Premium
Talking with the Donkey: Cooperative Approaches to Environmental Protection
Author(s) -
Harrison Kathryn
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
journal of industrial ecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.377
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1530-9290
pISSN - 1088-1980
DOI - 10.1162/jiec.1998.2.3.51
Subject(s) - rulemaking , negotiation , enforcement , incentive , government (linguistics) , public relations , function (biology) , business , law and economics , public economics , economics , political science , law , microeconomics , linguistics , philosophy , evolutionary biology , biology
Summary In recent years, governments throughout the world have expressed growing interest in cooperative approaches to environmental protection, including negotiated rulemaking, flexible approaches t o enforcement, and voluntary codes and agreements. It is often argued that cooperative approaches are more cost effective, more conducive t o innovation, and better able t o promote fundamental attitudinal change than traditional “command and control” regulation. However, the overly broad term “cooperative approaches” fails t o acknowledge fundamental differences among these novel po I icies, including distinct ions between mandatory and voluntary programs and between those that involve bipartite negotiations between government and business and those that invite participation by a broader range of interests. This article analyzes these cooperative approaches first by offering a framework to distinguish among various cooperative policy instruments. Second, the article critically examines theoretical arguments and empirical evidence concerning one class o f cooperative approaches, voluntary challenges and agreements. The most striking finding is how little we know about the effectiveness of voluntary approaches. This is a function not only of the quite recent experience with these approaches, but also of more fundamental inattention t o program evaluation and obstacles to evaluation inherent in voluntary programs. The article concludes with a call for a more rigorous program of research to examine the effectiveness of the new policy instruments and t o compare them with traditional regulation and market‐based incentives.