You need to enter your keywords into Web of Science or Google Scholar and find review papers. No one can help you except yourself

Thanks ;) something I have obviously done already, except for the review search, which is a good idea! I always forget about review papers

Book Essential Concepts of Global Environmental Governance

Not a compendium of key texts, of which there are many, but a timely and up-to-date compilation of 101 short entries in alphabetical order, presented in the form of an encyclopedia.

Fiona Nunan produced a very accessible 'topic guide' on the complexity of natural resources governance for DFID, 'Nunan, F. Topic Guide : Governance of Natural Resources. Evidence on Demand, UK (2016) vi + 49 pp.', which cab be downloaded here: https://www.gov.uk/dfid-research-outputs/topic-guide-natural-resource-governance-summary.

She subsequently produced a policy and practice brief for the ESPA programme, 'Nunan, F.; Menton, M.; McDermott, C.; Schreckenberg, K.; Huxham, M. 2018, Governing natural resources for effectiveness, equity and sustainability: what matters?', which can be found here: https://www.espa.ac.uk/publications/governing-natural-resources-effectiveness-equity-and-sustainability-what-matters

So when you say environmental governance in relation to sustainable development, were you referring to: more top-down global environmental governance (e.g. international conventions https://elearning.informea.org/pluginfile.php/4724/block_html/content/3%20hours%20course%20-%20GOVERNANCE.pdf , industry standards and norms, etc.); or bottom-up organisational or corporate environmental governance?

If you are interested in a business perspective, McKinsey published a paper entitled "Five ways that ESG creates value". You could also try the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD). They published "Modernising governance" and "The state of corporate governance in the era of sustainability risks and opportunities".

From my point of view your question is too much open, I think you firstly should identify the environmental boundary where you are looking to apply governance policies, as there is many key issues affecting different environments, as water, air, earth, etc. So I guess you must identify them and then search over the solutions proposed by science find those which be the better to solve it (very difficult¡¡) and only then you could establish an effective Governance to go for a sustainable development. (https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/top-25-environmental-concerns.php)

Have some sympathy with Marcelo's suggestion, but unlike the 'management' of natural resources - with which it's often confused - governance as applied to the environment spans political, legal and administrative frameworks, multiple socio-cultural contexts, the socio-economic environment, as well as the physical environment, both natural and man-made (e.g. settlements, infrastructure). Or put another way it's often complex - characterised by conflicting ideas for ecision-making (i.e. involving disagreements between decision-makers), and by knowledge gaps and uncertainties (e.g. climate impacts) - so may not be readily amenable either to cause and effect analyses, or cause and effect solutions!

It might then be useful - necessary - to clarify what is understood by 'governance', a concept which has been framed in different and changing ideological terms, ranging from simply 'doing things better' to the broader analytical basis for understanding the multiple political processes and relationships through which state and non-state actors do, and might, engage.

Definitions of the latter ilk include: “The exercise of political, economic and administrative authority in the management of a country’s affairs at all levels. Governance comprises the complex mechanisms, processes, and institutions through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, mediate their differences, and exercise their legal rights and obligations.” UNDP (1997) Governance for Sustainable Human Development.

“Governance is a descriptive label that is used to highlight the changing nature of the policy process in recent decades. In particular, it sensitizes us to the ever-increasing variety of terrains and actors involved in the making of public policy. Thus, governance demands that we consider all the actors and locations beyond the [central government] ‘core executive’ involved in the policy making process.” Richards and Smith (2002) Governance and Public Policy in the United Kingdom.

From this analytical perspective, understanding governance will be closely linked to identifying and understanding how decisions are made (and in terms of ‘sound governance’, how this might be improved upon):

- Who is included in decision-making – or should be, and how should they be included?

- In which ‘terrains’ and/or at what levels are they made – or should they be made?

- Who initiates and/or is responsible for the process – or should be?

- Who has decision-making and implementation authority (decision-making entities; individual decision-makers; interactions among decision-makers) – or should have?

- Who and/or what influences the decisions (personal values, attitudes, believes etc; decision support resources e.g. info & knowledge; technological & other options) – or should influence decision?

In addition to decision-making governance is also about the subsequent implementation of those decisions. What are the outcomes of a decision once made; and how do decision-makers and stakeholders live with them?

When considering the management of natural resource in particular, one key focus will inevitably be that of local government and the broader system of what might be called local governance. Many developing countries have undergone or are in the process of decentralisation to improve service delivery and resource management, amongst other things. These processes are frequently only partially formulated and implemented, and reality typically falls well short of aspirations of devolution. Thus the ‘enabling environment’ required to facilitate local government and optimise local governance processes remains very much influenced if not constrained by national level processes (i.e. central decision-making and implications for implementation).

One key pervasive constraint relates to the divide that often characterises policy formulation, whereby the potential beneficiaries of policy change, and even those public servants with responsibilities for policy implementation, may not be consulted during this preliminary phase. Wider criticism relates to the very relevance of policy itself; it has been suggested that many of the earlier Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRSs) (linked to debt relief in the naughties) were oriented towards symptoms rather than solutions, and their implementation often diluted or ineffective. This leads to considerations of adaptive policy approaches, to better take account of risk, uncertainties and discontinuities.

Specific definitions of environmental governance include: “The interactions among structures, processes and traditions that determine how power and responsibilities are exercised, how decisions are taken, and how citizens or other stakeholders have their say in the management of natural resources – including biodiversity conservation” (CEESP and WCPA, 2004)

“…environmental governance refers to negotiations between communities and the state in respect of decision-making and/or implementation of environmental management, bearing in mind that environmental management involves the management of all components of the bio-physical environment, both living (biotic) and non-living (abiotic).” (IIED, 2006)

With respect to water governance, Cleaver offers the following definition: “the system of actors, resources, arrangements and processes which mediate society’s access to water” (2012).

Sound, good or good-enough governance? The various governance interpretations cited above are all descriptions of decision-making within a political context of multiple stakeholders or actors, at multiple levels, with multiple and diverse perspectives and objectives. As such none of them identifies what sound, good, or not-so-good governance actually looks like. There has been however increasing acknowledgement that poor governance is responsible both for grinding poverty and environmental destruction. Diagnoses of entrenched poverty have long identified weak governance and failed states as the root causes (DFID, 2006). The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) and Global Environment Outlook both made similar diagnoses for environmental degradation and loss. While not using the term governance, the MA asserts that: pressures on ecosystems will increase globally unless human attitudes and actions change; and better conservation policies may be of limited value unless governments, businesses, and communities take natural systems into account in a wide range of other decisions. The MA argues that the productivity of ecosystems is dependent on policy choices on investment, trade, subsidy, taxation, and regulation, amongst other things. Thus, reversing poor governance – or moving towards good governance – is frequently linked to the realisation of equity and poverty reduction goals, and/or environmental conservation aims; and is associated with addressing issues of power and authority in society, and moving existing governance systems in aspirational directions.

For many the concept of ‘good governance’ is linked to a set of core principles based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

- Participation: the degree of involvement by affected stakeholders; - Fairness: the degree to which rules apply equally to everyone in society;

- Decency: the degree to which the formation and stewardship of the rules is undertaken without humiliating or harming people;

- Accountability: the extent to which political actors are responsible to society for what they say and do;

- Transparency: the degree of clarity and openness with which decisions are made;

- Efficiency: the extent to which limited human and financial resources are applied without unnecessary waste, delay or corruption.

Not everyone is happy with the concept of ‘good governance’, which may be seen as alignmed to western democratic and bureaucratic traditions, where congruence between formal and informal institutions, and formalised economies are well established. Writing about Pakistan Jabeen (2007) characterised the governance context there as one of authoritarianism, elitism, familism, paternalism, sectarianism, extremism and feudalism; and suggest the values of good governance stand in conflict with the prevailing norms. Building on the concept of ‘good enough governance’ (Grindle, 2004), she recommended ‘indigenisation’ of the concept of good governance.

With respect to local governance in NRM, some of the literature draws attention to the design principles first collated by Ostrom. These are the existence of:

- Clearly defined boundaries;

- Rules adaptable to local conditions: proportional equivalence between costs and benefits;

- Space for collective choice arrangements;

- Monitoring, particularly by third parties, for enforcement and punishment;

- Sanctions escalating with the severity of the violation;

- Conflict resolution mechanisms;

- The right to organise groups;

- Nested enterprises: arrangements where local knowledge and local institutions prevail, but shaped to accommodate larger and broader interests.

In the context of protected areas (PAs) principles identified with equitable and effective – or ‘good’ – governance include: legitimacy and voice, subsidiarity, fairness, doing no harm, direction (e.g. contextually informed objectives), performance, and accountability (see Borrini-Feyerabend et al.,).

As is probably obvious I've cut and pasted this from earlier work I did for WWF on environmental governance. Interestingly the conservation world, which previously focused on resource management has long been forced to concede that one can't ignore the political aspects of NRM, which inevitably means addressing governance challenges. Recognising the 'complexity' that typically characterises environmental governance is still work in progress. Hope something here is useful?

If you can read (or translate to) portuguese, look this article on "green governance": http://www.scielo.br/pdf/asoc/v16n2/09.pdf.

Also, I would recomend the classic of Ostrom, "Governing the Commons".

Book Environmental Governance in Latin America

Thanks for initiating this thread, it is indeed very helpful also for other researchers in the field.

I would recommend the introduction of the book "Environmental Governance in Latin America", which is a regional approach but also pins down key aspects of the overarching debate.

Best,

If the focus is on Global Environmetnal Governance I would suggest to have a look at the work of Harriet Bulkeley.

Arun Agrawal has also a great work on that!