Sustainability indicator systems within urban governance: Usability analysis of sustainability indicator systems as boundary objects

While sustainability indicator systems (SIs) have proven to be valuable rational tools for improving the availability of information related to the relationship of cities and communities to natural limits, the indicators movement has achieved limited instrumental uptake in policy. This paper begins from a recognition that instrumental use of sustainability indicator systems is rare. Greater potential impact exists for SIs designed to be much more attentive to their conceptual and political values within their particular social and political context. In other words, greater attention to what has been called the governance of indicator systems, or the ways in which SIs fit as policy tools within a multilevel and multiactor governance context, is key to increasing their utility. This is particularly true given the need for decisive policy change, or even the introduction of a new development path, which is asserted within the sustainability agenda.Understanding the real and potential utility of indicator systems within multiactor governance processes, in which their roles are primarily rhetorical, conceptual and political, is facilitated by thinking about indicator systems as boundary objects, tools which open up dialogue, information sharing, learning and consensus-building across different policy boundaries: between experts and nonexperts, formal government and different nongovernment actors, higher-order governments and lower-order governments. This paper offers a comparative analysis of three sustainability indicator systems in the North American context – Vancouver's Vital Signs (Vancouver Foundation), Seattle's Happiness Initiative, and LEED-ND (US Green Building Council) – all of which have shown some success in operationalizing a new policy boundary as a means of making conceptual and political contributions to governance practices. The specific boundaries operationalized, the different approach taken by each project, and the usability demonstrated by each project at that boundary in terms of salience, legitimacy and credibility, are assessed comparatively. In general, the trajectory in design and use of ecological and sustainability indicators demonstrates an increase in appetite, aptitude and numbers of channels for use in processes of governance; however, these factors vary with the local social–political opportunity structure. This analysis presents the advances made as well as the tradeoffs evident in these cases across the gamut of different forms of usability of nongovernmental indicator systems designed for use as boundary objects, and suggests a path forward for indicator work which aims to change policy, from a governance perspective.     

Co-evolution of physical and social sciences in synthetic biology

Emerging technologies research often covers various perspectives in disciplines and research areas ranging from hard sciences, engineering, policymaking, and sociology. However, the interrelationship between these different disciplinary domains, particularly the physical and social sciences, often occurs many years after a technology has matured and moved towards commercialization. Synthetic biology may serve an exception to this idea, where, since 2000, the physical and the social sciences communities have increasingly framed their research in response to various perspectives in biological engineering, risk assessment needs, governance challenges, and the social implications that the technology may incur. This paper reviews a broad collection of synthetic biology literature from 2000–2016, and demonstrates how the co-development of physical and social science communities has grown throughout synthetic biology’s earliest stages of development. Further, this paper indicates that future co-development of synthetic biology scholarship will assist with significant challenges of the technology’s risk assessment, governance, and public engagement needs, where an interdisciplinary approach is necessary to foster sustainable, risk-informed, and societally beneficial technological advances moving forward.     

Governing stem cell therapy in India: regulatory vacuum or jurisdictional ambiguity?

Stem cell treatments are being offered in Indian clinics although preclinical evidence of their efficacy and safety is lacking. This is attributed to a governance vacuum created by the lack of legally binding research guidelines. By contrast, this paper highlights jurisdictional ambiguities arising from trying to regulate stem cell therapy under the auspices of research guidelines when treatments are offered in a private market disconnected from clinical trials. While statutory laws have been strengthened in 2014, prospects for their implementation remain weak, given embedded challenges of putting healthcare laws and professional codes into practice. Finally, attending to the capacities of consumer law and civil society activism to remedy the problem of unregulated treatments, the paper finds that the very definition of a governance vacuum needs to be reframed to clarify whose rights to health care are threatened by the proliferation of commercial treatments and individualized negligence-based remedies for grievances.     

英国脱欧后基因技术监管趋势及对中国的启示*——基于英国《基因技术报告》的分析

英国脱欧后加快了生物技术领域的立法进程,迫切希望通过革新原先欧盟的保守监管模式,在保障技术安全的前提下充分发挥基因技术的应用价值。为实现该目标,英国发布了《基因技术报告》,旨在重新构建更加全面的基因技术监管体系。这一报告不仅分析了既有基因技术治理实践的不足,还指明了未来英国基因技术监管的方向。当前基因编辑、合成生物学等新型基因技术正处于高速发展时期,英国的报告也为这些技术的应用提供了一条可供参考的治理路径。     

A Note on a Comparison of the Ocean Governance System Between Mainland China and Taiwan

With the increasing use of the oceans and coastal areas, there is a need to pay greater attention to and reexamine the issue of ocean governance. Through comparing the framework of ocean governance in mainland China with that in Taiwan in terms of legislation, administration, and law enforcement, this article establishes that there are advanced practices concerning ocean governance in Taiwan and lessons that may be applicable for mainland China.     

Biobank governance: a lesson in trust

Biobanks are controversial due to their ethical, legal, and social implications. Recent discussion has highlighted a central role for governance in helping to address these controversies. We argue that sustainable governance of biobanks needs to be informed by public discourse. We present an analysis of a deliberative public engagement to explore the public values, concerns, and interests underlying recommendations pertaining to biobank governance. In particular, we identify five themes underlying expressed goals and concerns of participants regarding the development, operation and application of biobank research. Ultimately, we argue that, for the deliberants, governance represented a way to achieve trust in biobanks through accountability, transparency and control. As discussion of biobank governance moves the conceptual to the specific, policy makers and researchers should acknowledge the importance of the public viewpoint in maintaining trust; this acknowledgement is of importance to the ultimate success and longevity of biobanks.     

包容性治理：中国国家公园治理新思路

模式的选择在自然保护地有效治理过程中起着关键作用,适宜的治理模式是实现自然保护地生态、社会、经济和文化综合效益最优化的重要途径。包容性治理在建立多元共治、全民共享的国家公园治理体制、促进社会公平和容纳边缘群体等方面具有独特优势,是对保护地治理模式的优化与创新,拥有广阔的应用空间。系统总结了全球保护地治理模式,对不同治理模式进行了比较和评价,重点从理论和实践背景阐述了包容性治理的源起;从边缘性和公平性视角两方面分析了现阶段中国国家公园进行包容性治理的必要性与可行性;并对中国国家公园包容性治理框架进行了阐释,提出了中国国家公园包容性治理建议和思考。以治理主体多元化、主体间的合作、促进社会公平、容纳全体社会成员自由发展,尤其是确保边缘群体的利益为特征的包容性治理,可以成为中国国家公园协调保护和当地发展的新思路、新选择。     

法国大区公园经验对钱江源国家公园体制试点区跨界治理体系构建的启示

建立国家公园的目的之一是保护生态系统的原真性和完整性。然而, 生态系统完整性和原真性保护不仅面对交叉重叠、多头管理导致碎片化管理问题, 还要面对行政区划进一步造成的碎片化和管理分割的现实。钱江源国家公园体制试点区地跨浙江、安徽和江西三省, 存在国家公园跨界治理过程中的三大普遍问题: 跨界协同治理空间边界划定、生态保育政策及执行不统一、毗邻社区居民生计对自然资源依赖与生态保护目标的矛盾。文章借鉴法国大区公园治理经验, 依据《建立国家公园体制总体方案》精神, 提出钱江源国家公园跨界治理中必须形成一个政府主导(公园管理机构为代表), 企业、社区居民和第三方组织共同参与的多元主体协同治理组织框架, 并针对上述三个问题, 提出通过第三方组织参与方式实现跨越行政壁垒的统一保护、通过社区协议保护方式实现保护标准的统一、通过国家公园产品品牌增值体系实现保护与发展的可持续性。     

Professionalization as a governance strategy for synthetic biology

This article considers professionalization as a governance strategy for synthetic biology, reporting on social science interviews done with scientists, science journal editors, members of science advisory boards and authors of nongovernmental policy reports on synthetic biology. After summarizing their observations about the potential advantages and disadvantages of the professionalization of synthetic biology, we analyze professionalization as a strategy that overcomes dichotomies found in the current debates about synthetic biology governance, specifically “top down” versus “bottom up” governance and scientific fact versus public values. Professionalization combines community and state, fact and value. Like all governance options, professionalization has limitations, particularly regarding war and peace. It is best conceptualized as potentially part of a wider range of governance mechanisms working in concert: a “web of prevention”.     

Democratic governance of genomics: the case of UK Biobank

Biobanks are collections of human biological tissue used for genomics research. This promises a better understanding of the gene-based contribution to common disease and development of a more personalized approach to healthcare with safer drugs and more effective treatment. However, biobanks are also controversial owing to the ethical, legal, social and political issues raised about their collection and use of biological samples. Therefore, their democratic governance is not only a normative challenge but also an empirical one. This paper is concerned with both challenges: it attempts to “evaluate” processes of democratic governance of genomics by focusing on the case of UK Biobank. The overall argument is that although the UK Biobank performs well in terms of general democratic governance structures, there are epistemological and practical limits to specific democratic governance processes.     

A collaborative model for large‐scale riparian restoration in the western United States

In 2009, a group of practitioners took action to restore 175 miles of riparian habitat impaired by invasive plants along the Dolores River in southwestern Colorado and eastern Utah. Recognizing the magnitude of ecological, jurisdictional, and management challenges associated with this large‐scale initiative, this group of managers built trust and relationships with key partners to foster collaboration across boundaries and cultivate consensus of a variety of perspectives and forms of knowledge. What emerged was a network of individuals, organizations, and agencies dedicated to restoring the Dolores River riparian corridor while sharing information and learning from one another. This public–private collaboration, called the Dolores River Restoration Partnership (DRRP), has been successful in creating a process by which financial, technical, and human resources are shared across boundaries to restore a riparian corridor. Specifically, the DRRP developed effective planning documents, a responsive governance structure, monitoring protocols, and a shared mindset for extracting lessons learned that have been instrumental in making progress toward its shared restoration goals and addressing a wide variety of restoration challenges. The tools developed by the partnership and lessons learned from their utility are outlined in this case study as a means to inform other collaborative restoration efforts.     

The European Union and Ocean Use Management: The Marine Strategy and the Maritime Policy

Problems resulting from contemporary patterns of ocean use and threats to the viability of the marine environment have led to reconsideration of ocean use governance in a number of states, including the United States, Australia, and Canada. For its part, the European Union has been working on the development of a Marine Strategy to safeguard the environment and a more encompassing Maritime Policy into which the Marine Strategy would be folded. The desired Maritime Policy would reflect a holistic perspective of ocean space, embody an ecosystem-based approach to ocean use management, and provide a broad framework for ocean/coastal management. As has been seen elsewhere, developing such a governance system is difficult both in terms of conceptualization and, subsequently, in operationalization. The June 2006 European Commission Green Paper on Maritime Policy sets the stage for a year of consultations designed to develop an effective governance system for ocean management. Institutional and policy changes will be needed and it will be necessary to balance the objectives of economic growth and protection of environmental sustainability. This article examines current developments in efforts to devise a coherent and integrated European Union approach to ocean management.     

公立医院法人治理结构改革试点效果与对策分析

以河南科技大学第二附属医院为对象,使用问卷调查、深度访谈等方法,对医院法人治理结构改革现状进行分析。结果发现,改革在提升了医院服务质量和社会公信力的同时,仍然存在法人治理结构不规范、医管局权责不明晰、财政补偿机制不完善、内部治理改革所需要的外部条件缺失、产权结构单一等问题。最后提出了相应的完善对策,包括强化政府中立角色和政府责任;推进信息公开与问责制度,完善监督评估机制;完善法人治理管理办法;实施股权结构多元化经营;坚持并完善理事会型法人治理结构。     

Teleology, function, design and the evolution of animal behaviour

Concerns about teleological language in evolutionary biology focus on the notions of function, design and adaptation. Accounts that naturalize these ideas are currently popular. In keeping with recent developments in evolutionary theory and philosophy of biology, three naturalistic analyses of function - current utility, historical function, and functions as capacities - should be differentiated. All have roles to play in biology, although the historical conception seems the most central to evolutionary theory. While rarely distinguished from function, design should be regarded as an extension of historical function. We consider the utility of this distinction for the study of behaviour.     

Governance factors in the identification of global conservation priorities for mammals

Global conservation priorities have often been identified based on the combination of species richness and threat information. With the development of the field of systematic conservation planning, more attention has been given to conservation costs. This leads to prioritizing developing countries, where costs are generally low and biodiversity is high. But many of these countries have poor governance, which may result in ineffective conservation or in larger costs than initially expected. We explore how the consideration of governance affects the selection of global conservation priorities for the world's mammals in a complementarity-based conservation prioritization. We use data on Control of Corruption (Worldwide Governance Indicators project) as an indicator of governance effectiveness, and gross domestic product per capita as an indicator of cost. We show that, while core areas with high levels of endemism are always selected as important regardless of governance and cost values, there are clear regional differences in selected sites when biodiversity, cost or governance are taken into account separately. Overall, the analysis supports the concentration of conservation efforts in most of the regions generally considered of high priority, but stresses the need for different conservation approaches in different continents owing to spatial patterns of governance and economic development.     

Institutional Governance and Refugee Resistance: Displaced Karen in the Thai–Burma Borderlands

Displaced Karen constitute a complex array of actors in the Thai–Burma borderlands. Forms of governance meant to contain and control these actors are framed by practices of territorial sovereignty and bureaucratic processes of identification and resource allocation. This article examines forms of institutional governance through two broad authorities, the state (predominantly the Thai government) and the humanitarian aid apparatus. It argues that the operations of these two authorities establish a series of control over space and movement and a system of administrative categorisation that works to identify and regulate displaced populations. Based on an ethnographic study of displaced Karen residing in the Thai–Burma borderlands, I go on to argue that the Karen challenge these institutional forms of governance because they do not adequately capture their claims for political autonomy. Key features of this political autonomy include Karen understandings of being a refugee and their experience of the refugee apparatus, their advocacy around human rights abuses, and their agitation for political and social change. I argue that these challenges represent a reframing of the discourse around refugeedom, where displaced Karen bring the experience of displacement back into the ‘humanitarian case’ and pursue a desire to be actively engaged in a political resolution to their displacement.     

Realizing responsibility. Institutional routines,critical intervention,and the “big” questions in the controversy over non-invasive prenatal testing in Germany

NIPT has become a matter of controversy in Germany over the past years, there is now a widespread concern that it raises fundamental social and ethical questions. Starting from the assumption that responsible governance requires governance actors to address these questions, the article examines how the main governance actors realized their responsibility in the sense of conceiving and performing it. Building on the pragmatic sociology of critique, we study how actors are doing responsibility within a given institutional and political context. We show that critical interventions disrupted institutional routines and caused governance actors to struggle with conflicting commitments of complying with institutional rules and exercising responsibility by taking social and ethical considerations into account. Whereas these conflicting commitments posed a predicament for political decision-makers, who solved it through shifting responsibility for social and ethical issues elsewhere, there was no such predicament for the producers; for them, routine and responsibility converged.     

Restoration dialogues: improving the governance of ecological restoration

Ecological restoration activities should be conceptualized as a form of governance, as this lens best captures the multiactor, collaborative processes by which societies through governments and nonstate entities seek to achieve environmental outcomes. Successful restoration governance depends on addressing a cluster of challenges concerning optimal spatiotemporal scales, biological feasibility, sociocultural acceptability, financial viability, and institutional tractability. Changes to private law, company law, and taxation are some of the governance reforms available to tackle these challenges.     

Does governance play a role in the distribution of invasive alien species?

Invasive alien species (IAS) constitute a major threat to global biological diversity. In order to control their spread, a detailed understanding of the factors influencing their distribution is essential. Although international trade is regarded as a major force structuring spatial patterns of IAS, the role of other social factors remains unclear. Despite studies highlighting the importance of strong governance in slowing drivers of biodiversity loss such as logging, deforestation, and agricultural intensification, no study has yet analyzed its contribution to the issue of IAS. Using estimates of governance quality and comprehensive spatiotemporal IAS data, we performed multiple linear regressions to investigate the effect of governance quality upon the distribution of species listed under “100 of the worst” IAS in 38 Eurasian countries as defined by DASIE. Our model suggested that for countries with higher GDP, stronger governance was associated with a greater number of the worst IAS; in contrast, for the lowest GDP countries under analysis, stronger governance was associated with fewer of these IAS. We elucidate how the quality of governance within a country has implications for trade, tourism, transport, legislation, and economic development, all of which influence the spread of IAS. While our findings support the common assumption that strengthening governance benefits conservation interventions in countries of smaller economy, we find that this effect is not universal. Stronger governance alone cannot adequately address the problem of IAS, and targeted action is required in relatively high‐GDP countries in order to stem the influx of IAS associated with high volumes of trade.     

Adaptive governance of synthetic biology

As resistance to synthetic biology slowly coalesces, governments and scientists need to be proactive to avoid a repetition of the near moratorium on genetically modified crops in Europe.Synthetic biology has the potential to revolutionize the development of drugs, vaccines, biofuels and food crops, and to clean up environmental pollution, but the field is relatively young. It is too early to tell how it will deliver new fundamental understandings in the life sciences, how this understanding will create opportunities for innovation to satisfy human needs and the extent to which its applications might generate hazards to people or the environment.Synthetic biology is now being linked by NGOs to genetically modified (GM)crop development with potentially similar results for its future development [1]. An NGO advocacy coalition has published a report on synthetic biology that echoes the arguments made against GM crops in the late 1990s [2] with the intention to “… reign [sic] in these new technologies”, with an ideologically based framing of the technology as inherently hazardous, based on negative conjectures with little relationship to actual evidence.The prospect of another polarized public debate had already convinced policy-makers and scientists to pay early attention to the governance of synthetic biology.Reports from the US Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (PCSBI) and from the International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) [3,4] have attempted to develop principles of good governance that could be applied to synthetic biology, given the uncertainty about the nature of future developments. The reports recommend that policy-makers should aim for a governance approach that can adapt to changing innovation opportunities emerging from new scientific discoveries; encourage and promote innovation; minimize risk to humans and the environment; and balance the interests and values of all relevant stakeholders. The reports reject calls for a moratorium on synthetic biology until all risks are identified and mitigated, but also reject unfettered freedom for scientific investigation. The governance of synthetic biology should achieve an equitable balance between promoting innovation and imposing constraints to ensure safety. Dialogue with stakeholders should be conducted in a manner that welcomes the respectful exchange of opposing views and encourages mutual accommodation of differing opinions. Dialogues should contribute to decisions being taken on the basis of the best available evidence. Considering potential dual-use risks of synthetic biology, both reports note that undue restriction might be counterproductive to safety and security, by preventing the development of effective safeguards against, for example, terrorist threats.These principles of good governance are part of a long-term political and policy experiment that claims to use a lighter touch and be less top-down [5], but in effect has extended the regulatory process into areas that used to be left to market forces. It claims to be more democratic by involving a wider range of stakeholders in the decision-making process, but in effect has merely led to a shift in power away from industry and commerce towards advocacy groups with equally limited claims to represent ‘society''. The impact of implementing this governance agenda on innovation has so far been more marked and damaging in Europe than in the USA, but the recent criticism by Friends of the Earth and other advocacy groups might signal a change of emphasis and put the balanced approach to the governance of synthetic biology, that has so far been achieved, at risk.Indeed, the availability and quality of the scientific evidence used to support policy advice and decision-making, has been a major casualty of the new governance approach as applied in the EU to GM crops—as evidenced by the destruction of GM crop trials designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of these crops. The role of neutral, impartial evidence in political decision-making has been diminished in favour of evidence that suits the agendas of particular advocacy groups. Politicians themselves helped to create this situation by shying away from making difficult, unpopular decisions on the basis of hard evidence, in favour of trying to accommodate all opinions, including ideologically driven agendas. Arthur Miller describes the sense of liberation experienced when eschewing the role of evidence in decision-making: “It was as though the absence of real evidence was a release from the burdens of this world; [….] Evidence, in contrast, is effort; leaping to conclusions is a wonderful pleasure…” [6].There is a need to reappraise both the role of scientific evidence in informing policy and political decision-making on new biotechnologies, and the legitimate context in which to accomodate value-based opinions as represented by NGOs.