Table 3 - uploaded by Grant Pink
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Despite sharing relatively common purposes, Environmental Enforcement Networks are each unique. Part of this is because the circumstances vary under which they were established. A range of factors influence their development and ultimately determine their relative capability and potential maturity as a network.This paper postulates five possible ph...
Citations
... They did this through partnerships, involving other organizations and actors, and establishing and diffusing new niches of governance (Andonova, 2010;De Burca et al., 2013: 734;Glasbergen et al., 2007;Shepston Overly, 2010). Emblematic of these approaches were new international enforcement collaborations among policing organizations (Pink and Lehane, 2011;White, 2011) as well as the growing pluralization of policing (Bayley and Shearing, 1996;Loader, 2000) and NGO engagement in crime monitoring and policing (such as Greenpeace and Humane Society whaling monitoring). White (2012: 5-6) provides a useful illustration of the different types of engagement pursued by NGOs in environmental policing; identifying NGOs, such as the RSPCA, who are granted official status and legal rights in regards to investigation and prosecution of animal abuse, as well as other NGOs who play a more indirect role in policing by collecting evidence of illegal activities that are forwarded to relevant authorities and can be used in a court of law to prosecute environmental offenders. ...
During the first half of the 20th century, responsibility for enforcing environmental laws often fell to police.
This chapter charts how the transboundary nature of environmental harms has contributed to and is creating shifts in environmental policing, which is broadly conceived as the governance of environmental security (Shearing, 2015). After briefly mapping the traditional enforcement approach, the chapter will examine ongoing shifts toward networks, cooperation, and more pluralized forms of security governance. After mapping these developments, the chapter turns its focus to some emerging issues and areas of analysis for understanding and explaining environmental problems. and policing. It argues that the ‘cooperation imperative’ demanded by global environmental problems has for sometime been shifting thinking and practice toward new responses to environmental harms (Holley et al., 2011). We suggest that the most recent iterations of these new approaches can be characterized as ‘New Environmental Governance’ (NEG) (Holley et al., 2011). The analysis proceeds in three parts. Part one commences by charting how the transboundary nature of environmental harms has led to NEG, highlighting shifts in the thinking and arrangements of security governance, from traditional environmental enforcement to markets, early forms of partnerships and finally NEG. Part two goes on to examine the NEG approach, identifying its distinguishing features; examples in practice and the key benefits that NEG could contribute to effectively police and govern transboundary environmental harms. Attention is paid to international harms and domestic contexts (including those of weak states), since transboundary environmental problems infiltrate administrative regions at all levels, in addition to crossing sovereign state boundaries (Yu, 2011: 188–189). In the course of this chapter we will highlight recent debates, with a focus on whether nodal forms of environmental governance such as NEG can deliver on their promised benefits to offer a more effective, efficient and legitimate resolution to environmental harms than traditional modes of environmental policing and enforcement. As we will see below, precisely because of its nodalapproach NEG’s successes in practice often depend on its coexistence with traditional enforcement focused forms of environmental policing (De Burca et al., 2013; Driessen et al., 2012: 157; for a general discussion of forms of collaboration between police and other agents of security governance see Ayling et al., 2009). Part three will offer some concluding thoughts and sum up the chapter by setting out emerging issues and new areas of analysis for understanding and explaining environmental problems and policing.
Climate change regulation, like all forms of regulation, requires allegations of non-compliance to be investigated. Enforcing climate change law and regulations is already sufficiently challenging given a myriad of social, economic and environmental issues. However, climate change regulation is further complicated due to cross-jurisdictional issues, transnational factors and its intersection with traditional and crossover crimes such as fraud and money laundering. It is anticipated that both non-compliant entities and organised criminal enterprises will challenge and frustrate the efforts of government regulators as they attempt to enforce climate change legislation. Therefore climate change regulators have much to learn from the experiences of other enforcement and regulatory agencies that have cooperated and worked collaboratively through various Environmental Enforcement Networks to advance and maximise their enforcement effort. This chapter considers the opportunities for cooperation, it recommends the establishment of a Climate Change Enforcement Network, and provides information for consideration if such a network was established. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media New York. All rights are reserved.
https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=u6ZTDAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT222&ots=G8j43AwrAW&sig=Ns9exJDo8akWEzFRf_fucH2KX6k#v=onepage&q&f=false
