| Summary: | International transboundary environmental issues that affect the natural and social systems
of more than one nation state are becoming increasingly prevalent and complex due to
population increases and economic activity since the late 18th century and post-1945
contemporary globalization. While international and transnational governance institutions
have also burgeoned, they are still inadequate to deal with transboundary environmental
issues because of a number of endemic shortcomings. I argue that governance comprises
five dimensions: (1) international/transnational; (2) state/substate; (3) market-economy; (4)
civil society; and (5) individual agency; that planning is a form of governance, and that
improved collaborative planning is one way to enhance a governance process to address
environmental issues in an international and transboundary context. First, from the
literature I identify three shortcomings of international/transnational regimes: (1) lack of
horizontal coordination between regimes, (2) lack of vertical coordination within and
between regimes, and (3) lack of enforceability of internal consensus within, and
compliance with regimes. Second, I create an analytical collaborative planning governance
framework for assessing how collaborative planning can assist in resolving or managing
international transboundary environmental issues. Third, I test the analytical framework by
applying it to research and assess the effectiveness of existing Georgia Basin/Puget Sound
(GB/PS) international/transnational governance regimes: the BC/Washington State
Environmental Cooperation Council (ECC) and one of its task forces, the Georgia
Basin/Puget Sound International Task Force (GB/PS ITF). Results indicate that the three
shortcomings of international and transnational regimes identified in the literature are
present, partially confirming that for North America, regional cross-border governance
institutions tend to be single-issue and geographically flow-oriented. Also, in spite of many
transboundary linkages, the BC/Washington State Cascadia cross-border region exhibits
minimal institutional scope and depth. Major conflicts are revealed between economic and
environmental visions. Best efforts of individual agents have been impeded by this lack of
social, political and institutional leverage. The conceptual analytical framework is shown to
develop iteratively during application and interpretation. The thesis contributes to collaborative planning knowledge by creating an analytical
collaborative planning framework and evolving it by applying it to assess the effectiveness
of collaborative planning in illustrative examples of environmental governance regimes in
an international transboundary context; a context absent from existing collaborative
planning literature. The thesis addresses mitigation of GB/PS transboundary environmental
issues by making recommendations for policy changes in GB/PS transboundary
governance institutions and for further research. === Science, Faculty of === Resources, Environment and Sustainability (IRES), Institute for === Graduate
|
|---|
