Environmental Management

Critical thinking and emerging practices

Peter Mulvihill, S. Harris Ali

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781317480259
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Environment & Energy Policy
• Index: Politics & International Relations

The field of Environmental Management (EM) involves a broad and evolving repertoire of practices. The field originated around 1970 in response to new policy, regulation and public concern about environmental issues. EM has undergone many changes and improvements since then, progressing from a reactive, compliance-based focus toward, in leading cases, practices reflecting strong commitment to sustainability. And yet, EM remains, for the most part, ill-equipped to deal with the complex and highly uncertain implications of the ecological crisis.

Environmental Management offers a rigorous critique of conventional EM and explores alternative ideas, frameworks and approaches that are currently considered "fringe", but which have the potential to transform the practice of EM. This book goes beyond narrow definitions and considers questions regarding the purpose, roles, scope and potential of environmental management. EM is situated and contextualized within the evolving and expanding realm of environment and sustainability literature. The book argues that new approaches to EM need to be more flexible, imaginative and better equipped to address future environmental problems of a scale and severity previously unforeseen.

This book will be of great interest to students and scholars of environmental management, environmental planning, resource management, and environmental assessment.

1
INTRODUCTION

Organization and Purpose

The aim of this book is twofold: to examine the theory and practice of environmental management (EM) from a critical perspective, and to explore emerging directions that may improve EM and shape more sustainable futures. Our intent is not to examine environmental management in a comprehensive or exhaustive way – that would be beyond the scope of this monograph. The discussion is more selective, focusing on a limited number of themes, issues and prospects. Our motivation is straightforward. In our experience teaching courses that address environmental management, we have identified a key shortcoming in the literature: most of it can be described as conventional or mainstream (or else overly technical), and relatively little of it could be described as critical or alternative. The alternative literature that could inform new approaches to environmental management lurks largely unnoticed in places that have been generally regarded to be outside of the field as conventionally defined. In practice, important insights, ideas and experiences that could influence the field of EM can originate from anywhere across the spectrum of the natural or social sciences, arts or humanities, rather than primarily or only from “environmental” literature, theory and practice. Ideas that may seem peripheral at present may turn out to be influential or even transformative. It is therefore necessary to explore EM in a critical, provocative manner, and ask new, difficult questions about its purpose and its future directions.

In the more mainstream literature on environmental management, it is rare to find EM discussed explicitly or in a focused manner – more often, it is subsumed under other headings and treated superficially and uncritically. As Barrow (2006: 164) observes: “Environmental management is sometimes little more than a catch-phrase”. It tends to appear as a secondary topic alongside more elaborate discussions of, for example, environmental planning, integrated resource management (RM), watershed management, or adaptive management (which are also relatively new streams of literature). Likewise, it is difficult, though possible, to find critical or contextualized definitions of environmental management. Too often, narrow definitions are proposed, setting aside important questions regarding the purpose, roles, scope and potential of environmental management. It is not sufficient to only discuss, as is common enough in the mainstream literature, “principles” or criteria for good practice. It is also necessary to situate and contextualize environmental management within the evolving and expanding realm of environment and sustainability literature. Finally, it is necessary to continually re-examine and revisit standard assumptions about EM.

What is environmental management? Where did it come from? How has it evolved? These fundamental questions are addressed in Chapter 3 (Drivers of Change: Key Forces Influencing New Directions in EM) and Chapter 4 (Conventional Environmental Management: Origins, Evolution, Characteristics and Critique). Before that, in Chapter 2 (Context: Challenges Facing Environmental Management), we discuss the context which necessitated the introduction of formal EM some four decades ago, and which continues to demand not only continual improvement in EM practice, but arguably a radical reorientation of the field. Indeed, this is a major theme of our book: slow, incremental improvements in conventional environmental management will not be sufficient. Dramatic improvements are needed to leap-frog to a new era in which sustainability is an explicit and overarching goal and more of EM’s potential is realized as a force of positive change.

The first four chapters of this book set the stage for our discussion of alternative approaches to environmental management, which then unfolds in Chapter 5 (Current State of Alternative EM: Theory, Practice, Limitations and Gaps), Chapter 6 (Critical Social Science and the Ecological Crisis), Chapter 7 (The Critical Analysis of Climate Change as a Case in Study), Chapter 8 (Disaster Studies and the Ecological Crisis), Chapter 9 (A Socio-Ecological Approach to the Ecological Crisis), Chapters 10 and 11 (Towards a Philosophical Approach to the Ecological Crisis, Parts I and II). We conclude with Chapters 12 and 13, a discussion of principles, opportunities and prospects for alternative environmental management.

Throughout the book, we distinguish generally between two approaches to environmental management: “conventional” and “alternative” (or “emerging”). Our intent is not to suggest that a simple bifurcated world of environmental management exists, either conventional or alternative. Rather, it is to suggest that a tension between conventional and emerging approaches has always existed and has shaped the evolution of environmental management. In the chapters that follow, we discuss a range of approaches, from the most conventional to the more progressive and beyond into what may be on the horizon. In our exploration of streams of literature that have been under-recognized in terms of their potential relevance to EM, we pay particular attention to the field of critical social science and, more precisely, the fledgling subfield of environmental sociology, including disaster studies.

In writing this book, our goal is to add to the existing literature on environmental management, but from new and different angles. This book is not intended to be one that will be easy for everyone to agree with. We believe that the field of environmental management is currently in a pattern of slow improvement or incremental progress. We hope to offer provocative arguments and alternatives that may resonate with others who are not satisfied with the current situation and state of the art. We hope that this book will complement existing literature on environmental management and serve as a counterpoint to the more mainstream works that currently dominate the field. We contend that EM, to a great extent, lacks a solid or coherent theoretical foundation, and we discuss concepts and theories that may help fill ongoing gaps.

We are currently at an interesting point in time as we reflect on possibilities for EM to be better informed by critical social science and environmental sociology. Environmental or ecological issues have traditionally been a minor theme in mainstream sociology, but they are commanding increasing attention. The longstanding anthropocentrism of the social sciences is giving way to a more integrated perspective and there is increasing engagement with socio-ecological matters. Environmental issues, once framed more narrowly, are now framed much more broadly. At the same time, new “types” of environmental problems – most notably climate change – challenge our fundamental beliefs about the effectiveness of management measures and solutions. This shift and reorientation creates possibilities for new theoretical and practical directions in EM; alternatives may emerge from a much wider array of sources than ever before. We explore these possibilities in detail in Chapters 6 to 11.

Defining Environmental Management?

Definitional challenges and dilemmas are common across the broad field of environmental and sustainability literature. This should not be surprising, since literature that can be categorized as explicitly “environmental” has existed for less than 50 years, and has undergone rapid development and diversification. There is still little or no agreement on how to define key environmental terms, many of which are used loosely or interchangeably. Environmental management is even vaguer than most environmental terms. It was not coined or trumpeted with fanfare, as, for example, “sustainable development”, or “corporate social responsibility”. Instead, it quietly gained currency as a more explicitly “environmental” version of antecedents such as forest management, natural resource management or pest management. It is, to a great extent, a generic and unglamorous term, although its role and consequences are potentially far-reaching.

Environmental management is commonly perceived as a systematic and coordinated approach to addressing environmental issues, risks and problems. It is related to, but to some extent distinct from other processes such as environmental policy, regulation, standards, assessment or auditing. It is often thought of as primarily a corporate function, the domain of industry. It is often confused with, or reduced to “environmental management system”, although the former is much broader than the latter. In addition, it is sometimes confused with “development” or “resource management”. It is not uncommon, in some contexts, to see activities such as mining, agriculture or forestry referred to, erroneously, as environmental management, thus equating extraction with management. This trivializes and undermines the true purpose of EM as a force of change and not as an enabling agent for business as usual practices. The term “environment” in EM has clear implications; whereas resource management has often been interpreted as management for the purposes of sustained exploitation, EM goes beyond that in suggesting that the environment itself must be sustained. This is an important, though not always recognized distinction.

Let’s consider a selection of definitions drawn from literature pertaining to environmental management:

a) “Environmental management is the means of controlling or guiding human– environment interactions to protect and enhance human health and welfare and environmental quality” (Randolph, 2004: 3).

b) “Environmental management is a system of administrative functions that are used to (i) develop; (ii) implement; and (iii) monitor the environmental strategy of a business” (Antweiler, 2014: 2).

c) “Environmental management seeks to steer the development process to take advantage of opportunities, try to avoid hazards, mitigate problems, and prepare people for unavoidable difficulties by improving adaptability and resilience” (Erickson and King, 1999; International Network for Environmental Management website: www.inem.org, accessed January 2005, cited from Barrow, 2006: 5).

d) “Environmental management is a process concerned with human–environment interactions, and seeks to identify: what is environmentally desirable; what are the physical, economic, social and technological constraints to achieving that; and what are the most feasible options . . .” (El-Kholy, 2001: 15, cited from Barrow, 2006: 5).

e) “The control of all human activities which have significant impact upon the environment” (Barrow, 2006: 6).

f) “Management of the environmental performance of organizations, bodies and companies” (Sharratt, 1995, cited from Barrow, 2006: 6).

A spectrum of definitions is noted above, ranging from broader conceptions of the purpose of EM (Randolph, Erickson-King, El-Kholy and Barrow) to considerably narrower (Antweiler as well as Sharratt frame EM in organizational terms rather than societal in scope). The scope of EM may be confined to corporate activities, or more broadly to encompass a range of human activities, or most expansively to address the totality of all human/environment interactions – a virtually infinite realm. “Management” is variously described as guidance, steering, controlling, protecting, avoiding, mitigating or otherwise. When defined in restrictive terms or reduced to the point where it is interchangeable with EMS, it may be easier to visualize as a limited, finite function or responsibility, but it becomes less meaningful and inclusive. And it must be acknowledged that the term “management” has connotations that are problematic – it sounds technical and top-down, a vestige of a bygone era in which the ethos and tyranny of “command and control” were more common. This kind of terminological baggage is unavoidable as long as the operative term “management” retains its currency. The term “environmental governance” has gained considerable momentum in the last decade and its relationship with EM is not entirely clear, although it may be argued that EM should be thought of increasingly as a component of governance. We will return to this debate throughout the book, but this brings us to a more general point about environmental terminology. Most, if not all, environmental terms are evolving and contested, as should be expected in such a new field. “Sustainability”, for example, remains a highly controversial term, even after 30 years of mainstream use. It has been critiqued on many levels and to some it remains vague, inaccessible or, even worse, heavily compromised. Many others, however, find that sustainability is a useful and compelling term. This underlines two points: we need to be as clear as possible about the meaning of terms and use them with precision, and we need to continually improve and refine environmental terminology, adding greater meaning and nuance.

It is also important to note that, notwithstanding the selection of quotes above, definitions of environmental management are not plentiful; indeed, there is a strong tendency for them to be absent in the literature. A recent book titled Manual of Environmental Management (Belcham, 2015) provides an excellent example of this pattern. Despite the title of this 300-page volume, environmental management is never, at any point, defined explicitly. The book contains many definitions of key concepts under the categories of environmental policy, law, sustainability, environmenteal management system (EMS), reporting, assessment, auditing, etc., but a definition of environmental management is not offered. This is reflective of a strong tendency in the literature pertaining to environmental management; it is generally assumed that the term is so understandable and accessible that it requires no definition and no explicit discussion. It is assumed that only the more specific terms under the broad umbrella of environmental management need to be defined. Environmental management thus remains largely amorphous and difficult to pin down. In Chapter 6 of Belcham’s book, Environmental Management and Assessment Tools, the central term (EM) is undefined and simply assumed, while there is an explicit discussion and definition of environmental impact assessment (EIA), environmental risk assessment, environmental auditing, EMS and other terms. Once again, this is characteristic of the general literature; definition and explicit discussion of environmental management is suspended or overlooked, while topics such as EIA and EMS are used as avatars for the more general subject. This misses an important point; it is also important to examine the concept of environmental management with explicitness and precision. Moreover, it reinforces a common fallacy that tools or processes such as EMS or EIA are sufficient to ensure that the goals of environmental management will be achieved. In turn, this fallacy reflects overconfidence in standards, policies and techniques to achieve substantive outcomes, when in reality they are only pieces of a much more complicated puzzle.

Throughout this book we challenge limiting and restrictive conceptions of environmental management. For example, in the recent book Elements of Environmental Management, Antweiler offers a narrow definition and argues that environmental management should be thought of as a business activity and should not be confused with broader goals such as “management of the environment” or sustainability (p. 1). We believe the opposite is true: environmental management is a broad, collective, collaborative endeavor – it is nothing less than governance for sustainability. However, before we begin to make that case, let us consider some examples of environmental management to demonstrate that it comes in many forms. What does it look like? It is, for example, an application of herbicide or integrated pest management in a utility corridor. It is a fish ladder on a salmon-bearing river. A public information sign directing hikers away from ecologically sensitive areas in a park. A prescribed burn or replanting of trees. A beach closed to the public. A decommissioned rail bed converted to a bicycle path. The installation of solar panels or wind turbines. A training course in emergency spill response. The purchase of carbon offset credits. The installation of wildlife tunnels underneath highways. Designation of heritage trees in urban areas. Conversion of diesel engines to alternative fuels. Recyling and reuse. National, regional or local climate change reduction strategies. And, of course, much more. Environmental management is a million different things, occurring at all scales, and it is impo...