Warning: Undefined array key "page" in /home/public/wp-content/themes/carrington-blog/functions/admin.php on line 228
Blog – Raul Pacheco-Vega, PhD - Understanding and solving intractable resource governance problems.
Skip to content


Perceptions of drinking water quality in Vancouver (project in early stages)

Discussions on whether Vancouver and other municipalities in Canada should ban bottled water have been predominant in the social discourse particularly in the past couple of years (2007-2009). Earlier this year, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities called for a ban in bottled water (mostly focusing on civic buildings and parks). Recently, legislation that effectively would eliminate sales of bottled water in Vancouver has apparently been under discussion, and the Vancouver Education Board seemingly has considered eliminating bottled water sales within schools. I have been puzzled about societal perceptions of drinking water in Canada for a while now. As a scholar of environmental politics, I am fascinated by the political aspects of new policy implementation. Banning bottled water at the municipal or regional level could potentially have negative implications as citizens would shift consumption from bottled water (a healthier alternative) to soft drinks. What kind of policy instruments and new legislation would our province/regional district require in order to encourage the proper shift in behavior (i.e. reduce plastic bottles in landfills, encourage consumption of tap water)? This is an interesting research problem.

The banning bottled water debate in Vancouver offers a number of analytical angles for water research. The first angle is the issue of commodification and privatization of water. Selling bottled water may be perceived as akin to commodifying a natural resource. Another analytical angle can be examining the potential health-associated risk to consumption of tap water. The second aspect offers a lot of interesting research material and it may serve as the backdrop to our project. It could be argued that consumers often (but not always) drink bottled water because they feel safer. Sometimes a consumer may feel compelled to drink bottled water simply because he/she does not have access to tap water at the moment. An implicit assumption is that we don’t need to worry about our safety and health if we consume bottled water. Is our tap water really all that bad?

Dr. Rachel Black and I are in the early stages of putting together a research proposal for a study on cultural perceptions of drinking water in the Greater Vancouver area. We are still deciding on the geographical scale and the scope of the project, but we are primarily interested in understanding how do citizens of the Lower Mainland perceive the quality of tap water. We are still in early stages but I hope we can have a rough draft research proposal by the end of summer (fingers crossed). In the mean time, I’d be interested in hearing from readers as to how they perceived the quality of our tap water in the Vancouver area (or if you are outside, in your own region).

Posted in cultural aspects of water management, water policy.


Using Social Media to Elicit a Response to Climate Change in British Columbia

I have mentioned before that, while I haven’t really conducted much research on climate change per se, I’ve taught Environmental Policy and Politics and I have surveyed the climate policy literature, particularly around integrated assessment and adaptation to multiple stressors. My doctoral dissertation actually used both of these bodies of work to build the theoretical and analytical frameworks. Many of my students and colleagues have asked me to do more work on climate policy and this is one of the first attempts I’m doing at trying to merge my research objectives with the social media savvy I’ve accumulated. Comments, as always, very welcome. This presentation is Creative-Commons licensed as Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike.

Posted in climate policy, research, social media for sustainability.

Tagged with .


Being an activist and a scholar

I am fully aware that my research work has implications for environmental public policy at all levels, from the local community to the global arena. I’ve studied a number of phenomena that are of relevance and require paying attention to, like the governance of wastewater, the mobilization strategies of environmental activist groups, and the impacts of restructuring on the local environment at local and regional scales.

Both Kate Milberry and I maintain websites that are associated with our research. In my case, I have used this space to disseminate some of my ideas and findings. Both Kate and I have personal online spaces as well, where we may discuss non-scholarly endeavours. Recently, Kate wrote on her research site about how she found an internal inconsistency with speaking about free software while using proprietary software. This paragraph touched a nerve in me, particularly:

I have always liked and embraced Marx’s idea of praxis: the notion that theory without action is useless and action without theory even more ridiculous, and ultimately unsustainable. From the beginning of my academic career, I have criticized the academy for being out of touch with reality, for navel gazing and other forms of theoretical narcissism. I intended to be an activist, starting from the inside and working out, connecting ideas to action for social change “on the ground.” Not an academic content to warehouse my ideas securely within the ivory tower, speaking jargon to a select chosen few. [Kate Milberry on Geeks and Global Justice

I find myself in a similar conundrum rather frequently, particularly when it comes to studying environmental non-governmental organizations’ strategies to mobilize and put pressure on national and supra-national governments.

As an academic, I find myself wanting to be seen as having credibility. This credence may be due to my rigorous training (armed with a PhD) or it may be due to my research being solid and my work deemed worthy of being referred to. As someone who writes a personal blog, I find that I sometimes want to retreat to that ivory tower that Kate talks about for fear that my readers may not see me as an authority in my specific research fields. And as an activist, I struggle with studying activists. I try really hard to maintain a balanced position, non-biased and scholarly. I find that sometimes, I don’t think I can (or want to) do that because I do believe in the work that a certain ENGO is doing.

But I also share Kate’s goal – I also want to bring my research findings closer to the public, to the un-trained eye, speak to the issues that are affecting society and to influence policy design and implementation. I also strive for and want to effect change in the world I’m living in.

How can I balance my academic work with my activist role and with my community building role? How can I maintain credibility while still ensuring that I am not perceived as being a resident of the “ivory tower”? I’d really appreciate some insight on this.

Posted in research.


Examining the Use of Citizen Submissions on Enforcement Matters (CSEM) to the North American Commission on Environmental Cooperation (NACEC) by Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations

This is the third talk I’m prepared to give – I would think that this would be appealing to political science/public policy academics and/or environmental NGO groups.

Pembleton on Flickr)

Global warming protest outside Washington Park (Photo: Pembleton/Flickr)



Examining the Use of Citizen Submissions on Enforcement Matters (CSEM) to the North American Commission on Environmental Cooperation (NACEC) by Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations

Citizen participation in North American environmental policy-making has had some ebbs and flows, with an increase in participation in some of the CEC’s strategies and programs. Two mechanisms were specifically designed to allow for citizen participation within the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (NACEC or CEC for short). The first mechanism is the Joint Public Advisory Committee (JPAC), a tri-national advisory board comprised by citizens from all three countries, and from varied backgrounds (industry, academia, non-governmental organizations).

The second one is the Citizen Submission on Enforcement Matters programme (CSEM), based on Articles 14 and 15 of the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC). This mechanism provides civil society organizations with the opportunity to play a “whistleblower” role. Any concerned citizen from any of the three countries can prepare and present a submission to the CEC Secretariat denouncing a country for failing to comply with its own environmental laws (NACEC 2001). The CEC Secretariat’s Office of Submissions on Enforcement Matters reviews the submission and assesses whether the submission actually warrants a response from the concerned country.

In this talk, I will provide an overview of a tri-national, collaborative project that examines CSEM. Our objective in this research project is to develop an empirical basis on which to explore the theoretical and applied aspects of civil society involvement on environmental policy-making. We focus on (amongst other aspects), how ENGOs use a trinational policy reform (CSEM). The CSEM is a mechanism built into the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation, designed to avoid “races to the bottom” and “pollution havens”. In theory, this type of institutional reform should empower civil society organizations to hold nation-states accountable.

We were particularly interested in undertaking an independent assessment on three key aspects. First, are citizen claims an effective mechanism to influence domestic environmental policy enforcement? Second, does this mechanism provide an opportunity for ENGOs to come together and form transnational advocacy networks? And third, what (if any) are the tangible impacts of the CSEM mechanism? As we have conducted our research, these objectives have had to be adapted and modified. I will offer preliminary results of our collaborative effort and suggest the direction that our project will take in the foreseeable future.

Posted in comparative public policy, environmental NGOs, environmental policy, North America.

Tagged with .


Exploring the Effect of Multiple Stressors on the Restructuring of the Mexican Leather and Footwear Industries

This is the abstract I submitted to the University of Victoria Department of Geography.

Exploring the Effect of Multiple Stressors on the Restructuring of the Mexican Leather and Footwear Industries

Credit: Gripso Banana Prune

Credit: Gripso Banana Prune

Traditional theories of industrial restructuring assign the most explanatory weight of the structural change phenomenon to increasing pressures via globalization and falling trade barriers. In this talk, I will describe a new model of thinking about industrial restructuring that includes multiple stressors. The research focuses on three main drivers of structural change: market pressures, environmental regulation and changes in land use and land pricing, using two case studies of leather and footwear industrial clusters in Mexico, located in the cities of León and Guadalajara. Evidence of multiple drivers of structural change is found. Furthermore, responses to restructuring drivers in León and Guadalajara are found to be substantially different. Firms in the leather and footwear cluster in León have implemented countervailing strategies such as price competition, government lobbying, and more recently, investment in socio-economic research (competitiveness) projects. However, firms in the leather and footwear cluster in Guadalajara focused on a specific, high-end target market.

At the larger, urban scale, footwear and its allied industries in the city of León resisted change and have tried to remain in operation while the city of Guadalajara has focused on a diversification strategy, attracting new (arguably more technically advanced) industries.

Empirically, this project applies a firm demographics approach to the study of industrial clusters under multiple stressors. This approach has not been previously used on Mexican data. Theoretically, it demonstrates that future analyses of industrial complexes’ structural change can be strengthened through the use of an integrated assessment framework investigating the effect of multiple stressors (market forces, land pricing, technical change, environmental regulations, and consumer preferences) on industrial restructuring.

Posted in cluster theory, environmental economic geography, environmental policy, industrial restructuring, integrated assessment.


Are River Basin Councils the Right Model of Water and Wastewater Governance in Mexico?

This is the abstract for my water policy talk. I’ve submitted it to the School of Public Administration at University of Victoria to see if they’re interested, although I’m happy to tailor it for other audiences.

Are River Basin Councils the Right Model of Water and Wastewater Governance in Mexico? Lessons from a Case Study in the Lerma-Chapala Watershed.

The integrated water resource management (IWRM) literature privileges the watershed (river basin) as the appropriate unit for analysis. The paradigm is predicated on the assumption that all stakeholders within a river basin will be able and willing to cooperate in appropriate adequate water management across political and geographical boundaries.

From a geographical scale (and bio-physical) standpoint, the watershed is the right scale of analysis. A basin/watershed is the unit of analysis that encompasses all the elements (bio-physical, communities, government). From the political boundaries’ perspective, the watershed council crosses political borders. Therefore, using watersheds as units of analysis presents substantial implementation challenges to policy-makers. From a governance perspective, the watershed council offers an interesting yet complex model of shared authority. In this multi-stakeholder, round-table process, the final authority for water allocation does not reside within the watershed council but within the government. Thus, the degree to which the Mexican government shares responsibilities (and authority) is substantially limited.

in this talk, I discuss the results of my research on water and wastewater policy in Mexico. Driven by a theoretical interest in institutional analysis, and drawing on two years of in-depth field research in the Lerma-Chapala watershed, I conducted a cross-state comparative examination of wastewater policies in the five states that share territory with(the Lerma-Chapala watershed: State of Mexico, Queretaro, Jalisco, Guanajuato and Michoacan.

Using the Lerma-Chapala river basin as a case study, I analyze the formal and informal rules of the river basin council, finding that informal rules are substantially more important than formal rules, thus causing institutional instability. I also demonstrate that there is a chasm between Mexican environmental and wastewater policies. This chasm is caused primarily by differences between target actors, lack of institutional coordination between environmental and water-focused agencies, and an increasing jurisdictional overlap.Findings from this project offer sound evidence in favour of the criticisms that watershed councils have faced.

My water governance research has led me to explore two distinct but inter-related emerging research streams . The first one focuses on wastewater policy itself; the second one examines the effectiveness of watershed councils as appropriate models for water governance. In this talk I summarize the challenges I see in implementation of river basin councils as institutional innovations for integrated water management I also make a case that social science research on water management has focused largely on access and distribution of water, given its common-pool-resource nature, to the relative neglect of sanitation and wastewater. My goal in the near future is to bring both of these agendas together to create a holistic, integrated model of governance of water and wastewater.

Posted in wastewater, water policy.

Tagged with .


Social Media for Sustainability and Public Policy

Below you can find the slides (Creative Commons – Non-Commercial, Share-Alike, Attribution) for my Net Tuesday (March 2009) talk. The unedited crib will follow in a couple of days, once I have the actual time to go through it. In the mean time, feel free to check out the excellent live-tweeting that AHA Media in conjunction with Lorraine did.

Posted in social media for public policy, social media for sustainability.

Tagged with , , , , .


New tools for old problems: Water footprint, water stress and virtual water (Canada and worldwide)

As I mentioned, I was invited by Doug Van Spronsen and Jered Love from WaterDrop to give a keynote talk at their inaugural event “The Global Water Crisis”. I am both honored and flattered that they invited me to their first event, and I do hope I contributed to the discussions we had.

What follows below my slides (hosted on Slide Share under a Creative Commons License – Non-Commercial, Attribution, Share-Alike) is an unedited crib of my talk. I borrow the term “crib” from Dr. danah boyd (who is a scholar of social media and youth) who publishes unedited typed notes of her talks and calls them crib. A crib of her latest research can be found here.

Good evening, and thank you everyone for coming. Thanks, first of all, to Doug and Jered for inviting me. I am very honored and flattered to be speaking to such an engaged group of citizens. I hope my talk will provide you with a quick overview of the way in which I think about water issues, and hopefully, you’ll learn some interesting stuff about water.

I have come to admit recently that I am a story teller. My research tells you a story. The story I’m interested in telling you has to do with my interest in questions of access to clean water and sanitation. I approach water problems from an interdisciplinary perspective, and while my PhD is interdisciplinary, I have a strong bias towards the social sciences. However, I also have an MBA and a chemical engineering background so I look at these issues from a variety of lenses.

If I had to summarize my research in a sentence, I can tell you that I have found tthat while we have the technology to treat water and recycle it (thus reducing the amount of water wasted) we don’t have the institutional arrangements to facilitate the adoption of these wastewater treatment technologies.

There is a reason why I always start my talks on water with a photograph like the one you are seeing on the cover slide. Yes, that is a photo of people collecting water in Sub-Saharan Africa. That is the quality of water these people are consuming. As you saw in the powerful documentary, Flow, there is a huge demand for clean drinking water in many developing countries. My work aims to contribute to increasing access to better water quality globally.

In the environmental public policy literature (and in every element of human life) we always have two elements: the politics and the policy. I confess that I practice a politics of fear, and a policy of hope. My notion of politics of fear means that I am more than happy to scare people with data. I have no qualms in scaring people and showing them the realities of environmental degradation. However, I am also a practitioner and an activist in some ways. Therefore, I practice a policy of hope. I offer potential technical and policy solutions. I also educate, not only my students, but everybody who will listen to me, about the need to look at water issues and not forget about how important they are in the light of current focus on climate change issues. We live in an interconnected world, so we must look at water issues as part of the global environmental change challenges.

Throughout my talk, I will share some terrifying facts that I hope will galvanize you to take action. And then I will close my talk by offering a few policy suggestions and highlighting the issues that need to be talked about. My hope is that after my talk, you will be compelled to engage in action to examine your own water consumption patterns and make substantial changes (for the good of humanity)

SLIDES 3 AND 4 – 3,900 children die every day from water-borne diseases. Nearly 41% of the world’s population lives in river basins under water stress. Less than 0.3% of the world’s water is freshwater. Less than 3% of the world’s water supply is available in lakes and rivers. With those facts, do you still feel compelled to take long showers, leave your tap open while brushing your teeth, wash the streets with the water hose? I sure hope not!

SLIDES 5 AND 6 – I love dispelling myths. That’s what made doing my doctoral research and my post-doctoral work so much fun. I enjoy shattering myths, like the one of Canada’s water abundance. If you juxtapose the graphs of water availability and water withdrawal, you’ll see that while Canada has a lot of water available (range of 1,700-5,00 m3/person/year) it also withdraws a lot of water (1,700 m3/person/year). If you do the math correctly, you’ll find that we will soon be in a negative water balance. As you can see, taken individually, these two graphs paint very different pictures. But that’s why we need to think about environmental problems in a holistic way. Canada is one of the countries with the highest water withdrawal rates (Slide 6). We need to re-think the way we approach water consumption and treatment.

Given my empirical research focus on Mexico (a country with one of the highest consumption rates by agricultural activities), it was somewhat shocking for me to find data indicating that in comparison, one (if not THE) main use of water in Canada is in energy production. (SLIDE 7).

There are numerous myths that I could dispel about the state of Canadian water, and numerous issues that need to be taken into account but have not. However, I am just going to highlight two (SLIDE 8). The first one is the rate of average daily water use in the residential sector. As you can see, it has been consistently in the vicinity of 300 litres per capita per day. The daily consumption of water in Africa is 10-20 litres per person per day. Canadians use between 15 and 20 times that. Time to re-think our consumptive patterns. The second graph shows the percentage of municipal population in sewers. Not 100%, as you can see. Well below. We need much more infrastructure for wastewater and sewerage.

SLIDE 9 – One of my most extensive research projects has been in the governance of wastewater and sanitation. This map shows you the distribution of wastewater facilities in Canada. I am currently working on launching a project to examine the state of wastewater policy across Canada, and I am hoping to use this as a baseline. Just for comparative purposes, Canada has less wastewater treatment facilities than the Lerma-Chapala river basin in Mexico does. Rather surprising, eh? In many ways, Canada’s state of sanitation wastewater and infrastructure appears to be much worse than Mexico.

SLIDE 10 – I will admit that I am a big proponent of water metering and water pricing as a policy mechanism to reduce water overconsumption and waste. I do not adhere to the idea of the commodification of water, and I confess that I still need to do more research on privatization of water supplies to define my position. But I am a firm believer that water should NOT be wasted. And I think that putting a price on water and measuring the supply will definitely help minimize excessive withdrawals. If you pay for it, you’ll think twice about wasting it. From the graph you can see that Canada has the cheapest cost of water ($ 0.31/cubic metre vs. $2.36/cubic metre in Germany). Again, time to re-think our consumptive patterns.

SLIDE 11 – I’m going to turn now to three tools that have helped me re-think the way I approach water problems. The first one is the concept of water stress. I have written on water stress previously on my blog, and I just want to show you that there are MANY areas all over North America under high water stress. Canada included.

SLIDE 12 – The second concept I’ve been exploring is the idea of virtual water (I also recently wrote about virtual water on my blog). Virtual water is the amount of water embedded in food or other products needed. For example, to manufacture 1 cup of coffee, you need 140 litres. That cup of coffee you are downing every morning? Yes, 140 litres of water were used in it. Time to re-think our behavioral patterns. I have personally shifted my diet from primarily meat to primarily vegetarian (producing meat consumes way more resources than vegetables).

SLIDE 13 – Finally, the third concept I’ve been exploring is the idea of a water footprint. Similar to the term coined by Dr. Mathis Wackernagel and Dr. Bill Rees (coincidentally, Dr. Wackernagel and I obtained our PhDs from The University of British Columbia, albeit in different programmes. Also, I do know the work of Dr. Rees very well), the water footprint borrows the main conceptual framework from the ecological footprint. The water footprint of a nation is defined as the volume of water needed to produce goods and serices consumed by the inhabitants of the country. I have also written about water footprint on my blog, but not to a large extent. However, there is an actual blog where the authors disseminate their findings on water footprinting. You can read it here. You can guess, yes – one of the highest water footprints is that of the United States of America. Not shocking, eh? Canada is, sadly, lagging not much behind.

SLIDE 14 – I would like to begin closing my talk (I promised it’d be short!) by re-emphasizing the issues I’ve been talking about in my research in the past five years. We need to start focusing on ways to close the hydrological cycle. What do I mean by that? I mean that we need to start paying attention on the red arrows in the graph you are looking at right now in this slide (14). We need to consider how we are going to treat water to the quality level we need. We also need to ensure that when we talk about water, we don’t talk solely about access to water, but also access to sanitation facilities and wastewater treatment. If we treat more water, we can replenish our water bodies. However, of course, it would be smarter if we didn’t consume so much water and/or if we didn’t pollute it in the first place.

SLIDE 15 – Finally, as I promised, I’m going to give you hope. I think that the biggest hope I have is that the documentary you saw tonight, the talks that my fellow presenters and I gave, and the interaction you will most definitely have with the exhibitors in the back of the room (Council of Canadians, Oxfam, Township of Langley’s Water Wise) will shape how you will behave in regards to water from now on.

I hope that Canadian politicians and bureaucrats realize that we need a cohesive, coherent and smart and sound nation-wide water policy.

I hope that Canada improves in regards to its inventories of water and water balances.

I hope that everybody in Canada begins to think about water and the hydrological cycle in an integrated way.

And I hope that you learned something from my talk. Feel free to contact me via e-mail, Twitter or dropping a comment on my blog. I am always available for speaking engagements, to talk to students and the public, and to share whatever little I have learned in regards to environmental public policy and water governance.

THANK YOU.

Posted in governance, research, wastewater, water footprint, water policy, water stress, World Water Day.

Tagged with , , , , .


World Water Day 2009: Transboundary Waters

You might recall that I wrote a few days back about an invitation that Jered Love and Doug Van Spronsen from WaterDrop made recently. Jered and Doug asked me if I’d be willing to speak about the state of Canadian water within the global water issues context. Of course, I accepted gladly because I believe very strongly in the work that Doug and Jered are doing in regards to highlighting the relevance of water within the context of global environmental change. As I’ve mentioned before, many people are SO focused on climate change that they tend to forget that water IS also a natural resource that faces great challenges in the very near future.

Stanley Park Prospect Point Event

The event took place last night, with a showing of a video that WaterDrop created, a screening of the movie/documentary “Flow” and two talks, one by the folks of Run for Water (I’ll write more about them in the next few days) and my own. I’ll have my slides up on my research site in the next couple of days. On the way back, we were talking about the event and I mentioned that they should be proud, because bringing 70 people to Langley (at Trinity Western University) on a Saturday night to talk water, is not an easy task, and the participants stayed for much longer to talk to the folks who had exhibits at the event (the Township of Langley, Oxfam, the Council of Canadians). They did an amazing job and they also had several people who helped make the event successful, and I personally had a great time.

Burnaby Lake Park

Water and energy are considered two of the most important and pressing environmental issues in the next 50 years. Unfortunately, so much emphasis is placed on the need for energy resources that not enough attention is paid to the myriad of issues surrounding water. Who has the right to access water? How can we make this access equitable? Is privatization the right way pathway for water conservation? What can we do to re-purpose wastewater and how safe is the technology? There are many, many questions regarding water that are still not answered. My research on water governance aims to tackle just a few of this questions.

Only 3% of the world’s water supply is freshwater (the rest is salt water). This fact comes as a good reminder that today, March 22nd, 2009 is not only the second day of spring, but also the celebration of World Water Day. The theme for 2008 was Sanitation (where my main focus of water research is) and for 2009 is Transboundary Water.

Over the last 60 years there have been more than 200 international water agreements and only 37 cases of reported violence between states over water. We need to continue to nurture the opportunities for cooperation that transboundary water management can provide. [World Water Day UN Site]

In my research, I have examined the way in which wastewater policy is created within a river basin that encompasses territory of five Mexican states (the equivalent of provinces in Canada). The 2009 theme of Transboundary Waters is very timely, because (as I found while conducting fieldwork for this project) water can be used not only as a natural resource but also as a political resource. When water bodies (aquifers or lakes or rivers) are shared amongst two political entities, conflicts about jurisdiction over the water bodies may potentially ensue. Right now, we don’t have water wars, but given the irresponsible consumption patterns that many individuals have, we may see real water fights in the near future.

How many transboundary river basins are there?

There are 263 transboundary river basins. Over 45 percent of the land surface of the world is covered by river basins that are shared by more than one country. Over 75 percent of all countries, 145 in total, have within their boundaries shared river basins. And 33 nations have over 95 percent of their territory within international river basins.

While most transboundary river basins are shared between just two countries, there are many river basins where this number is much higher. There are 13 basins worldwide that are shared between 5 to 8 countries. Five river basins, the Congo, Niger, Nile, Rhine and Zambezi, are shared between 9 to 11 countries. The river that flows through the most countries is the Danube, which passes through the territory of 18 countries.[UN World Water Day]

On this World Water Day, I encourage all my readers to re-think their consumption patterns, to think of ways to conserve and recycle water, to ponder how can each one of us contribute to the work of non-governmental organizations that are fighting tirelessly to provide safe drinking water to the many people in developing nations that don’t have access to clean water. Happy World Water Day.

Posted in water policy, World Water Day.

Tagged with .


Measuring influence in domestic and international environmental politics

Despite the increased emphasis given to citizen participation in environmental policy making in the past few years, skeptics can easily wonder how much influence can civil society have on public policy processes to protect our environment. One of the questions that has puzzled me for quite some time is under what circumstances and how do environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) exert influence on environmental policy making.

Powerful and boisterous cross-border mobilizations of environmental activists trumping projects that may have negative environmental effects have offered anecdotal evidence that civil society may possibly influence the way in which industry behaves and/or policy is made.

In two of my research projects, I have investigated the mechanisms used by ENGOs to exert pressure on national (domestic) governments. In Pacheco-Vega 2005a and 2005b, I proposed two mechanisms of pressure transmission. A first-order pressure transmission mechanism is a direct action by agent A specifically designed to change the behavior of agent B. An example of first-order pressure transmission mechanism would be direct lobbying of governments by civil society organizations. This is a direct mechanism.

A second-order pressure transmission mechanism is an indirect action, whereby agent A puts pressure on agent B so that in turn B can try to change the behavior of agent C. An example of a second-order pressure mechanism would be a civil society organization asking an international institution (e.g. the World Bank) to put pressure on a national government. This is an indirect mechanism.

The definition of influence is complex, however. Who influences whom to do what? This question makes us wonder whether we can really measure influence. Betsill and Corell (2001, 2008) have offered a framework to measure influence that is based on measuring outcomes (i.e. whether the influenced agent does change behavior or not) and analyzing what information does the influencing agent make available.

Interestingly, in the realm of social media, I have found something similar to what Arts and Mack (2003) found in regards to ENGO. Arts and Mack indicate that ENGOs are influential if they are perceived as such. When the target agent perceives the actor as being capable of exerting influence, and acts upon that perception, Arts and Mack say that influence has occurred. I argue that this self-perpetuating mechanism is actually one of the main elements that underlie the creation of influence in social media. Whether this self-reinforcing mechanism works in the realm of international and domestic environmental politics remains to be seen.

One of the important insights I have gained in my empirical research on ENGO influence in domestic and international environmental politics is that successful ENGOs will adapt and change their strategies to influence specific agents (industry actors or governments) depending on how receptive the influenced agent will be. This adaptive capacity enhances the ENGO’s influence and allows it to gain ground vis-a-vis the government agent, ground that it wouldn’t otherwise be able to gain.

References

Pacheco-Vega, R. (2005). Democracy by proxy: Environmental NGOs and policy change in Mexico. Environmental Issues in Latin America and the Caribbean. A. Romero and S. West. Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Springer Publishers.

Pacheco Vega, R. (2005). Assessing indirect environmental consequences of NAFTA: Transnational coalitions formation and pollutant release and transfer registries. Trading Justice: NAFTA’s New Links and Conflicts, Memphis, TN, Center for Research on Women, University of Memphis.

Posted in environmental NGOs, influence, measurement.

Tagged with , , , .