IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ufzdps/102010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Legitimacy analysis of multi-level governance of biodiversity: Evidence from 12 case studies across the EU

Author

Listed:
  • Suéskeviécs, Monika

Abstract

Legitimacy is regarded as one critical aspect of biodiversity management and nature conservation arrangements. Multi-level governance is claimed to pose several challenges to legitimacy. The aim of this paper is to review some legitimacy challenges in multilevel governance contexts, and to analyse empirically biodiversity governance in different EU countries in the light of these challenges. Four legitimacy criteria - legal compatibility, accountability, representation and inclusion, and transparency - serve as a framework for theoretical and empirical analysis. The analysis is based on twelve cases of multilevel biodiversity governance from different EU countries. The results show that several of the legitimacy challenges in multilevel governance can be observed in the cases, for example the poor inclusion of certain concerns at some time points of the decision process, difficulties in being accountable towards multiple levels simultaneously, or the weak visibility of the decision process either for the general public or for the immediate participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Suéskeviécs, Monika, 2010. "Legitimacy analysis of multi-level governance of biodiversity: Evidence from 12 case studies across the EU," UFZ Discussion Papers 10/2010, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ufzdps:102010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/44755/1/635661241.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Berghöfer, Augustin & Wittmer, Heidi & Rauschmayer, Felix, 2008. "Stakeholder participation in ecosystem-based approaches to fisheries management: A synthesis from European research projects," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 243-253, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marion Glaser & Philipp Gorris & Beatrice Padovani Ferreira & Annette Breckwoldt, 2018. "Analysing Ecosystem User Perceptions of the Governance Interactions Surrounding a Brazilian Near Shore Coral Reef," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, May.
    2. Fred A. Johnson & Mitchell J. Eaton & James H. Williams & Gitte H. Jensen & Jesper Madsen, 2015. "Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Sander Van den Burg & Marian Stuiver & Jenny Norrman & Rita Garção & Tore Söderqvist & Christine Röckmann & Jan-Joost Schouten & Ole Petersen & Raul Guanche García & Pedro Diaz-Simal & Mark De Bel & L, 2016. "Participatory Design of Multi-Use Platforms at Sea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Marian Stuiver & Sander van den Burg & Wenting Chen & Claire Haggett & David Rudolph & Phoebe Koundouri, 2020. "Stakeholder involvement in technological design: Lessons learned from the MERMAID and TROPOS projects," DEOS Working Papers 2019, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    5. Lopes, Rita & Videira, Nuno, 2019. "How to articulate the multiple value dimensions of ecosystem services? Insights from implementing the PArticulatES framework in a coastal social-ecological system in Portugal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Pamela Durán-Díaz, 2023. "Sustainable Land Governance for Water–Energy–Food Systems: A Framework for Rural and Peri-Urban Revitalisation," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-31, September.
    7. Santiago, Jose L. & Ballesteros, Marta A. & Chapela, Rosa & Silva, Cristina & Nielsen, Kåre N. & Rangel, Mafalda & Erzini, Karim & Wise, Laura & Campos, Aida & Borges, Maria F. & Sala, Antonello & Vir, 2015. "Is Europe ready for a results-based approach to fisheries management? The voice of stakeholders," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 86-97.
    8. Spyros NIAVIS & Theodora PAPATHEOCHARI & Harry COCCOSSIS, 2019. "Supporting Stakeholder Analysis Within Iczm Process In Small And Medium-Sized Mediterranean Coastal Cities With The Use Of Q-Method," Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(1), pages 53-74, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:ufzdps:102010. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/doufzde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.