[雙語(yǔ)翻譯]環(huán)境治理外文翻譯--環(huán)境治理及其對(duì)保護(hù)實(shí)踐的啟示（英文）

1、MINI REVIEWEnvironmental governance and its implications for conservation practiceDerek Armitage1, Rob de Lo¨ e1, Stockholm Resilience Centre, University of StockholmKeywordsAdaptation; environmental conservation;c

2、onservation policy; resource management;sustainability.CorrespondenceDerek Armitage, Department of Environmentand Resource Studies, Faculty of Environment,University of Waterloo, 200 University AvenueWest, Waterloo, ON N

3、2L 3G1, Canada. Tel:519-88-4567 x36795; fax: 519-746-0292. E-mail:derek.armitage@uwaterloo.caReceived22 October 2011Accepted13 March 2012EditorDr. Mark Lubelldoi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00238.xAbstractGovernments are n

4、o longer the most important source of decision makingin the environmental field. Instead, new actors are playing critical decision-making roles, and new mechanisms and forums for decision making are be-coming important (

5、e.g., in some contexts regulation is being supplemented orreplaced by markets and cooperative arrangements). New ways of governingin relation to the environment have important implications for the practice ofconservation

6、. Greater awareness of key ideas and concepts of environmentalgovernance can help conservation managers and scientists participate more ef-fectively in governance processes. Understanding how conservation practice isinfl

7、uenced by emergent hybrid and network governance arrangements is par-ticularly important. This short review explores key environmental governanceconcepts relevant to the practice of conservation, with specific reference

8、toinstitutional fit and scale; adaptiveness, flexibility and learning; the coproduc-tion of knowledge from diverse sources; the emergence of new actors and theirroles in governance; and changing expectations about accoun

9、tability and legit-imacy. Case-based examples highlight key directions in environmental gover-nance.Introduction“The era of management is over”- Ludwig (2001)Environmental governance is a rapidly growing fieldin applied

10、human-environment scholarship with impli-cations for conservation practice. This article is aimedat current and future conservation managers and sci-entists who find themselves leading or participating inmultistakeholder

11、 processes where outcomes are uncer-tain. Citizens, elected officials, government agencies, andfirms expect these processes to achieve broad goals ofecosystem stewardship and economic development. Suchexpectations are in

12、creasingly understood as governancechallenges.The article introduces the concept of environmentalgovernance and identifies key issues that conservationscientists and managers must increasingly confront, in-cluding proble

13、ms of institutional fit and scale; adaptive-ness, flexibility and learning; the coproduction of knowl-edge from diverse sources; the emergence of new actorsand their roles in governance; and changing expectationsabout ac

14、countability and legitimacy. These concerns arecritical, we suggest, because those engaged in conserva-tion practice are increasingly embedded within, or inter-secting with, broader governance processes. Understand-ing t

15、rends in environmental governance will (1) permitscientists and managers to participate more effectively inreal-world conservation initiatives; (2) encourage reflec-tion on the assumptions and values that frame their own

16、and others role in conservation initiatives; and (3) fur-ther recognize how conservation occurs in a contestedand power-laden social context.Why environmental governance?Management and governance are not synonymous.Manag

17、ement involves operational decisions to achieveConservation Letters 5 (2012) 245–255 Copyright and Photocopying: c ?2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 245D. Armitage et al. Environmental governancethe rule of law, and particip

18、atory, consensus-oriented de-cision making (Crabb´ e Armitageet al. 2009).Models of governance reflect assumptions about howsociety should be organized, how problems should be ad-dressed, and by whom (Glasbergen 19

19、98). Most striking isthe hollowing out of the ”State” over the past two decadesand the hybridization of governance arrangements. Aspart of this shift, there is opportunity for emergent mod-els of governance involving sta

20、te and nonstate actors co-operating to achieve shared goals. However, this shift alsoreflects a push for the privatization of commons resourcesand off-loading of responsibility rather than a move to-ward more deliberativ

21、e processes and greater participa-tion (B¨ ackstrand et al. 2010). For conservation scientistsand managers it is important to recognize the compet-ing political ideologies underlying this transition (LarsonB¨ a

22、ckstrand et al. 2010), and the roles thatthey may play in that process.A growing interest in cooperative models of gov-ernance will not replace the existing regulatory ap-proach (Meadowcroft 1998). Instead, cooperative m

23、od-els of governance are more likely to work effectivelywithin an enabling system of government regulations,and be compatible with other governance mechanisms,such as the use of market incentives. Models of environ-menta

24、l governance are not mutually exclusive. Acrossa wide spectrum of environmental problems (from bio-diversity conservation to watershed management), hy-brid forms of governance are emerging that combine thestate, markets,

25、 and civil society. Examples include co-management (e.g., shared power to make decisions aboutfish quotas), public–private partnerships (e.g., certifica-tion schemes) and private–social partnerships (e.g., pay-ment for e

26、cosystem services) (Lemos & Agrawal 2006), allof which can conceivably coexist, and the combinationsof which will influence conservation outcomes (Duit &Galaz 2008). However, it is crucial that managers andscient

27、ists engaged in conservation initiatives do not as-sume that hybrid governance forms are necessarily betterat achieving conservation outcomes than more conven-tional government-centered efforts.Efforts to resolve water i

28、ssues (e.g., conservation forecosystem use, allocation for human needs) in theMurray–Darling Basin of Australia provide a useful illus-tration. Governance in the basin involves hybridizationof several of the “ideal” mode

29、ls described earlier. A regu-latory model remains the cornerstone of governance, butmarket regulation is a key tool for allocating water re-sources, cooperative management is used at key planningstages, and a variety of

30、approaches are used to engage cit-izens. Adaptive management is an explicit goal of waterreforms (Allan 2008). The Murray–Darling Basin Author-ity (established in 2007) is charged with the task of cre-ating a single, con

31、sistent, and integrated basin plan, andpublic involvement and consultation in this process arerequired. However, through the creation of water mar-kets, key decisions about how water will be used in theMurray–Darling Bas

32、in are now also being made by indi-viduals and companies that are engaged in water trading(de Lo¨ e & Bjornlund 2010). The range of actors involvedin water has broadened considerably relative to previousdecades.

33、 Governments (State and Commonwealth) playkey roles, but individuals and corporations participatingin water markets are now central actors in water gover-nance, and catchment management organizations com-prised of indivi

34、dual and sector representatives now havelegally defined planning roles.Key concepts and emerging directions in environmental governanceConventional notions of what governance implies (goodgovernance), how governance take

35、s place (through thestate), and what governance processes seek to achieve(efficient resource use) are shifting. We draw attentionto five key concepts or issues in environmental gov-ernance: (1) recognition of the importa