Institutional Contexts and Policy Discourses: A Case of Water Quality Governance in Lake Erie Basin

IF 1.8 3区 经济学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Bereket Isaac, R. D. de Loë
{"title":"Institutional Contexts and Policy Discourses: A Case of Water Quality Governance in Lake Erie Basin","authors":"Bereket Isaac, R. D. de Loë","doi":"10.5334/IJC.1057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is growing recognition that the effects of discourse in shaping environmental policy are nested within broader institutional contexts. Consequently, over the last decade there have been increasing efforts by institutionalism scholars to theorize the link between discourses and institutions. This emerging ‘discursive institutionalism’ perspective considers discourse not only as an ensemble of ideas and their expression in language, but also takes into account the institutional contexts in which discourses emerge and are institutionalized in social practices. The application of this perspective in the context of resource governance has mainly focused on how dominant discourses become institutionalized into regulatory frameworks. However, the converse scenario, whereby the institutional context shapes the very nature of the discourse itself, has received much less attention in the scholarly literature. In this study, we employ the discursive institutional perspective to better understand the policy processes in the province of Ontario and the state of Ohio regarding the problem of eutrophication in Lake Erie, shared between Canada and the United States. Data collected through interviews, documentary sources, the news media and other relevant sources was analyzed with a process tracing approach. Results show that the federal and provincial/state level institutional arrangements in the two regions have influenced the nature of the ideational and interactive dimensions of discourse differently in the context of developing Domestic Action Plans (DAP) to address the eutrophication problem. Divergences in policy discourses revealed in the analysis show how different institutional contexts acted as filters for the varying cognitive and normative aspects of the policy discourses ultimately adopted in the DAPs. These differences may shape the relative effectiveness of achieving nutrient runoff reduction targets that initially set in motion the development of the DAPs themselves.","PeriodicalId":47250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of the Commons","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of the Commons","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/IJC.1057","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is growing recognition that the effects of discourse in shaping environmental policy are nested within broader institutional contexts. Consequently, over the last decade there have been increasing efforts by institutionalism scholars to theorize the link between discourses and institutions. This emerging ‘discursive institutionalism’ perspective considers discourse not only as an ensemble of ideas and their expression in language, but also takes into account the institutional contexts in which discourses emerge and are institutionalized in social practices. The application of this perspective in the context of resource governance has mainly focused on how dominant discourses become institutionalized into regulatory frameworks. However, the converse scenario, whereby the institutional context shapes the very nature of the discourse itself, has received much less attention in the scholarly literature. In this study, we employ the discursive institutional perspective to better understand the policy processes in the province of Ontario and the state of Ohio regarding the problem of eutrophication in Lake Erie, shared between Canada and the United States. Data collected through interviews, documentary sources, the news media and other relevant sources was analyzed with a process tracing approach. Results show that the federal and provincial/state level institutional arrangements in the two regions have influenced the nature of the ideational and interactive dimensions of discourse differently in the context of developing Domestic Action Plans (DAP) to address the eutrophication problem. Divergences in policy discourses revealed in the analysis show how different institutional contexts acted as filters for the varying cognitive and normative aspects of the policy discourses ultimately adopted in the DAPs. These differences may shape the relative effectiveness of achieving nutrient runoff reduction targets that initially set in motion the development of the DAPs themselves.
制度背景与政策话语:伊利湖流域水质治理案例
人们越来越认识到,话语在制定环境政策方面的作用嵌套在更广泛的制度背景中。因此,在过去的十年里,制度主义学者越来越多地努力将话语与制度之间的联系理论化。这种新兴的“话语制度主义”视角不仅将话语视为思想及其在语言中的表达的集合,而且还考虑到话语在社会实践中产生和制度化的制度背景。这一观点在资源治理背景下的应用主要集中在主导话语如何制度化为监管框架。然而,相反的场景,即制度语境塑造话语本身的本质,在学术文献中受到的关注要少得多。在这项研究中,我们采用了散漫的制度视角,以更好地理解安大略省和俄亥俄州关于伊利湖富营养化问题的政策过程,这是加拿大和美国共同的问题。通过访谈、文献来源、新闻媒体和其他相关来源收集的数据采用过程追踪方法进行分析。结果表明,在制定国内行动计划(DAP)以解决富营养化问题的背景下,这两个地区的联邦和省/州一级的制度安排对话语的概念和互动维度的性质产生了不同的影响。分析中揭示的政策话语的差异表明,不同的制度背景如何过滤最终在DAP中采用的政策话语中不同的认知和规范方面。这些差异可能会影响实现养分径流减少目标的相对有效性,这些目标最初启动了DAP本身的开发。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of the Commons
International Journal of the Commons ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
10.50%
发文量
17
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信