東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Regulatory Capacity, Governance Fail...

Large, Daniel.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Regulatory Capacity, Governance Failure, and the Challenge of Urgent Environmental Problems: A Critical Analysis of Conservation Strategies for the Greater Sage-Grouse.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Regulatory Capacity, Governance Failure, and the Challenge of Urgent Environmental Problems: A Critical Analysis of Conservation Strategies for the Greater Sage-Grouse./
Author:	Large, Daniel.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2023,
Description:	184 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-12, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International84-12B.
Subject:	Public administration. -
Online resource:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30486415
ISBN:	9798379712464

Regulatory Capacity, Governance Failure, and the Challenge of Urgent Environmental Problems: A Critical Analysis of Conservation Strategies for the Greater Sage-Grouse.
Large, Daniel.

Regulatory Capacity, Governance Failure, and the Challenge of Urgent Environmental Problems: A Critical Analysis of Conservation Strategies for the Greater Sage-Grouse. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2023 - 184 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-12, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Cornell University, 2023.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

The state is traditionally believed to possess a singular capacity to impose controls to address urgent environmental problems. In the U.S., shifts in governance since the 1980s have eroded centralized public authorities' role in environmental policy and management. Trust and confidence in federal institutions have declined to historic lows. These developments suggest potential governance failure: specifically, a situation in which government loses ability to steer public policy. Prevailing institutional norms-including excitement attached to voluntarism and collaboration-have led scholars and practitioners to overlook how these developments have weakened federal regulators' role in environmental governance. Of particular concern is regulatory capacity: regulators' ability and willingness to intervene to advance public policy objectives for which they are responsible. To address this question, this dissertation draws on public administration and policy studies to analyze how state-level regulatory capacity for biodiversity conservation is constrained when federal intervention is marginalized. This research focuses on a recent high-profile conflict over implementation of the Endangered Species Act to protect the greater sage-grouse-a charismatic ground-nesting bird. To respond to both economic and environmental objectives, public and private actors emphasized biodiversity offsetting as a response to obligations under the Act. Offsetting enables developers-e.g., oil and gas drillers, mining companies, road-builders-to "offset" adverse habitat impacts by{A0}conserving habitat elsewhere. These characteristics make offsetting policy useful to analyze how environmental regulatory capacity was constructed and constrained. This analysis draws on a case study of the Colorado Habitat Exchange-a ten-year effort to develop an offsetting program for sage-grouse-and a study of U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's efforts to introduce national offsetting policy during this same period. Findings demonstrate the conflict between sage-grouse and energy development in Colorado placed federal and state government's commitment to implementing the Act in crisis, exposing limits of regulatory capacity. Without regulatory capacity to impose controls on economic activity, the Exchange imploded and the national offsetting policy was withdrawn. Whether these outcomes reflect governance failure is ambiguous. Government competently steered policy but largely to avoid intervening for conservation. Findings suggest that while shifts in governance have expanded collaboration, this has undermined government's critical role in these arrangements. Without rehabilitating this role, rapid biodiversity loss appears likely to continue.

ISBN: 9798379712464Subjects--Topical Terms:

531287
Public administration.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Conservation

Regulatory Capacity, Governance Failure, and the Challenge of Urgent Environmental Problems: A Critical Analysis of Conservation Strategies for the Greater Sage-Grouse.
LDR:04089nmm a2200409 4500 001 2393794
005 20240604073554.5
006 m o d
007 cr#unu||||||||
008 251215s2023 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798379712464
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30486415
035 $a AAI30486415
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Large, Daniel. $0 (orcid)0000-0002-3687-5066 $3 3763270
245 1 0 $a Regulatory Capacity, Governance Failure, and the Challenge of Urgent Environmental Problems: A Critical Analysis of Conservation Strategies for the Greater Sage-Grouse.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2023
300 $a 184 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-12, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Wolf, Steven.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Cornell University, 2023.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a The state is traditionally believed to possess a singular capacity to impose controls to address urgent environmental problems. In the U.S., shifts in governance since the 1980s have eroded centralized public authorities' role in environmental policy and management. Trust and confidence in federal institutions have declined to historic lows. These developments suggest potential governance failure: specifically, a situation in which government loses ability to steer public policy. Prevailing institutional norms-including excitement attached to voluntarism and collaboration-have led scholars and practitioners to overlook how these developments have weakened federal regulators' role in environmental governance. Of particular concern is regulatory capacity: regulators' ability and willingness to intervene to advance public policy objectives for which they are responsible. To address this question, this dissertation draws on public administration and policy studies to analyze how state-level regulatory capacity for biodiversity conservation is constrained when federal intervention is marginalized. This research focuses on a recent high-profile conflict over implementation of the Endangered Species Act to protect the greater sage-grouse-a charismatic ground-nesting bird. To respond to both economic and environmental objectives, public and private actors emphasized biodiversity offsetting as a response to obligations under the Act. Offsetting enables developers-e.g., oil and gas drillers, mining companies, road-builders-to "offset" adverse habitat impacts by{A0}conserving habitat elsewhere. These characteristics make offsetting policy useful to analyze how environmental regulatory capacity was constructed and constrained. This analysis draws on a case study of the Colorado Habitat Exchange-a ten-year effort to develop an offsetting program for sage-grouse-and a study of U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's efforts to introduce national offsetting policy during this same period. Findings demonstrate the conflict between sage-grouse and energy development in Colorado placed federal and state government's commitment to implementing the Act in crisis, exposing limits of regulatory capacity. Without regulatory capacity to impose controls on economic activity, the Exchange imploded and the national offsetting policy was withdrawn. Whether these outcomes reflect governance failure is ambiguous. Government competently steered policy but largely to avoid intervening for conservation. Findings suggest that while shifts in governance have expanded collaboration, this has undermined government's critical role in these arrangements. Without rehabilitating this role, rapid biodiversity loss appears likely to continue.
590 $a School code: 0058.
650 4 $a Public administration. $3 531287
650 4 $a Sustainability. $3 1029978
650 4 $a Conservation biology. $3 535736
653 $a Conservation
653 $a Endangered Species Act
653 $a Environmental governance
653 $a Governance failure
653 $a Regulation
653 $a Regulatory capacity
690 $a 0617
690 $a 0640
690 $a 0408
710 2 $a Cornell University. $b Natural Resources. $3 3277005
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 84-12B.
790 $a 0058
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2023
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30486415