Informational governance - Environmental Reform in the Information Age - page 100

earlier. Four insights together explain the complexities of the environ-
mental state in informational governance.
First, it is impossible to generalise the intentions, effects and assess-
ments of all informational governance practices, institutions and
arrangements. Similar forms and formats of joint environmental pol-
icy making and also informational governance work out differently
in distinct political, cultural and economic contexts. Overall, conclu-
sions independent from specific time-space constellations and contexts
cannot easily be drawn.
Second, in the field of environmental protection informational gover-
nance arrangements and practices are there to stay, similar to changing
roles and tasks of states. Both developments are rooted in fundamen-
tal transformations of modern societies and their environmental gov-
ernance systems. The question should not be whether we favour them
or not, but how they are to be framed and operationalised to let them
fulfil conditions of sound, effective and democratic environmental gov-
ernance.
Third, states will most likely (have to) perform significant tasks in
successful informational governance, for instance, with respect to cod-
ification of new developments, the sanctioning of transparency and
disclosures, the organising and facilitation of informational processes,
the verification of information or the verification of auditors and so on.
Similarly, (the system of) states will remain crucial institutions in set-
ting basic environmental quality norms and standards. But one should
not be too frightened of shifts in tasks and obligations from states to
other actor arrangements, as long as the basic conditions for environ-
mental protection remain in the end safeguarded, either by the state
or any other solid sanctioning institution. Such developments should
be judged against criteria of maintaining and providing environmental
sustainability, rather than following Pavlov reactions 'in defence of the
state'.
Fourth, it nevertheless remains extremely useful and insightful to
constantly examine and assess the origins and consequences of shifts
in governance, also those related to informational governance. What
do these shifts entail for the activities, tasks and responsibilities of the
state and of other actors and institutions? It would certainly not be the
first time that core and powerful actors manage to frame new develop-
ments for their own interests, rather than for more common interest
of environmental sustainability and democratic governance. But, by