Advertisement

Collaborative Research as a Tool for Building Environmental Regulatory Capability

  • Matthew Marshall
  • Grant Pink
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Green Criminology book series (PSGC)

Abstract

Contemporary governments produce a number of text types. Some are to be read as though spoken by the impersonal voice of state authority. There are also texts with hybridised voices that demonstrate positional hierarchies foregrounding the individual while retaining the discourse of the state. Certain public service office holders generate texts as part of academic research, either as part of or separate to their employment. As a general rule these public servants, both former and current, have senior managerial and/or subject-matter expertise and experience.2 For the most part, their texts are histories of their respective agencies, with a particular focus on the formation of a specific programme run by, or a change management process applied within, that agency. Apart from senior managers, some public service officers also have standing in academic and professional forums as practitioner-academics or, as per the neologism of the last 30 years, pracademics.3

Keywords

Australian Research Council Environmental Crime Environment Protection Agency Line Area Environmental Compliance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ANAO (Australian National Audit Office) (2006), ‘Implementation of Programme and Policy Initiatives: Making Implementation Matter’, Better Practice Guide. Canberra: ANAO.Google Scholar
  2. APSC (Australian Public Service Commission) (2007a), Tackling Wicked Problems: A Public Policy Perspective. Canberra: APSC.Google Scholar
  3. APSC (2007b), Building Better Governance. Canberra: APSC.Google Scholar
  4. APSC (2011), Foundations of Governance in the Australian Public Service, September 2010. Canberra: APSC.Google Scholar
  5. Bartel, R. (2013), ‘Vernacular Knowledge and Environmental Law: Cause and Cure for Regulatory Failure’, Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 19(8), 891–914, published online 20 May.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basham, B.R. (2014), ‘Police Instructor or Police Educator?’, Salus Journal, 2(1), 99–109.Google Scholar
  7. Bates, G. (2006), Environmental Law in Australia (6th edition). Chatswood, NSW: LexisNexis Butterworths.Google Scholar
  8. Bricknell, S. (2010), ‘Environmental Crime in Australia’, AIC Reports: Research and Public Policy Series, 109. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.Google Scholar
  9. Clifford, M. and Edwards, T. (2012), Environmental Crime (2nd edition). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.Google Scholar
  10. CoA (Commonwealth of Australia) (2014), Regulator Performance Framework. Canberra: CoA.Google Scholar
  11. de Tocqueville, A. (2006), Democracy in America, J.P. Mayer (ed.), G. Lawrence (trans.). New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics.Google Scholar
  12. Doyle, T. (2011), ‘The Future of Border Management’, in G. McLinden, E. Fanta, D. Widdowson, and T. Doyle (eds), Border Management Modernization. Washington, DC: IBRD/World Bank, pp. 11–22.Google Scholar
  13. Early, G. (2008), ‘Australia’s National Environmental Legislation and Human/ Wildlife Interactions’, Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy, 11, 101–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elliott, L. (2009), ‘Combating Transnational Environmental Crime: “Joined-up” Thinking about Transnational Networks’, in K. Kangaspunta and I.H. Marshall (eds), Eco-crime and Justice: Essays on Environmental Crime. Turin: UNICRI, pp. 55–77.Google Scholar
  15. Elliott, L. (2011), ‘Transnational Environmental Crime: Applying Network Theory to an Investigation of Illegal Trade, Criminal Activity and Law Enforcement Responses’, Transnational Environmental Crime Project Working Paper 1/2011. Canberra: Department of International Relations, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  16. Farmer, A. (2007), Handbook of Environmental Protection and Enforcement: Principles and Practice. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  17. Gemmell, J.C. and Circelli, T. (2015), ‘Environmental Regulation and Enforcement Networks Operating in Tandem: A Very Effective Vehicle for Driving Efficiencies and Facilitating Knowledge Exchange and Transfer’, in M. Faure, P. De Smedt, and A. Stas (eds), Environmental Enforcement Networks: Concepts, Implementation and Effectiveness. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 172–186.Google Scholar
  18. Government of Victoria (2007), Victorian Approaches to Joined Up Government: An Overview. Melbourne: Government of Victoria.Google Scholar
  19. Honadle, B. (1981), ‘A Capacity-Building Framework: A Search for Concept and Purpose’, Public Administration Review, 41(5), 575–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hood, C. (1996), ‘Control over Bureaucracy: Cultural Theory and Institutional Variety’, Journal of Public Policy, 15(3), 207–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Horne, D. (2013a), ‘Policy Responses to Transnational Wildlife Crime in the Asia-Pacific. Part 1: Global and Regional Policy Context and a Potential Framework for Optimal National Policy’, Transnational Environmental Crime Project Working Paper 1/2013. Canberra: Department of International Relations, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  22. Horne, D. (2013b), ‘Policy Responses to Transnational Wildlife Crime in the Asia-Pacific. Part 2: Policy Responses at the National Level and Preliminary Gap Analysis’, Transnational Environmental Crime Project Working Paper 2/2013. Canberra: Department of International Relations, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  23. Huxham, C. and Vangen, S. (2004), ‘Doing Things Collaboratively: Realizing the Advantage or Succumbing to Inertia?’, Organisational Dynamics, 33(3), 190–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Huxham, C. and Vangen, S. (2005), Managing to Collaborate: The Theory and Practice of Collaborative Advantage. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. INECE (International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement) (2012), Manual for Creating and Sustaining Regional Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Networks. Available at inece.org/resource/network_manual/ (accessed 5 June 2012).Google Scholar
  26. INTERPOL (International Criminal Police Organisation) (2009), ‘Environmental Crime’, Fact Sheet. Available at http://www.interpol.int/content/download/19249/ 170126/version/10/file/23_PST03_09_2013_EN_web.pdf (accessed 26 May 2014).
  27. Kelly, T.E. (2012), ‘Protection in a Non-regulatory World: The Indoor Air Program’, in G.A. Emison and J.C. Morris (eds), True Green: Executive Effectiveness in the US Environmental Protection Agency. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, pp. 135–160.Google Scholar
  28. Kelman, S. (2007), ‘The Transformation of Government in the Decade Ahead’, in D.F. Kettle and S. Kelman (eds), Reflections on 21st Century Government Management. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government, pp. 33–63.Google Scholar
  29. McMahon, R. (2006), The Environmental Protection Agency: Structuring Motivation in a Green Bureaucracy. Brighton, Portland: Sussex Academic Press.Google Scholar
  30. Management Advisory Committee (2004), Connecting Government: Whole of Government Responses to Australia’s Priority Challenges. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
  31. Marshall, M. (2014), ‘Governmental Discourses on Transnational Environmental Crime’, Transnational Environmental Crime Project Working Paper 1/2014. Canberra: Department of International Relations, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  32. Marshall, M. and Pink, G. (2011), ‘Internal Communication Strategies for Building Capacity among Non-Inspectors’, in Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Environmental Compliance and Enforcement, 24 June, Whistler, British Columbia, Canada. INECE: Washington, pp. 704–716.Google Scholar
  33. Marshall, M. and Pink, G. (2014), ‘Building organisatonal capacity: The role of collaborative research’, Transnational Environmental Crime Project Working Paper 2/2014. Canberra: Department of International Relations, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  34. New Zealand Government (2008), Border Sector Strategy 2008–2013: A Framework for Collaboration for Border Sector Agencies. Wellington: Border Sector Governance Group.Google Scholar
  35. NSW PSC (New South Wales Public Service Commission) (2014), ‘Doing Things Differently: Raising Productivity, Improving Service and Enhancing Collaboration across the NSW Public Service’, Advisory Board Report. Sydney: NSW Public Service Commission.Google Scholar
  36. O’Flynn, J. (2008), ‘Elusive Appeal or Aspirational Ideal? The Rhetoric and Reality of the “Collaborative Turn” in Public Policy’, in J. O’Flynn and J. Wanna (eds), Collaborative Governance: A New Era of Public Policy in Australia, Australia and New Zealand School of Government. Canberra: ANU E-Press, pp. 181–196.Google Scholar
  37. O’Leary, R. and Bingham, L.B. (eds) (2003), The Promise and Performance of Environmental Conflict Resolution. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  38. Pink, G. (2011), ‘Assessing the Utility of Environmental Enforcement Networks: In an Attempt to Maximise Benefits to Members. A Qualitative Analysis’, in Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Environmental Compliance and Enforcement, 24 June, Whistler, British Columbia, Canada. INECE: Washington, pp. 797–804.Google Scholar
  39. Pink, G. (2013a), ‘Law Enforcement Responses to Transnational Environmental Crime: Choices, Challenges and Culture’, Transnational Environmental Crime Project Working Paper 4/2013. Canberra: Department of International Relations, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  40. Pink, G. (2013b), ‘Law Enforcement Responses to Transnational Environmental Crime: Practical Considerations and Suggested Improvements Arising from an International Analysis’, Transnational Environmental Crime Project Working Paper 5/2013. Canberra: Department of International Relations, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  41. Polner, M. (2011), ‘Coordinated Border Management: From Theory to Practice’, World Customs Journal, 5(2), 49–64.Google Scholar
  42. Raustiala, K. (2002), ‘The Architecture of International Cooperation: Transgov-ernmental Networks and the Future of International Law’, in D. Zaelke, D. Kaniaru, and E. Kružíková (eds), Making Law Work: Environmental Compliance and Sustainable Development (Volume 2). London: Cameron May, pp. 405–417.Google Scholar
  43. Robins, L. (2008), ‘Making Capacity Building Meaningful: A Framework for Strategic Action’, Environmental Management, 42, 833–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rose, G. (ed.) (2014), Following the Proceeds of Environmental Crime: Forests, Fish and Filthy Lucre. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Situ, Y. and Emmons, D. (2000), Environmental Crime: The Criminal Justice System’s Role in Protecting the Environment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  46. Slaughter, A.-M. (2004), A New World Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Sparrow, M.K. 2008, The Character of Harms: Operational Challenges in Control. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Thomson, A.-M., Perry, J.L., and Miller, T.K. (2008), ‘Linking Collaboration Process and Outcomes: Foundations for Advancing Empirical Theory’, in L.B. Bingham and R. O’Leary (eds), Big Ideas in Collaborative Public Management. New York: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 97–120.Google Scholar
  49. UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime) (2008), ‘Building Capacity to Counter Trafficking in Illegal Timber and Timber Products in East Asia and the Pacific Region’, draft concept, Thailand.Google Scholar
  50. UNODC (2010), The Globalization of Crime: A Transnational Organized Crime Threat Assessment. Vienna: UNODC.Google Scholar
  51. UNODC (2013), Wildlife and Forest Crime Analytic Toolkit (Revised edition). New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  52. Van de Ven, A.H., Emmett, D.C., and Koenig Jr, R. (1975), ‘Theoretical and Conceptual Issues in Inter-organizational Theory’, in A.R. Negandhi (ed.), Interorganization Theory. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, pp. 19–38.Google Scholar
  53. Wenger, E., Trayner, B., and de Laat, M. (2011), Promoting and Assessing Value Creation in Communities and Networks: A Conceptual Framework (Rapport 18). Heerlen: Ruud de Moor Centrum, Open Universiteit.Google Scholar
  54. White, R. (2008), Crimes against Nature: Environmental Criminology and Ecological Justice. Devon: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  55. White, R. (2011), Transnational Environmental Crime: Toward an Eco-global Criminology. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Wyatt, T. (2011), ‘The Nature of Illicit Activity and the Involvement of Criminal Groups in the Transnational Smuggling of Wildlife’, Concept Paper Presented at the Transnational Environmental Crime Conference, Australian National University, Canberra, 15 September. Available at ips.cap.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/IPS/ IR/TEC/WYATT_Criminal_involvement_in_wildlife_smuggling.pdf (accessed 27 March 2013).Google Scholar
  57. Wyatt, T. (2013), ‘A Comparative Analysis of Wildlife Trafficking in Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom’, Transnational Environmental Crime Project Working Paper 6/2013. Canberra: Department of International Relations, Australian National University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Matthew Marshall and Grant Pink 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew Marshall
  • Grant Pink

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations