Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
will be sustained, lies in legally embedding the institutional capacity within
an overarching framework whose operation, in part, is predicated upon the
work of bodies tasked with the generation and analysis of information.
Conversely, it is clear from the examples provided by Brooks, Jones and
Virginia, and that are cited in Haas
'
c resources for
producing information that are not entrenched are inherently vulnerable
to governmental perception of the seriousness of environmental crises.
Finally, it is desirable, in view of this potential for political and economic
pressure to compromise the pursuit of ecological objectives, that responsi-
bility for collecting and interpreting information and for giving advice
should be devolved to an independent body with statutorily founded
authority for performing these tasks rather than being left with governmen-
tal agencies that are more likely to be diverted by extraneous considerations
in undertaking them. 23 In this regard Brunnée and Toope suggest, in the
context of international collaboration over environmental problems, that
giving power to independent bodies to take on the collection and evaluation
of data would help to depoliticise the identi
work, that scienti
cation of problems and the
setting of priorities for responding to them. 24 Again, there is no guarantee
that establishing an independent body will ensure its political insulation.
However, this devolution of power is at least more likely to result in the
continuous production of information than leaving responsibility for this
with an agency whose will to improve understanding of ecosystems may be
eroded over time by the need to consider other governmental objectives in
performing its duties.
A legal system in which a scienti
c advisory body is embedded may have
a capacity for directing the production of and interpreting ecological infor-
mation, but thought should also be given to how and by whom that
information will be generated. In practice, arrangements will vary according
to the need for research to advance understanding of ecosystem behaviour
and for monitoring systemic responses to particular disturbances. However,
at a basic level, interaction is most likely to be between a central scienti
c
advisory body and governmental authorities at local, regional and national
levels. Collaboration between them would build
a common set of under-
standings upon which to base future management efforts and further efforts
to generate additional information
'
. 25 Bodies that are directly concerned
'
with governance can,
through coordinating monitoring and public
23 Doremus,
'
Adaptive Management
'
,81.
24 Brunnée and Toope,
'
Environmental Security
'
,43.
25 Karkkainen,
'
Collaborative Ecosystem Governance
'
, 220.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search