental sustainability. This includes both policy-makers (national and international) and civil society. The Pathways to Impact outlines my strategies for ensuring that these actors have opportunities to benefit from the research. Specific policy-oriented beneficiaries will include:

The case study organisations: Global Green Growth Institute; United Nations Environment Programme; United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific; and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Each of these organisations is promoting green growth and green economy initiatives.

European Union, which is presently implementing its ten-year growth strategy, Europe 2020, in which 'sustainable growth' is a core pillar. The 'green economy' is also a concept that the EU has made considerable effort to advance in the international arena, though with mixed success as witnessed at Rio+20.

The UK Government, which, having committed to being the greenest ever, has released a roadmap for a transition to a green economy ('Enabling the Transition to a Green Economy: government and business working together').

UN intergovernmental group on Sustainable Development Goals, which will be established by late 2012 to begin developing and negotiating the SDGs.

Potential civil society beneficiaries are widely dispersed and often organised into loose networks of social movements and activist groups. There are groups at local, national, and global scales that aim to influence international environmental policy and maximise its ecological integrity. These range from highly professionalised and well-resourced organisations, such as WWF and Greenpeace, to decentralised grassroots movements, such as the de-growth movement and La Via Campesina. The Pathways to Impact details strategies for engaging with these actors in the forums in which they frequent converge for debate and coordination.

The desired impact is conceptual and instrumental. Greater clarity of the multiple ways in which the environment-economy nexus is understood will enable more fruitful public and policy debate, including between decision-makers and civil society. There has been resistance to fixing the meaning of concepts such as 'green economy', but if the international community is to maintain flexibility in operationalising such concepts then it is important to have a clear idea of the meanings that are attached to the concepts. The discourse analysis part of this project will advance conceptual clarity. The project has also been designed for instrumental impact. Ample evidence exists to suggest that decision-making among like-minded individuals negatively affects the quality of decisions. Illustrative are the findings of the IMF's Independent Evaluation Office study of the IMF's failure to anticipate the global financial crisis. A high degree of 'groupthink' was a key factor, hence the recommendation to 'create an environment that encourages candour and considers dissenting views' (IEO 2011). Given the high stakes of reconciling economic development and environmental sustainability, international organisations should learn from these mistakes. Enhanced clarity on the range and character of different interpretations of the environment-economy nexus would enable greater inclusivity in discussion and decision-making. Organisations would further be able to avoid 'groupthink' by understanding their internal discursive constitution, i,e., the range of perspectives represented within the organisation.

Instrumental impact is also desired among civil society beneficiaries, whose practices would be strengthened by a greater understanding of how normative critique is received and which forms of critical engagement are considered most effective and appropriate.