Many have discussed the crucial role that environmental nongovernmental organizations (ENGOs) have played in the implementation of nature protection policies across European member states. However, there are important differences in the opportunity structures among new and old member states that influence how ENGOs can act and undertake activities. This article seeks to clarify the role of ENGO capacity building within the context of multilevel environmental governance and focuses on a case in which Slovene ENGOs mobilized against the siting of 80 windmills in a natural area suggested for protection under the EU Birds and Habitats Directive. The dispute involved ENGOs seeking to pursue nature protection objectives against state authorities who prioritized green energy infrastructural development. The article analyses the mobilization strategies pursued and the combination of material, cognitive, social and symbolic resources used. The results suggest that these resources had to be mobilized and organized along both horizontal (domestic) and vertical (international) axes, and that this combination appears key in advancing an environmental protection agenda.

Based on a literature review of over 160 journal articles and books, this paper examines the ecosystem management and environmental governance approaches, and looks for common topics and integrated research agendas. While scientific articles on environmental governance stem primarily from social science research, the ecosystem management approach is more natural-science-oriented. A review of journal articles from the ISI Web of Knowledge (Web of Science) reveals that the two research communities hardly interact. The paper discusses two thematic linkages between the two approaches: the debates dealing with the scale and level of environmental policy; and the discussions surrounding multi-stakeholder participation. Moreover, the article identifies areas with a high potential for the establishment of common ground, such as the current discussion on science-policy interfaces. We argue for more interaction, claim that the two research approaches can learn from each other, and discuss the potential for the development of interdisciplinary research agendas

This chapter focuses on forms of and challenges for risk communication within regional environmental governance, based on an analysis of five environmental risks in the Baltic Sea – marine oil transportation, chemicals, overfishing, eutrophication and alien species. We address questions about how risks are framed and communicated and also analyse the role of communication in the governance process. Our main focus is on risk communication with the public (e.g. existing institutional arrangements and procedures of risk communication), but we also relate this analysis to discussions on communication with a broad range of actors and issues of stakeholder participation and communication. In the study we have identified some examples of relatively well-working risk communication with parts of the organised public in the Baltic Sea region (BSR), such as in fisheries or eutrophication, but also a number of different barriers and obstacles. Our key result from this study is that BSR consists of many national institutions for risk communication, but that there are hardly any centralised institutions for risk communication activities relating to environmental governance in the region. Another key conclusion is that public risk communication in this array of cross-national environmental risks is restricted mainly to (one-way) information. Against this backdrop and from our empirical and theoretical knowledge of risk communication and the role of the public, we finally suggest some ways for improvement.

This chapter analyses the governance structures linked to the marine environment of the Baltic Sea. The purpose is to assess whether current developments of the governance structures have a potential to take into account requirements of an Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM). We use the concept of reflexive governance to understand key components and weaknesses in contemporary governance modes, as well as to elaborate on possible pathways towards a governance mode more aligned with EAM. The reflexive governance framework highlights three elements: (1) acknowledgement of uncertainty and ambiguity; (2) a holistic approach in terms of scales, sectors and actors; and (3) acknowledgement of path dependency and incremental policy-making. Our analysis is based on a comparative case study approach, including analysis of the governance in five environmental risk areas: chemical pollution, overfishing, eutrophication, invasive alien species and pollution from shipping. The chapter highlights an existing governance mode that is ill-equipped to deal with the complexity of environmental problems in a holistic manner, with systematic attention to uncertainty, plurality of values, ambiguity and limited knowledge, while also pointing at important recent cognitive and institutional developments that can favour pathways towards reflexive governance and consequently EAM.

Previous studies of environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGO) have primarily taken place within a nation-state perspective without considering multiple levels of politics and governance. Because environmental problems are usually cross-border phenomena, environmental movements must develop transnational features to play constructive roles in politics and governance. This study contributes to the theorizing and study of transnationalization of ENGOs by illuminating the different regional conditions for this process. The conditions for ENGOs to develop transnational collaboration are explored by comparing ENGOs from six countries in two macro-regions: Sweden, Germany, and Poland in the Baltic Sea region, and Italy, Slovenia, and Croatia in the Adriatic-Ionian Sea region. Grounded in the literatures on social movement theory and ENGO transnationalization, the study identifies how different national, macro-regional, and European institutional structures shape the conditions under which ENGOs develop cross-border collaborations, and demonstrate the importance of long-term and dynamic interplay between processes that occur at the domestic and transnational levels.

Departing from previous theoretical and empirical studies on sustainable supply-chain management, we investigate organizational commitment (drivers and motivations) and capabilities (resources, structures, and policy instruments) in sustainable procurement of “noncore” products. By focusing on chemicals in textiles, the article explores the activi-ties of differently sized organizations and discusses the potentials and limitations of sustainable procurement measures. The study is based on a qualitative and comparative approach, with empirical findings from 26 case stud-ies of Swedish public and private procurement organizations. These organizations operate in the sectors of hotels/ conference venues, transport, cinema, interior design, and hospitals/daycare. While this work demonstrates major challenges for buyers to take into account peripheral items in sustainable procurement, it also identifies constructive measures for moving forward. A general sustainability/environmental focus can, as an effect, spill over to areas per-ceived as peripheral. © 2014 Boström et al.

The synergies and trade-offs between the various dimensions of sustainable development are attracting a rising scholarly attention. Departing from the scholarly debate, this article focuses on internal relationships within social sustainability. Our key claim is that it is diffi cult to strengthen substantive social sustainability goals unless there are key elements of social sustainability contained in the very procedures intended to work toward sustainability. Our analysis, informed by an organizing perspective, is based on a set of case studies on multi-stakeholder transnational sustainability projects (sustainability standards). This article explores six challenges related to the achievement of such procedures that can facilitate substantive social sustainability. Three of these concern the formulation of standards and policies, and three the implementation of standards and policies. To achieve substantive social sustainability procedures must be set in motion with abilities to take hold of people's concerns, frames, resources, as well as existing relevant institutions and infrastructures. © Berghahn Journals.

This paper introduces the Special Volume on sustainable and responsible supply chain governance. As globalized supply chains cross multiple regulatory borders, the firms involved in these chains come under increasing pressure from consumers, NGOs and governments to accept responsibility for social and environmental matters beyond their immediate organizational boundaries. Governance arrangements for global supply chains are therefore increasingly faced with sustainability requirements of production and consumption. Our primary objectives for this introductory paper are to explore the governance challenges that globalized supply chains and networks face in becoming sustainable and responsible, and thence to identify opportunities for promoting sustainable and responsible governance. In doing so, we draw on 16 articles published in this Special Volume of the Journal of Cleaner Production as well as upon the broader sustainable supply chain governance literature. We argue that the border-crossing nature of global supply chains comes with six major challenges (or gaps) in sustainability governance and that firms and others attempt to address these using a range of tools including eco-labels, codes of conduct, auditing procedures, product information systems, procurement guidelines, and eco-branding. However, these tools are not sufficient, by themselves, to bridge the geographical, informational, communication, compliance, power and legitimacy gaps that challenge sustainable global chains. What else is required? The articles in this Special Volume suggest that coalition and institution building on a broader scale is essential through, for example, the development of inclusive multi-stakeholder coalitions; flexibility to adapt global governance arrangements to local social and ecological contexts of production and consumption; supplementing effective monitoring and enforcement mechanisms with education and other programs to build compliance capacity; and integration of reflexive learning to improve governance arrangements over time. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd.

Most environmental problems are extremely long term and have cross-border implications. For environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) to achieve significant impact on environmental governance cross-border and sustained activities are required. The purpose of the paper is to identify key barriers and possible pathways to develop sustained and transnationalenvironmental activism among ENGOs operating in strikingly different political contexts.  

Our analysis is based on qualitative methodology and empirical analyses of ENGOs in six countries (Sweden, Germany, Poland, Italy, Slovenia and Croatia) and two regional contexts, the Baltic Sea and the Adriatic Sea regions. The study is based on document analyses and semi-structured interviews with representatives from 4-6 key ENGOs in each country. The theoretical framework departs primarily from social movement theory.

The paper reveals intriguing similarities and differences between the countries regarding ENGOs' abilities to develop sustained and cross-border activism. We pay particular attention to differences in opportunity structures for resource mobilization. The last decades, the European Union (EU) has emerged as a key opportunity structure that in various ways facilitate cross-border collaboration and capacity building among ENGOs, particularly in Central and Eastern European (CEE) Countries. However, the EU also considerably shapes the conditions for ENGOs to set independent long-term agendas. With the exception of Germany and Sweden, ENGOs rely heavily on their ability to develop a "project mind-set", which in turn requires fund-raising skills and procedures. Also ENGOs in Germany and Sweden make use of public grants. However, the fact that they historically have been able to mobilize huge number of members/supporters –which is still extremely difficult particularly in post-communist countries - have profound implications for abilities to develop transnational and sustained environmental activism. We discuss the role of (dis)trust (institutional vs. family-based trust), political culture and historical legacies to analyze these remarkably different conditions for resource mobilization.