Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Breaking the Wall of Monocentric Governance: Polycentricity in the Governance of Persistent Organic Pollutants in the Arctic

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of The Yearbook of Polar Law Online

AbstractWe often mistakenly assume that institutional design will remain effective indefinitely. Complex long-term environmental challenges illuminate the disparity between institutions and state boundaries. While globalization has challenged monocentrism, we must look beyond traditional measures and design resilient governance systems, such as polycentric governance, that combine trust and local expertise in small-scale governance with the governance capacity of large-scale systems. These harness globalization’s benefits and provide solutions for the effects of ecosystem changes.This work examines the lessons – benefits, challenges, limitations, and unanswered questions – that may be learned from polycentric governance in the case of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in the Arctic, where a polycentric political system has developed as a result of a mismatch in environmental, jurisdictional, and temporal scales. Section One examines characteristics of polycentricity, focusing on actors, multilevel governance, degree of formality, and the nature of interactions. Section Two concentrates on the tools utilized. Section Three applies the outlined framework. Finally, Section Four examines three lessons that global environmental governance may learn from the case study: (1) Peak organizations are effective tools for managing polycentricity, allowing for the inclusion of non-state actors, such as indigenous peoples organizations (2) and epistemic communities (3), in bridging the human-environment nexus.

Affiliations: 1: Balsillie School of International Affairs, University of WaterlooCanadaArctic Centre, University of LaplandFinland


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    The Yearbook of Polar Law Online — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation