Bridging the legitimacy gap—translating theory into practical signposts for legitimate flood risk governance

Legitimacy is widely regarded as a founding principle of ‘good’ and effective governance, yet despite intense academic debate and policy discourse, the concept remains conceptually confusing and poorly articulated in practice. To bridge this gap, this research performed an interpretive thematic analysis of academic scholarship across public administration, public policy, law, political science and geography. Three core themes were identified in relation to representative deliberation, procedural and distributive equity and justice, and socio-political acceptability, with numerous sub-themes therein. In an attempt to clarify conceptual confusion, this paper grounds these theoretical debates in the context of flood risk governance where numerous legitimacy dilemmas exist. A number of questions are presented as conceptual ‘sign posts’ to encourage reflexive governance in the future. Thus, more broadly, we assert the importance of bringing legitimacy to the forefront of contemporary flood risk governance discourse and practice, moving beyond the realm of academic reflection

A critique of the Global Pact for the Environment: A stillborn initiative or the foundation for Lex Anthropocenae?

In May 2018 the process which may ultimately lead to the negotiation of a legally binding Global Pact for the Environment formally commenced under the auspices of the United Nations General Assembly. Expectations for the Pact are high, evidenced in particular by its multiple and overlapping objectives: to serve as a generic binding instrument of international environmental law (IEL) principles ; to integrate, consolidate, unify and ultimately entrench many of the fragmented principles of IEL; and to constitute the first global environmental human rights instrument. In the wake of the impending intergovernmental process, the paper offers a thorough critique of the draft Pact in its present iteration. We do so with the aim of evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the present draft Pact by interrogating: a) its diplomatic and symbolic relevance and possible unique contribution at the policy level to global environmental law and governance; and b) its potential at the operational level of IEL and global environmental governance, focusing on the extent to which the draft Pact accommodates both existing and more recent rules and principles for environmental protection. As the Pact’s primary ambition is to become a universally binding global treaty, it would be churlish not to recognise its potential for innovation, as well as the considerable opportunity that the negotiation of the Pact will have to generate broad-sweeping and positive impacts. However, our central thesis is that only if the Global Pact were to incorporate ambitious normative provisions to strengthen those public and private global governance efforts that aim to halt the deterioration of Earth system integrity, as well as to maintain and improve integrity, will it be able to offer a firm foundation of the type of Anthropocene Law, termed here as the Lex Anthropocenae, required to confront head-on the deep socio-ecological crisis of the Anthropocene

Conservation lessons from taboos and trolley problems.

Governments pass conservation laws, adopt policies, and make plans yet frequently fail to implement them. Implementation of conservation, however, often requires costly sacrifice: people foregoing benefit for the benefit of biodiversity. Decisions involve trade-offs with outcomes that depend on the values at stake and people's perceptions of those values. Psychology, ethics, and behavioral science have each addressed the challenge of making difficult, often tragic, trade-off decisions. Based on these literatures, values can be classified as secular or sacred, where sacred values are those for which compensation may be unthinkable (e.g., freedom). Taboo trade-offs emerge when secular values are pitted against sacred ones. These are difficult to discuss, much less negotiate. Confronting taboo trade-offs in conservation may require discursive approaches to better understand particular attributes of decisions that place sacred human values at risk. Tragic trade-offs emerge when sacred values are pitted against one another. The trolley problem-a forced choice between 2 unthinkable outcomes-is a simple heuristic illustrating ethical challenges of tragic trade-offs. Behavior studies illustrate that people have a strong aversion to losses where an active choice was made, resulting in a bias toward status quo decisions. Faced with tragic, trolley-problem-like choices, people tend to avoid taking responsibility for action, defer decisions, evade opinions on painful choices, and regret unfortunate outcomes of actions. To help close the implementation gap, conservation actors may need to directly address the psychological, ethical, and behavioral barriers created by the remorse, regret, and moral residue of implementing conservation choices that have tragic outcomes. Recognition of these predictable features of the human psyche may foster better administrative structures to support action with durable outcomes as well as new research directions

Unravelling Stakeholder Perceptions to Enable Adaptive Water Governance in Dryland Systems

Adaptive water governance seeks to increase a social-ecological system’s adaptive capacity in the face of uncertainty and change. This is especially important in non-linear dryland systems that are already exposed to water scarcity and increasing degradation. Conservation of water ecosystem services is key for increasing adaptive capacity in drylands, however, how stakeholders perceive water ecosystem services greatly affects how they are managed, as well as the potential for adaptive water governance. This paper focuses on identifying the system’s potential for enabling adaptive water governance by analysing different stakeholder perceptions on water ecosystem services. It takes the Rio del Carmen watershed as a case study, offering important insights for an increasing number of water-scarce regions. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key stakeholders in the watershed in order to unravel their perceptions and understand the governance context. We found disparities in how stakeholders perceive water ecosystem services have led to water overexploitation and several conflicts over water access. Our results indicate that stakeholder perceptions have a major influence on the system’s adaptability, as they shape the acquisition of water ecosystem services. Divergent stakeholder perceptions act as an important barrier to collaboration. Generating and sharing knowledge could facilitate the development of a common vision, allowing all actors to co-create information about water ecosystem services and the system state, engaging them in a participatory process, suitable for their context, and that will better support adaptive water governance

Once there was a river: a benefit–cost analysis of rehabilitation of the Jordan River

The Jordan River is among the world's most famous and culturally and historically significant waterways. The lower stretch of the river, however, has been a victim of development in a water scarce region, with current flows less than 5 % of historical levels. Furthermore, as it functions as an international border in a region of conflict, access to the river and its potential as a tourist attraction has been limited. Recently, there have been numerous calls for rehabilitation of the river. This study presents a first estimate of the economic benefits of such rehabilitation and compares them to the estimated costs. Identical contingent valuation method surveys were administered in Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority. Evidence from this study shows that, despite the large opportunity costs of increasing environmental flows, rehabilitation of the lower Jordan would produce positive net economic benefits. This is true even though the study estimated only the benefits to local populations, and not to international tourists or those outside the region. Net benefits are maximized when taking a regional, as opposed to strictly national, approach