Transparency for governance: The mechanisms and effectiveness of disclosure-based and education-based transparency policies
When transparency is used as a tool for global environmental governance - i.e., to induce targeted actors to reduce environmentally-harmful behaviors, it can operate via disclosure or education. Disclosure-based policies improve the information the public has about targeted actors' behaviors while education-based policies improve the information targeted actors have about their own behaviors, whether that is information about consequences, alternatives, or social norms. Various social and political forces shape whether and what type of transparency policies are adopted. Disclosure-based and education-based transparency policies are effective under different conditions and operate through different mechanisms. Both often operate through mechanisms that reflect an instrumental logic of consequences but also can and do operate through mechanisms that reflect a normative logic of appropriateness, by increasing the legitimacy accorded to global environmental norms and the social accountability targeted actors feel regarding their behaviors. Understanding the differences in the mechanisms by which disclosure-based and education-based transparency policies operate suggests that both scholars and practitioners should use caution in understanding why, and predicting when, such policies will work.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808, April.
- Mark Stephan, 2002. "Environmental Information Disclosure Programs: They Work, but Why?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 83(1), pages 190-205.
- Tannenwald, Nina, 1999. "The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Normative Basis of Nuclear Non-Use," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(03), pages 433-468, June.
- Aarti Gupta, 2008. "Transparency Under Scrutiny: Information Disclosure in Global Environmental Governance," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 8(2), pages 1-7, 05.
- Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy in earth system governance: A research framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1856-1864, September.
- Dryzek, John S. & Stevenson, Hayley, 2011. "Global democracy and earth system governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1865-1874, September.
- Aarti Gupta, 2010. "Transparency in Global Environmental Governance: A Coming of Age?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 10(3), pages 1-9, August.
- Spagnuolo, Francesca, 2011. "Diversity and pluralism in earth system governance: Contemplating the role for global administrative law," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1875-1881, September.
- Mark Cohen & V. Santhakumar, 2007. "Information Disclosure as Environmental Regulation: A Theoretical Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(3), pages 599-620, July.
- Radoslav S. Dimitrov, 2005. "Hostage to Norms: States, Institutions and Global Forest Politics," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 5(4), pages 1-24, November.
- James G. March, 1978. "Bounded Rationality, Ambiguity, and the Engineering of Choice," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 587-608, Autumn.
- Z rn, Michael & Checkel, Jeffrey T., 2005. "Getting Socialized to Build Bridges: Constructivism and Rationalism, Europe and the Nation-State," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 59(04), pages 1045-1079, October.
- Ann Florini, 2010. "The National Context for Transparency-based Global Environmental Governance," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 10(3), pages 120-131, August.
- Downs, George W. & Rocke, David M. & Barsoom, Peter N., 1996. "Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(03), pages 379-406, June.
- Checkel, Jeffrey T., 2005. "International Institutions and Socialization in Europe: Introduction and Framework," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 59(04), pages 801-826, October.
- Checkel, Jeffrey T., 2001. "Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(03), pages 553-588, June.
- Finnemore, Martha & Sikkink, Kathryn, 1998. "International Norm Dynamics and Political Change," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(04), pages 887-917, September.
- Virginia Haufler, 2010. "Disclosure as Governance: The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and Resource Management in the Developing World," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 10(3), pages 53-73, August.
- March, James G. & Olsen, Johan P., 1998. "The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(04), pages 943-969, September.
- Aarti Gupta, 2010. "Transparency as Contested Political Terrain: Who Knows What about the Global GMO Trade and Why does it Matter?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 10(3), pages 32-52, August.
- Alter, Karen J., 1998. "Who Are the “Masters of the Treaty”?: European Governments and the European Court of Justice," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(01), pages 121-147, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:11:p:1882-1890. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.