Approaches and Stimuli

doi:10.4324/9781315870168-3

ABSTRACT

Analysis reveals a range of different approaches which have characterized the development and implementation of green plans and strategies in industrial countries. The green plans and strategies covered by this study are compared against these characteristics in Table 2.1. Table 2.1 Strategy Characteristics Compared

	Australia	Canada Projet	Canada G Plan	Denmark	EU	France PNE	France FCSD
RESPONSE
Preceded UNCED	yes	no	yes	no	yes	yes	no
Response to UNCED	no	yes	no	yes	no	no	yes
Response to public concern for the environment	yes	no	yes	no	partly	yes	no
GOVERNMENT/PARLIAMENT
Official government mandate	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes
High-level government commitment	yes	?	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes
Formally reported to Cabinet	yes	no	yes	yes	N/A	?	no
Formally presented to parliament	no	no	yes	?	yes	yes	no
Led to legislative changes	yes	no	yes	?	yes	yes	no
Led to institutional changes	yes	no	?	?	yes	yes	no
FOCUS
Environment focus	no	no	yes	yes	yes	yes	no
Sustainable development focus	yes	yes	no	no	yes	no	yes
Concerned mainly with federal areas of responsibility	yes	no	yes	no	N/A	no	no
Set target time horizon(s)	no	no	yes	no	yes	yes	yes
Focus on special issues studies	no	no	no	no	no	no	yes
LINKS
Directly linked to budget process	no	no	yes	no	no	?	no
Linked to mainstream national planning	no	no	yes	yes	no	yes	no
Formal link with other national strategies	yes	no	no	yes	no	no	no
Influenced by regional strategies	no	yes?	yes	yes	no	?	no
Formal link with provincial/state strategies	yes	no	no	no	no	no	no
Promoted/supported local Agenda 21s	yes	?	no	yes	yes	yes	no
Developed independent from Convention strategies	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes
PROCESS
Independent process	no	yes	no	no	no	no	no
Continuing (cyclical) process	yes	yes?	no	yes	yes	no	?
Cross-govt./inter-departmental process	yes	no	yes	yes	N/A	yes	no
Undertaken exclusively within single ministry	no	no	no	no	mainly	no	no
PARTICIPATION
Extensive stakeholder participation	yes	yes	no	no	no	no	no
Consultation with industry/NGOs/public	yes	yes	yes	no	some	yes	yes
Mainly internal government exercise	no	no	yes	yes	yes	yes	no

	Lative	Netherlands		Netherlands	New Zealand		Norway
	NEEP/NEAP	NEPP	NEPP2	Action Plan	Res Man Act	Enviro.2010	Rep 46	Rep 13
RESPONSE
Preceded UNCED	no	yes	no	yes	yes	no	yes	no
Response to UNCED	?	no	part	part	no	no	no	yes
Response to public concern for the environment	no	yes	no	no	partly	no	no	no
GOVERNMENT/PARLIAMENT
Official government mandate	yes	yes	yes	no	yes	yes	yes	yes
High-level government commitment	?	yes	yes	no	yes	yes	yes	yes
Formally reported to Cabinet	yes	yes	yes	no	yes	?	yes	yes
Formally presented to parliament	no	?	yes	no	yes	?	yes	yes
Led to legislative changes	no	yes	?	no	yes	?	yes	no
Led to institutional changes	no	?	?	no	yes	?	?	no
FOCUS
Environment focus	yes	yes	yes	no	yes	mainly	yes	no
Sustainable development focus	no	part	part	yes	partly	partly	part	yes
Concerned mainly with federal areas of responsibility	no	–	–	–	no	no	no	no
Set target time horizon(s)	yes	yes	yes	yes	no	yes	no	no
Focus on special issues studies	no	no	no	no	no	no	no	no
LINKS
Directly linked to budget process	no	?	yes	no	no	yes	yes	no
Linked to mainstream national planning	no	?	yes	no	yes	yes	yes	no
Formal link with other national strategies	no	no	no	no	no	yes	no	no
Influenced by regional strategies	yes	–	–	no	no	no	yes	no
Formal link with provincial/state strategies	no	–	–	no	no	no	no	no
Promoted/supported local Agenda 21s	no	no	yes	no	no	yes	yes	no
Developed independent from Convention strategies	no	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes
PROCESS
Independent process	no	no	no	yes	no	no	no	no
Continuing (cyclical) process	yes	yes	yes	no	no	yes	no	no
Cross-govt/inter-departmental process	yes	yes	yes	–	yes	yes	yes	yes
Undertaken exclusively within single ministry	no	no	−	no	no	no	no	no
PARTICIPATION
Extensive stakeholder participation	no	no	part	no	yes	no	no	no
Consultation with industry/NGOs/public	yes	no	yes	no	–	yes	yes	no
Mainly internal government exercise	yes	yes	no	no	no	no	yes	yes

	Poland NEP	Sweden gov bill	Sweden Enviro 93	UK	USA PCSD	USA env goals
RESPONSE
Preceded UNCED	yes	no	yes	no	no	no
Response to UNCED	no	yes	no	yes	yes	no
Response to public concern for the environment	yes	partly	no	no	?	no
GOVERNMENT/PARLIAMENT
Official government mandate	yes	yes	departmental	yes	yes	set by EPA
High-level government commitment	?	yes	no	yes	?	?
Formally reported to Cabinet	yes	yes	no	yes	not yet	not yet
Formally presented to parliament	yes	yes	no	yes	not yet	? summer 95
Led to legislative changes	yes	yes	no	no	not yet	not yet
Led to institutional changes	?	not yet	no	limited	not yet	not yet
FOCUS
Environment focus	mainly	yes	yes	no	no	yes
Sustainable development focus	some	yes	–	yes	yes	no
Concerned mainly with federal areas of responsibility	no	no	no	no	?	? yes
Set target time horizon(s)	yes	yes	yes	yes	?	yes
Focus on special issues studies	no	no	yes	no	yes	yes
LINKS
Directly linked to budget process	no	no	no	no	no	EPA budget
Linked to mainstream national planning	no	yes	no	no	no	no
Formal link with other national strategies	no	no	no	no	no	no
Influenced by regional strategies	yes	some	yes	no	no	? no
Formal link with provincial/state strategies	no	no	no	no	no	no
Promoted/supported local Agenda 21s	no	yes	yes	finance support	no	no
Developed independent from Convention strategies	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes
PROCESS
Independent process	no	no	no	no	no	no
Continuing (cyclical) process	no	yes	no	no	?	?
Cross-govt./inter-departmental process	some	yes	yes	yes	no	some
Undertaken exclusively within single ministry	mainly	no	no	no	no	mainly EPA
PARTICIPATION
Extensive stakeholder participation	no	no	no	no	partly	no
Consultation with industry/NGOs/public	some	yes	no	yes	yes	limited
Mainly internal government exercise	yes	yes	yes	yes	no	yes