ReviewInformational governance – A systematic literature review of governance for sustainability in the Information Age
Introduction
Societies around the world are increasingly affected by rapid developments in all kinds of new information technologies, information networks, and social media. In our daily life, the so termed Information Age influences our social relationships (Twitter, Facebook and whatsApp), our economy (virtual auction), our science (scientific information losing much of its credibility and authority due to a variety of other information sources), and our politics (WikiLeaks). The Information Age has been widely studied and theorized upon but also strongly celebrated and heavily criticized.
The centrality of information in the Information Age increasingly impacts governance processes (Bichler, 2007, Clifford, 2009, Işik, 2013, Seraj, 2012). Governance can be addressed analytically by describing institutions as ‘the patterns that emerge from the governing activities of social, political and administrative actors’ (Gerritsen et al., 2013), but also by emphasizing processes meant for guiding, steering, controlling or managing sectors or facets of societies (Kooiman, 1993, p. 2). On the one hand, the hyper-connectivity across the globe opens up enormous possibilities for information exchange, knowledge creation, feedback, debate, learning and innovation, social networking, marketing and advertising. On the other hand, it erodes the power of classic public and private institutions as nobody is in control of information. Whereas conventional governance highly relies on authoritative resources, belief in information control and state power, in the Information Age uncontrolled flows of information is becoming a crucial (re)source with transformative powers for a variety of actors (Mol, 2008).
In particular, information plays a key role in governing environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity loss, depleting resources and competing land use claims. Human–environmental relationships are complex issues because of time-lags between human actions and environmental effects and the lack of understanding of multiple scaled ecological systems (Underdal, 2010).
Against this background, informational governance (Mol, 2008) is emerging as a new concept in the field of environmental policy and sustainability issues. It addresses two interrelated processes: (1) new forms of governing through information, and (2) transformative changes in governance institutions due to the new information flows appearing in the Information Age. The informational governance concept is inspired by Castells (1996, p. 21) who in a similar manner within a market context distinguishes between ‘information economy’ referring to flows of information, and ‘informational economy’ linking it with institutional change. Institutions are here interpreted broadly, accounting for formal as well as informal rules which encourage or restrain actors’ behaviours, and which influence the structures of contexts for acting (Ostrom, 2009).
The main aims of this article are to gain more insights into informational governance, and to suggest a research agenda. At present, literature that explicitly uses the key word informational governance is limited to six articles (Hoefnagel et al., 2013, Mol, 2006, 2009; Naus et al., 2014, Toonen and Lindeboom, 2015, Toonen and Mol, 2013). All these studies are connected with the same research community (Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands). Special applications have been conducted in research fields such as energy (Naus et al., 2014) and marine governance (Hoefnagel et al., 2013, Toonen and Mol, 2013).
Although we recognize that the concept of informational governance is hardly mentioned in the literature, we note that social, environmental and economic sciences contribute to informational governance. Particularly, we refer to literature addressing environmental policy and sustainability contexts, which link to new information technologies, new information flows and emanating institutional structures in the Information Age. Accordingly, in this article we systematically explore literature within the environmental governance domain to gain more insights into ways by which the Information Age impacts sustainability. More precisely, this paper addresses the following questions:
- a.
How does the emerging use of information and information technologies influence governing of firms, communities, citizens or consumers behaviours towards sustainability (referred to as governing through information)?
- b.
How does new information generation, processing and transmission influence change in sustainability governance institutions in terms of norms, rules, relations, processes and organization (referred to as institutional change due to information flows)?
- c.
How can these insights be used to identify research gaps and develop a research agenda for informational governance in the field of sustainability?
The method of systematic literature review is used to answer these questions (Kampen and Tamás, 2013). In Section 2 we explain how we have applied the systematic literature review method to analyze (a) governing through information, and (b) institutional change due to information flows. This is followed by both quantitative (Section 3) and qualitative (Section 4) analyses conducted to present some core findings of the systematic literature review. Finally, a discussion and concluding remarks are provided (Section 5), including an articulation of a proposed research agenda.
Section snippets
Method – a systematic literature review
The literature relating to informational governance was reviewed systematically by using a transparent and reproducible method for selecting literature. Systematic reviews are rapidly growing in importance in the social sciences to aggregate findings across multiple empirical studies, a method which extensively has been used in medical disciplines (Bilotta et al., 2014, Kampen and Tamás, 2013, Moore et al., 2014). In contrast with the traditional reviews, the systematic literature reviews avoid
Quantitative analyses of the selected literature
With this quantitative analyses we aim at getting a general picture of the selected literature. In particular, we analyze how the selected literature is distributed over geographical regions, sciences domains and specific sustainability issues. In short, these analyses show that European, Asian and United States (US) based articles contribute the largest shares, while African and South American contributions are relatively small (Fig. 2). It also illustrates that social and environmental
Governing through information
Based on the literature review in search 1 we particularly address the relations between governing through information and sustainability in the Information Age. This literature is relevant to both developed and developing country contexts. About half of the selected articles contributes with empirical analyses, the rest is basically descriptive. Based on the selected literature, we identified some six insights of governing through information, accounted for in the following.
E-governance of
Discussion and concluding remarks
In this article we explore literature addressing how the Information Age affects environmental governance aiming for sustainability. Through a systematic literature review we selected 39 articles, of which 23 belong to the search for governing through information (search 1), and the other 16 were identified by searching for institutional change due to information flows (search 2) (only one article is double counted). Note that, although different geographical areas, far outside the scope of
Acknowledgements
This article is written as part of the “Informational Governance” Research Program of Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR), to contribute to solutions for the most pressing global environmental problems. The programme is co-financed by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs. We also would like to thank colleagues who shared their thoughts about this article in the Public Administration Group and Environmental Policy Group at WUR. Also, related with the insights provided about the
References (62)
- et al.
On the use of systematic reviews to inform environmental policies
Environ. Sci. Policy
(2014) Environmental justice implications of Maritime Spatial Planning in the European Union
Mar. Policy
(2011)- et al.
Feeding aquaculture growth through globalization: exploitation of marine ecosystems for fishmeal
Glob. Environ. Chang.
(2007) - et al.
Integrating valuation and deliberation: the purposes of sustainability assessment
Environ. Sci. Policy
(2011) Urban regeneration and democratization of information access: CitiStat experience in Baltimore
J. Environ. Manag.
(2009)- et al.
The extraction and utilization of local and scientific geospatial knowledge within the Bluff oyster fishery
N. Z. J. Environ. Manage.
(2009) - et al.
Marine informational governance, a conceptual framework
Mar. Policy
(2013) Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea: the coastal zone in an Era of globalisation
Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci.
(2012)The social responsibility of nuclear energy
(2008)- et al.
Water policy reform and innovation: a systematic review
Environ. Sci. Policy
(2014)
Designing a sustainable business model for e-governance embedded rural telecentres (EGERT) in India
IIMB Manag. Rev.
Fostering inclusive growth through e-Governance Embedded Rural Telecenters (EGERT) in India
Gov. Inf. Q.
Smart grids, information flows and emerging domestic energy practices
Energy Policy
Strategies for competitiveness and sustainability: adaptation of a Brazilian subsidiary of a Swedish multinational corporation
J. Environ. Manage.
We create, we connect, we respect, therefore we are: intellectual, social, and cultural value in online communities
J. Interact. Mark.
Dark green electricity comes from the sea: capitalizing on ecological merits of offshore wind power?
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
Putting sustainable fisheries on the map? Establishing no-take zones for North Sea plaice fisheries through MSC certification
Mar. Policy
Complexity and challenges of long-term environmental governance
Glob. Environ. Chang.
Demand chain management: factors enhancing market responsiveness capabilities
J. Mark. Channels
Adoption of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in public forest service in Greece
Environ. Prot. Ecol.
An exploration of future trends in environmental education research
Environ. Educ. Res.
ICT intervention in the “Chandanbari” village of Bangladesh: results from a field study
Inf. Syst. Front.
Document emancipating women through technological empowerment: aid to sustainable development
Asian J. Inf. Technol.
International ideal and local practice – access to environmental information and local government in Poland
Environ. Policy Gov.
Changing business context: challenges and opportunities: dialogue with thought leaders
Glob. Bus. Rev.
Information and communication technologies for least developed countries (ICTs4LCDs): exemplified in the Republic of Yemen
Int. J. Interdiscip. Soc. Sci.
On the nature of barriers to climate change adaptation
Reg. Environ. Chang.
The sustainability strategy
Environ. Forum
The unplanned creative city: an emerging sustainability? Crossroads between education and innovation in Santiago, Chile
Int. J. Sustain. Dev.
The Rise of the Network Society, Volume I of the Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture
Globalization: a physical geography perspective
Prog. Phys. Geogr.
Cited by (40)
Governing Farmers through data? Digitization and the Question of Autonomy in Agri-environmental governance
2022, Journal of Rural StudiesInformation governance for sustainable development: Exploring social dilemmas in data provision for international reporting on Land Degradation Neutrality
2022, Environmental Science and PolicyCitation Excerpt :The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development requires governments to establish standardized monitoring and reporting systems that call for new approaches to information governance. The role of information in environmental governance is thus changing significantly: it not only provides inputs for decision making, but also increasingly affects the functioning of governance institutions (Mol, 2006; Hoefnagel et al., 2013; Soma et al., 2016b). In the context of international commitments, assessment, monitoring, and reporting are seen as state-led processes of collecting, processing, and sharing information for an international review body (Bexell and Jönsson, 2019).
Participation through place-based e-tools: A valuable resource for urban green infrastructure governance?
2019, Urban Forestry and Urban GreeningCitation Excerpt :UGI governance should seek to integrate different e-tools and place-based approaches in order to strive for reflexive and inclusive UGI governance. There seems to be a need to consider whether e-tools should ‘only’ be ‘desk-top’ tools for public engagements in governance, or whether they should also provide opportunities for actors to connect to places in more extensive ways (Arts et al., 2015) and foster self-organisation and cooperative behaviours (Soma et al., 2016a,b). The inherent character of the e-tools where citizens act as ‘sensors’ of places could be further developed in order to engage citizens insitu activities that support sustainable UGI governance.
Assessing social innovation across offshore sectors in the Dutch North Sea
2019, Ocean and Coastal ManagementCitation Excerpt :In addition, technological innovations are welcomed by the EU as contributions to increased employment and economic growth, while taking account of the environmental qualities (European Commission, 2014). Although new technologies, including Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), provide opportunities for effectiveness of economic activities and connectivity across the globe, they also provide different kinds of uncertainties (Mol, 2008; Soma et al., 2016a, 2016b; 2016c). Underestimating the importance of the societal dimension of the innovation processes can result in a simple technology-oriented approach.
Editorial overview: Forest governance interventions for sustainability through information, incentives, and institutions
2018, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability