Explore the vast range of titles available.

Although forest devolution, as a type of decentralization, is a high priority in the policy agendas of developing countries, recentralization has also occurred. In this paper, we focus on emerging recentralization within the devolution process of Collective Forest Tenure Reform (CFTR) in China’s southern provinces and conceptualize this process as “recentralized forest devolution.” In this paper, we update a key framework for analyzing decentralization and recentralization in governance processes based on the “policy arrangement approach.” Case studies were conducted in four counties of the Fujian and Yunnan provinces by tracing governance dynamics from 2001 to 2019. Our study found that the central government has tightened upward accountability and recentralized power for environmental conservation since 2012 under the discourse of “Ecological Civilization.” At the local level, recentralized forest devolution was expressed in terms of the restricted timber harvest levels for the purposes of environmental conservation. Therefore, forest devolution could be more vulnerable than expected by researchers and potentially interwoven with recentralization processes. Discourses, actors, property rights, and power are, therefore, considered to be interwoven in the complex dynamics of decentralization and recentralization.

This book explains devolution today in terms of the evolution of past structures of government in the component parts of the United Kingdom. Available in paperback for the first time, it highlights the importance of the English dimension and the role that England’s territorial politics played in constitutional debates. Similarities and differences between how the components of the UK were governed are described. It argues that the UK should be understood now, even more than pre-devolution, as a state of distinct unions, each with its own deeply rooted past and trajectory. Using previously unpublished primary material, as well as a wealth of secondary work, the book offers a comprehensive account of the territorial constitution of the UK from the early twentieth century through to the operation of the new devolved system of government.

In 2020, management of a prized recreational sportfish species, Lutjanus campechanus (red snapper), underwent a landmark change in the Gulf of Mexico of the United States: from federal management at the national level to a more localized, state level management. This policy change is based on the idea that localized management, informed by greater understanding of the context of the social-ecological system, enhances resilience. But how do fisheries stakeholders see this policy change? Our research asks how fishery stakeholders’ perceptions, especially recreational fishermen’s, vary across those who supported and did not support this change in management, known as Amendment 50 to the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Management Plan. We analyzed n = 2206 stakeholder comments using mixed methods and qualitative coding. Our thematic analysis found that 40% of comments supported devolved state management, 3% opposed it, and 57% could not be classified because the comment did not explicitly state support or opposition. In this paper, we only analyze the comments that explicitly support (40%) or oppose (3%) state management. We found that supporters of more localized fisheries management believe that it is characterized by (1) greater flexibility in management, (2) more trustworthiness, (3) better recreational access, and (4) trustworthy science. We argue that these four beliefs, analyzed through inductive methods, form a locally accepted and context-dependent model of resilient management for one of the most iconic recreational fisheries in the United States, in one of its fastest growing coastal regions. This model, built from these four beliefs, are connected by stakeholder trust in government. Understanding how to enhance stakeholder, especially recreational fishermen, trust in government has important implications for sectors beyond fishery management.

Against the widespread assumption that data are the oil of the 21st century, this article offers an alternative conceptual framework, interpretation, and pathway around data and smart city nexus to subvert surveillance capitalism in light of emerging and further promising practical cases. This article illustrates an open debate in data governance and the data justice field related to current trends and challenges in smart cities, resulting in a new approach advocated for and recently coined by the UN-Habitat programme ‘People-Centred Smart Cities’. Particularly, this feature article sheds light on two intertwined notions that articulate the technopolitical dimension of the ‘People-Centred Smart Cities’ approach: data co-operatives and data sovereignty. Data co-operatives are emerging as a way to share and own data through peer-to-peer (p2p) repositories and data sovereignty is being claimed as a digital right for communities/citizens. Consequently, this feature article aims to open up new research avenues around ‘People-Centred Smart Cities’ approach: First, it elucidates how data co-operatives through data sovereignty could be articulated as long as co-developed with communities connected to the long history and analysis of the various forms of co-operatives (technopolitical dimension). Second, it prospectively anticipates the city–regional dimension encompassing data colonialism and data devolution.

How does the European Union affect devolution and nationalist conflict in member states? Does the EU reduce the scope of regional self-government or enhance it? Does it promote conflict or cooperation among territorial entities? These are pressing questions in Spanish politics, where devolution has been an important tool for managing nationalist disputes, and for the Basque Country, where protracted and sometimes violent nationalist conflicts persist. Addressing these issues, this book explores prospects for an autonomous Basque role in EU politics; institutional arrangements for autonomous community participation in EU decision making; Basque government alliances with other regions and the EU's supranational bodies; EU incentives for collaboration among Basque and central state authorities; the impact of EU decisions on politically sensitive Basque competencies; and the incidence of EU issues in nationalist disputes. It presents a theoretical framework for analysing the impact of the EU on regional power.

This unique book breaks new ground in engaging the study of Northern Ireland politics directly with broader debates about European integration and European governance. The text offers the most comprehensive coverage to date of the institutional development of Northern Ireland following the UK government’s devolution programme and Northern Ireland’s development as an autonomous policy actor in Europe. This study marshals evidence from Northern Ireland’s relationship with the European Union (EU) during the contemporary era of devolved power. Uniquely, it does not treat Northern Ireland as a sui generis case-study, but as a region facing the same challenges as many other parts of Europe. This distinctive approach is a key strength of the book. It is a fresh and novel means of studying the EU and produces new and compelling conclusions with broad appeal and application. The text argues that in Northern Ireland, a series of national and regional constraints, complexities and divisions limit the application of the multi-level governance (MLG) model. The distinction between state and civil society in Northern Ireland has become less, rather than more blurred, and has shifted in the direction of the former. The author questions the synergy between devolution and the EU and queries the existence of new forms of ‘governance’. This is a contribution of both immense substance and considerable importance and will appeal to scholars from a diverse range of social science disciplines. It is essential reading for students and scholars of contemporary Northern Ireland politics, EU governance, European regions and conflict studies.

The article constitutes an attempt to deal with the paradox contained in the West Lothian Question (known also as the English Question) which remains one of the greatest anomalies of the British constitutional system. Since the 1970s (when this question was asked for the first time) there have been many legal and political disputes over that issue, and even the idea of ‘English votes for English laws’ (EVEL) was implemented by the British parliament.The purpose of the article is to analyze and evaluate the potential impact of Brexit on that issue. By applying the historical method as well as the institutional and legal analysis method, the author verifies the hypothesis that Brexit will not be a breakthrough in finding an optimal solution to this legal and constitutional conundrum, even though in the post-Brexit reality this issue will keep returning, gaining a completely new meaning in the eyes of the British.

Community-based conservation (CBC) institutions are widely regarded as transformative bodies that benefit social and ecological processes in coupled social-ecological systems. Yet, limited empirical evidence for this claim exists, especially on the African continent where community-based conservancies (CBCs) are being rapidly adopted in diverse institutional forms across multiple countries. We provide the first large-scale systematic review of CBC outcomes in sub-Saharan Africa. We review the literature on CBCs and develop a conceptual model that illustrates the nested scales of interaction in which CBCs are embedded, the institutional processes (“conditions”) reported as important for success, and the outcomes of CBCs on social and ecological systems. The mixed-method approach consists of inductive/deductive textual analysis of cases, geospatial visualization, descriptive statistics, and correlational analysis. Results indicate that more often than not, establishment of CBCs in Africa has led to negative or a mixture of positive and negative social outcomes, whereas ecological outcomes have been largely positive. The research conducted on CBC institutions has overwhelmingly focused on social outcomes, using qualitative methods. Monetary and nonmonetary incentives seem to be important but not sufficient on their own for positive outcomes. Devolution of rights to the local community is significantly associated with CBC outcomes but was not present in many cases, despite this feature being a hallmark of CBCs. A number of conditions were not reported in the cases reviewed, including leadership, social learning, consideration of cultural worldviews, and diverse partnerships. We provide indepth examples of the types and diversity of outcomes and contexts underpinning the presence or absence of societal processes, highlight important gaps in the existing research, and offer guidelines for research and evaluation moving forward.

Devolution has become a key 'global trend' over recent decades as many states have decentralised power to sub-state governments. The UK resisted this trend until the late 1990s when devolution was enacted by the then Labour Government, taking a highly asymmetrical form in which different territories have been granted different powers and institutional arrangements. Devolution allows the devolved governments to develop policies that are tailored to the needs of their areas, encouraging policy divergence, although this is countered by pressures to ensure that devolved approaches do not contradict those of the central state, promoting convergence. This review paper aims to assess the unfolding dynamics of devolution and policy divergence in the UK, spanning different policy areas such as economic development, health and social policy. The paper emphasises that devolution has altered the institutional landscape of public policy in the UK, generating some high-profile examples of policy divergence, whilst also providing evidence of policy convergence. In addition, the passage of time underlines the nature of UK devolution as an unfolding process. Its underlying asymmetries have become more pronounced as the tendency towards greater autonomy for Scotland and Wales clashes with a highly centralised mode of policymaking in Westminster, the consequences of which have spilt over into the devolved territories in the context of the post-2007 economic crisis through public expenditure cuts.