Dynamic interplay: convergence and divergence in interacting environmental regimes
Date
2015
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of Delaware
Abstract
Recent presidential directives for the Arctic seek to achieve integrated management of
resource regimes. The current governance structure is one of sectoral management, or
fragmented management on the fragmented – integrated governance spectrum (Cicin-
Sain and Knecht 1998). This dichotomy presents an economic and political, as well as
definitional, challenge for achieving the new integrated Arctic management directives.
The structural fragmented – integrated spectrum is end-point oriented and mutually
exclusive.
I suggest a different approach to integration: one that is dynamic and process oriented. I
develop the concept of ‘dynamic interplay’ as a means of integrating outputs. This idea
is based in the literature on institutional interaction, or interplay, in environmental
governance (Young 1999b, 2002b).
I suggest that independent institutions seeking to address common problems in
environmental resource challenges undertake a specific functional process I call the
phenomenon of oscillation. Oscillation is the movement of independent fragmented
institutions between two functional operational states in an oscillating pattern over time.
The two operational states are divergence and convergence. Divergence is the default norm of current sectoral governance structures operating independently in service to
their own mandate. Convergence is a unique functional state of engagement in mutual
service to those mandates. The duality of progressive functional oscillation contributes
to outputs that are mutually satisfactory. I describe dynamic interplay in its theoretical
form and I illustrate the empirical form and function within a long-standing case history
of Alaska fisheries and endangered species regime interactions.
The policy implications of dynamic interplay are that 1) it mimics the dynamic nature of
the environmental problems the governance regimes were designed to address, thereby
allowing for adaptive management and governance outputs that may be a better fit to
the environment being served, and 2) the implementation of dynamic interplay does not
require structural changes in existing governance regimes, which means substantial
economic and political cost savings to achieve integrated management. Complex and
competing environmental issues may be solved through functional integration within
the existing fragmented governance structure.