The  emerging  environmental  state

This review of the literature on transitions has shown that it can explain the process but lack elaborations on how to steer this process. Hence, it currently lacks an integration of governance literature. Many scholars working on environmental and/ or sustainable governance (particularly climate change mitigation) see the state represented by government and its bureaucracy as the key actor (Atomium Culture and Lund University, 2009, Christoff, 2005, Dryzek, 2005, Eckersley, 2004, Fiorino, 2011, Giddens, 2009, Jänicke, 2007, Meadowcroft, 2007). This is primarily because public actors hold the legitimacy and resources to manage the transition process. While it is crucial to understand how the state handles these issues, the more important question is whether it is capable to manage a process of this scope in particular as it has to change itself. The state is a key object as well as subject of the transition, which is a delicate position.

Since the state is “a messy concept” (Mann, 1984: 187) as most definitions combine functional and institutional dimensions, it is important to clarify its meaning in the given context. Commonly, the triad of the monopoly of force, a defined territory and people characterise a state (Lauth and Wagner, 2010). Tilly (1990: 1) defines states “as

coercion-wielding organizations that are distinct from households and kinship groups and exercise priority in some respects over all other organizations within substantial territories” that exist for more than 5,000 years. Since then they have proven their “superior survival value” (Mann, 1984: 195) compared to non-state social organisations. Hence, chances are high that they find ways to solve the ecological crisis and manage the green transition. The political organisation of a state based on different types of legitimacy can take various forms: the predominant ideal types are democracy (famously defined by US President Abraham Lincoln as “government of the people, by the people, for the people” (Lincoln, 1863)), dictatorship and many grey areas in between. Democratic regimes are in general either majoritarian or consensus oriented (Lijphart, 1984).¹⁹ Geddes et al. (2014) have developed a typology that classifies autocratic regimes according to their leadership either as dominant-party-dictatorships, personalised dictatorships, monarchies or rule by the military institution.

States extract the necessary means for their existence from their people to defend them against other states. This shows that the primary state function is to protect its citizens against internal and external threats (Mann, 1984). Later in history, as this basic security function had been realised, states turned towards their citizens’ social well-being. The motivation was to ensure good production capacities as the foundation for economic growth rather than individual well-being (Tilly, 1990). After this was achieved, governments to varying degrees assumed a redistributive role by establishing welfare states that guarantee social welfare for their citizens (Esping-Andersen, 1990, Gough and Meadowcroft, 2011, Meadowcroft, 2005b). Starting in the second half of the 20^th century, in particular civil society groups started arguing that state (in-)action has caused severe environmental degradation. The environmental movement in many countries has emerged in opposition to government by declaring “state failure” as public actors did not ensure the provision of public goods (such as an intact environment) (Jänicke, 1990). Hence, they put the issue on the agenda. The activists argued “that the pursuit of economic growth – or more precisely, the wrong sorts of economic growth – has done little to improve the quality of life, welfare and well-being of people” (Catney and Doyle, 2011:

95). Over time, this forced state authorities to engage with environmental problems. It caused rethinking environmental policy from focussing on interventions after the damage had occurred (end-of-the-pipe technologies) to a more pro-active approach that aims to avoid pollution in the first place. This marked the shift from government to governance in

19 According to Lijphart (1984) characteristics of majoritarian states are concentrated executive power, two-party systems, plural electoral systems and unitary governments whereas characteristics of consensus states are executive power-sharing, multiparty systems, proportional representation and federalism.

Governing the Transition to a Green Economy 55 ecological issues. Nevertheless, it remains a struggle for environmental concerns to compete

with others, for example economic concerns.

Table 3: State functions

Security Ensuring the safety of citizens against external and internal threats

Economic growth Safeguarding economic prosperity through, for example, designating property rights

Social welfare Protecting citizens in times of economic hardship by redistributing wealth

Environmental

protection Avoiding overuse and pollution of the resource base

Source: Author’s compilation.

This emerging environmental state function can take different forms. Achieving a negative environmental state function is key but only a positive understanding is slowly gaining ground (Jänicke, 2007). The negative protection dimension stresses the importance of avoiding environmental collapse by ensuring that economy and society operate within the given ecological limits. The positive function turns environmental policy into a competitive advantage by creating green markets and turning them into a profitable business opportunity and creating new employment opportunities. This green market is slowly growing internationally demonstrating constantly increasing demand for these goods and services. It protects economic well-being and strengthens social peace because environmental degradation has the potential to hamper economic activities causing social unrest. However, this emergence of a weak environmental state function and green markets does not entail an absolute decoupling of economic growth from resource depletion.

Dryzek et al. (2011) correctly argue that government failure on one of the core state functions (safety, economic prosperity, social safety) immediately threatens its power but the same does not hold true for the performance on environmental issues. For this reason, the environment ranks lower on the government’s priority list, which hinders triggering the green transition process. Hence, in order to preserve the ecological basis and to establish a green economy, states must adopt environmental protection as a key state responsibility resulting in stringent

measures to reduce GHG emissions and other forms of environmental pollution (Jänicke, 2007, Meadowcroft, 2005b). Sustainability needs to become a guiding principle that all government actors and agencies follow by implementing environmentally friendly policies throughout all sectors (for example transport, housing, agriculture). Without the environmental state function, environmental affairs continue to remain sidelined when crucial decisions are taken. The literature uses a variety of terms to describe states that adopt environmental protection as a core state function: “green state” (Eckersley, 2004), “ecostate”

(Meadowcroft, 2005b), “environmental state” (Mol and Buttel, 2002) and in the German debate “Umweltstaat” (Jänicke, 2007). Following the shift from government to governance, these states comprise not only public actors but include other crucial actor groups.

Meadowcroft (2005b) establishes that such a state needs to perform the following tasks:

• Assume a steering role including decisions on policy tools and a stable policy framework. Set medium and long-term targets in a transparent and accountable way.

• Establish a new macroeconomic framework and be a core actor in financing the required investments.

• Assess risks, establish a guiding vision, negotiate trade-offs with other societal issues and actors and deal with the distribution of social costs.

• Observe and report on the state of the environment and predict future developments.

• Shape the international climate policy realm and adjust national actions accordingly.

As mentioned before, transitions can result in multiple ends. A successful transition towards a green economy entails the task to adopt environmental concerns in the state’s core. Hence, the state remains a key protagonist but needs to adjust to new realities and challenges. Since the state itself often times does not recognise the new problems, external actors point towards them and enter the governance framework. While the historical development has shown that states are only slowly beginning to assume an environmental state function, such a function requires severe changes to the state itself. This underlines that the state is subject and object of the transition. Currently, public authorities are not capable or willing to tackle the environmental problems with the necessary urgency, which necessitates a profound overhaul of existing routines. This can result in conflicts within the state actors. Since continuing with the status quo is often times much easier than transferring to a new status, it remains to be seen whether states are capable of going through this necessary transition.

Governing the Transition to a Green Economy 57