Environment and

Governance
This key sheet is part of a series of awareness raising tools
developed by Irish Aid to accompany its Environment Policy
for Sustainable Development.

IRISH AID Key Sheet // 09

This key sheet is part of a series of awareness raising tools developed by Irish Aid
to accompany its Environment Policy for Sustainable Development. Key strategies
for implementing the policy are:
i) mainstreaming, where the environment is recognised as a critical part of
sustainable development and is taken into account in all policies, programmes,
activities and funding decisions; and
ii) partnership, where Irish Aid works with national governments, multilateral
organisations, international agencies and civil society organisations to
contribute to sustainable development.

The first step in environment mainstreaming is to understand how the environment

is linked to the development challenge or sector you are responsible for. In this key
sheet, we describe how environmental governance is significant for development,
and suggest sources of additional information. We will produce more detailed
guidelines on mainstreaming environment and development at a later date.

Environmental governance matters to development because:

> The environment is disproportionately important to poor people
> The environment presents unique governance dilemmas, such as multiple
public and private rights, multiple scales and seasonality
> Governance failures lie behind many environmental problems
> Improved governance can lead to better environmental management
> Environmental management can be an effective entry point for wider
governance reform
Field of crops, Tanzania.
2. The environment matters Box 1 Counting the ‘requirements’ for

to poor people good governance and environmental health

According to the 2005 Environmental Sustainability Index,
A review of 23 Participatory Poverty Assessments in the five most significant variables influencing environmental
developing countries revealed — in all cases — that poor sustainability all related to governance:
people consider the environment to be crucial to their well- > civil and political liberties;
being (DFID 2001). The poor are disproportionately dependent
on environmental goods (e.g. food, fuel, medicines) and > government effectiveness;
services (e.g. climate regulation, nutrient and water cycling, > quality of political institutions;
crop pollination) for their livelihoods and incomes (see Key
sheet: Biodiversity and poverty reduction). They are also > the environmental governance regime;
particularly vulnerable to environmental shocks such as > participation in international environmental agreements
pollution, droughts and floods.
(Source: Yale and Columbia Universities 2005)
Yet poor people often lack access to and control over natural
Each new edition of the World Development Report
resources, other than those that are degraded. This lack of
stresses ever more ‘requirements’ for good governance
secure rights, combined with low incomes, discourages the
– 45 are listed in 1997, 78 in 1998, 106 in 2000, and 116 in
poor from investing in managing their environmental assets
2002. This poses three dilemmas:
well. Improved environmental governance is therefore key to
development and poverty reduction. > ‘Good governance’ must be rooted in the realities of
particular contexts.
> Governments cannot meet multiple requirements

3. The environment alone. They should pursue these through

decentralisation and partnerships.

presents unique > Not all requirements will be necessary or practical in

most countries. The priorities, and feasabilities need
governance dilemmas to be assessed and tested against the problems that
affect most people, and particularly the poorest and
least powerful groups.
The environment brings benefits over spatial and temporal
scales beyond those at which most governments and (Source: Bass et al 2005)
businesses operate. Carbon storage in plants, for instance, can
help to mitigate global climate change over many years rather
than having an immediate local or national impact. 4. Governance failures
Western economic and institutional systems have tended to
overlook and undervalue environmental goods and services,
lie behind many
leaving them poorly regulated and scrutinised. This lack of
effective ownership leaves environmental assets open to
environmental problems
unsustainable exploitation, corruption and abuse. Governance is the exercise of authority – the decisions,
regulations and enforcement that determine how we will act
Finally, unpredictable environmental hazards are hard to plan and who will benefit; it encompasses laws, institutions and
and budget for. For all of these reasons, decision makers tend decision-making processes that embody this authority (WRI
to ignore the environment’s importance for development, or 2005). Good governance results in the fair and transparent
only consider it after problems have arisen. management of a country’s resources and institutions.

Too often in developing countries, poor governance means that

a few rich people enjoy environmental benefits while many
poor people bear environmental costs. Attention often focuses
on poor people’s impacts on the environment, but often it is
elites — or inequitable regimes — that are behind the poverty-
environment ‘downward spiral’. As C. S. Lewis wrote in 1947, (Pearce 2005). In countries such as Tanzania where a public
“what we call ‘Man’s power over Nature’ turns out to be a expenditure review has been conducted specifically for
power exercised by some men over other men with nature as the environment, such information may begin to influence
its instrument.” treasuries (see Key sheet on rates of return).

4.1 Development policy takes little account 4.4 Global governance systems reflect the
of the environment interests of the richest, most powerful
Development planning rarely takes account of environmental nations
goods and services and how their benefits are distributed. It Multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) are the main
also tends to ignore the risks associated with environmental instruments of international environmental governance, but
hazards such as climate change. Thus it is hard to know when they have little power to tackle the inequalities in international
development is breaching environmental limits, and who is trade that often underlie environmental degradation. Trade
suffering as a result. Meanwhile, authorities responsible for barriers erected by developed countries can discourage
natural resources and the environment tend to be too weak to developing countries from investing in sustainable agriculture
keep up with development dynamics, and to identify necessary (e.g. soil, water and biodiversity conservation) and controlling
investments in environmental information and management. the use of polluting agro-chemicals. This makes it difficult for
developing countries to pursue the MEAs’ aims. Furthermore,
Broad policy support for addressing poverty-environment there is generally inadequate funding to support equitable
linkages is rarely reflected in clear national targets and participation by developing countries in the negotiation and
responsibilities. Less than 5% of countries expect to review of MEAs (see Box 2).
achieve the Millennium Development Goal for environmental
sustainability (MDG7) by 2015. Indeed, in 2005, only four
countries reported on the complete set of eight MDG7 Box 2 Irish Aid support for international
indicators (Ghanime and Lee 2005). negotiations
Irish Aid provides financial support to the secretariats
4.2 Excluding the poor from natural of the Rio Conventions to facilitate the participation of
resources promotes environmental delegates from developing countries in International
damage negotiations. Countries need to be represented by an
Poor people (particularly women) tend to have little political adequate number of skilled negotiators in order to ensure
that their national priorities are heard in negotiations. Irish
voice and representation, and only weak rights over land and
Aid also supports UNITAR to provide training in negotiation
natural resources. This prevents them from accessing credit
skills and in understanding the conventions to developing
and investing in land and other environmental assets. It also
country delegates, so that they can make the most of their
makes them vulnerable to displacement by more powerful
participation at international meetings.
groups – as when loggers displace forest dwellers or property
developers displace the urban poor. Indeed, rich groups
with the power to convert environmental assets into greater
wealth are the root cause of much environmental degradation.
Improving poor people’s rights to property and resources, and
their participation in public decisions, is therefore critical for
poverty reduction.

4.3 Poor governance is an obstacle to

pro-poor environmental investment
Poverty reduction strategies rarely address environmental
budgetary and governance constraints, focusing instead on
sector-based technical issues (Waldman 2005). Treasuries
and planning authorities rarely allocate development finance
for environmental investments, and very few countries
have specific medium-term funding plans for environmental
management. However, recent research has shown that
the returns on environmental investments can be high
5. Governance locally by adaptive systems involving participatory and/or
collective learning and action. This much was recognised by

improvements have led the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, which pointed to

a wide range of ‘response options’ that directly or indirectly

to better environmental entail local-level governance improvements.

management
6. Environmental
The 1992 Earth Summit put too much faith in the capabilities
of national governments’ environment authorities. It is management can be an
now clear that most real progress since has resulted from
improved governance linked to improved interactions between effective entry point for
stakeholders, such as:
> Multi-stakeholder engagement in standards and certification:
wider governance reform
Civil society and private sector participation has been key
Environmental management may be a practical and relatively
in the recent proliferation of standards for environmental
uncontroversial entry point to achieving broader pro-poor
management and the generation of market-based incentives,
governance reform. The provision of environment-related
such as forest, fisheries and organic food certification
services — such as water supply, sanitation and drainage – can
and labelling. Such schemes are often governed by multi-
be a concrete way for local government to build partnerships
stakeholder groups. Because these schemes identify what
with citizens’ groups and to demonstrate improved
is good and how can it be measured and rewarded through
effectiveness to the public.
the market, they have increasingly influenced broader
government policy and legislation.
Democratising decision-making over the ownership, control
> Decentralisation and local decision-making: Civil society and management of natural resources is another avenue for
organisations and groups of poor people have negotiated promoting and testing good governance – a strategy seized by
improved rights, responsibilities, returns and relationships people’s movements in Uganda in the case of forest resources
– often in partnership with local government or environment (see Box 3); in Brazil for decisions over wild rubber resources
authorities to improve service delivery (e.g. community-led and in Kerala, India for fisheries (WRI 2005). However, the
sanitation in slums, and community management of wildlife management of some other resources can be more contentious.
and forests). This has also helped to improve transparency The profits from some – such as oil – can lead to corruption,
and accountability in the use of environmental assets. which reduces the state’s incentives to shift to greater
Environmental management is now increasingly driven accountability and more equitable resource management.

Box 3 Improving local environmental governance – forestry in Africa

The International Institute for Environment and Development is the lead organisation in the Forest Governance Learning
Group (FGLG), an international network of forestry experts who are working together to identify ways of managing forests in a
way that is sustainable and fair.
The FGLG focuses on making forest governance work for the poor and other marginalised groups by bringing together
scientists, forestry officials, civil society organisations and other stakeholders. It has country groups in Cameroon, Ghana, India,
Indonesia, Malawi, Mozambique, Niger, South Africa, Uganda and Vietnam.
Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment (ACODE) convenes FGLG-Uganda, which brings together members
from the National Forestry Authority, Forest Inspection Division, several members of parliament, the NGO Environmental Alert
and several others.
The Ugandan group has been working on improving the handling of forestry issues in the courts, integrating forestry with
the penal code and developing more accountable forest decision making. It has played a key part in the campaign against
degazettment of Mabira Forest Reserve.
The activities of other groups in Africa have included reconciling different approaches in development policies for land and
for forests, promoting debate on corruption in the forest sector, and establishing new rules recognising the rights of local
communities to control forest resources.
7. Options for integrating – what is being spent on what environmental assets and
with what results. This can then be linked to improving

environment and taxation and licensing systems both to raise revenue

from public environmental assets such as forests and

governance wildlife, and to support investment in long-term, pro-poor

environmental management (OECD 2005).

General governance principles that can be employed to inform > Improve the capacity of national environment authorities
environmental governance work are greater participation, to act as rules-based public institutions in tracking,
fairness, access to justice, transparency, accountability, regulating, controlling and administering public
efficiency, leadership/direction and timeliness. environmental assets – especially where they currently
have mandates that do not recognise intimate poverty-
Environment-specific governance principles derive from environment links. This is often most required in forest
international law that has emerged in response to the unique and wildlife areas where there may be a conflict of
characters of environmental problems, notably ‘polluter pays’, objectives between national aims (e.g. for timber revenue
precaution, participation in decision-making, and prior informed or conserving rare species) and local livelihood needs. It
consent. may be necessary to recognise informal and secondary
rights to land and environmental assets and exercise
Specific activities informed by such principles could include: caution in implementing ‘one-size-fits-all’ titling systems
where elites are better able to make effective claims.
7.1 With government:
7.2 With civil society:
> Create the capacity to support engagement by civil society
and multiple local organisations – and to respond to them. > S
 upport independent environmental watchdogs and
Exercises such as Participatory Poverty Assessments social justice groups that can track both the use of
are excellent means for such engagement, enabling real environmental assets and activities to protect against
environmental issues to be explored in depth. Given that environmental hazards, improving transparency of both
real progress is often through experiment and local cases, government and private sector activity – especially by
Irish Aid’s partner IIED has found that multi-stakeholder strengthening civil society’s legal and communications
environmental governance ‘learning groups’ can offer an skills and by helping to include them in policy processes.
unthreatening – but effective – way forward in identifying > R
 einforce communication and alliances between poor
‘what works’ for better environmental governance. people’s organisations such as slum dwellers’ and rural
>  uild environmental information systems that track the
B producers’ groups, to support their advocacy and analysis
value and use of key environmental assets in relation to work around their environmental deprivations and goals.
the needs of the poor e.g. environmental wealth accounts
(World Bank 2005). A simple national ‘state of environment’ 7.3 With local government and local
report can be helpful, especially if it includes poverty- organisations representing poor groups:
environment indicators and shows who bears the costs,
> Learn where and how local organisations are effective
benefits and risks of different uses of the environment.
in linking environmental management and poverty
If linked to e.g. a multi-stakeholder forum that is asked
reduction in practice, and what their ‘business models’
to regularly review the state of the environment, this can
are, e.g. producer associations, neighbourhood groups
improve transparency. Irish Aid could support this type of
and intermediaries such as NGO service delivery groups,
work as part of a wider donor group.
as well as exploring multiple local norms regarding how
>  ink information on where poverty is, and where
L poverty-environment issues are integrated or traded-off.
environmental problems are e.g. environment indicators
>  upport poor communities’ own plans to manage
S
in poverty monitoring, and poverty-environment mapping
the environment for poverty reduction. Of particular
(such as the World Resources Institute has been doing in
importance are local-level institutions that are accessible
East Africa). This can start to show correlations and where
to poor people and that have adapted to complex sets of
poverty/environment solutions most need to be coordinated.
resource rights. For example, supporting poor people’s
> Support environment budget reviews as part of all common property management institutions, such as
sectors’ inputs into public expenditure review processes community forestry groups and pastoralists’ associations.
 Irish Aid supports WRI to carry out his work.
7.4 With international governance regimes:
References and Resources
> Support stronger Southern delegations and more
equitable, cost-effective and accountable negotiation Bass S, Reid H, Satterthwaite D, and P. Steele. 2005. Reducing
processes in multilateral environmental agreements Poverty and Sustaining the Environment: The Politics of Local
(MEAs), as well as agreements (e.g. on trade and Engagement. Earthscan, London
finance) that influence the value of environmental assets
in developing countries. The most pressing issue is DFID. 2001. Poverty and the Environment: What the Poor Say.
improving agreements on climate change to enable Environment Dept Issues Paper No. 1
developing countries to both mitigate and adapt to its
impacts. Waldman L. 2005. Environment, politics and poverty: lessons
from a review of PRSP stakeholder perspectives. Institute of
> Develop incentives to implement international
Development Studies, Brighton
agreements as well as mechanisms to ensure their
compliance and enforcement. It is critical to reward poor
Ghanime L and Lee L. 2005. Environmental Sustainability in
people for their role in providing environmental services,
100 Millennium Development Goal Country Reports. UNDP
such as biodiversity protection. It is helpful if the reporting
Energy and Environment Group, New York
and enforcement mechanisms of multiple MEAs can be
rationalised and streamlined to help countries with limited
Grindle, M. (2002) Good enough governance: poverty reduction
capacity, such as small-island developing states.
and reform in developing countries. Report prepared for the
> Support environmental democracy, through promoting Poverty Reduction Group of the World Bank.
Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration (1992), which seeks
to tackle inequalities of access to information, public Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Millennium
participation in decision-making and access to justice Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis Report (World Resources
in environmental matters. Partnership for Principle 10 Institute, Washington
is an international partnership open to governments,
international organisations and civil society groups to OECD Development Assistance Committee. 2005. Guidance
enhance and accelerate Principle 10 at the national level. on environmental fiscal reform. OECD, Paris
> Support – and encourage national government sign-up
to – transparency and anti-corruption schemes such as Pearce D.W. 2005. Investing in Environmental Wealth for
the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, which Poverty Reduction. Prepared for the Poverty Environment
examines revenue flows and usage from mining and Partnership. UNDP, New York
minerals (www.eitransparency.org); and the Forest Law
Enforcement Governance and Trade Initiative, which aims World Bank. 2005. Where is the Wealth of Nations? Measuring
to halt trade in illegally-harvested wood (www.illegal- Capital for the 21st Century. World Bank, Washington DC
logging.info).
World Resources Institute. 2005. World Resources 2005: The
wealth of the poor. WRI, Washington DC

Yale Centre for Environmental Law and Policy and CIESIN,

Columbia University. 2005. Environmental Sustainability Index.
Yale and Columbia Universities.

This key sheet was produced for Irish Aid by the

International Institute for Environment and
Development (IIED). IIED is an independent, non-profit
research institute. Set up in 1971 and based in London,
IIED provides expertise and leadership in researching
and achieving sustainable development Printed on Era Silk recycled paper,
made from 50% genuine recovered paper waste
(see: http://www.iied.org). and 50% virgin fibre from well-managed forests.

Photography: Pieternella Pieterse/Irish Aid