Table 1
Indicators derived from the links between the design principles and the governance requirements
| Link | Indicator |
|---|---|
| Involve all interested parties to provide necessary information | Who provides information? What type of information is shared? Is the information process transparent? |
| Involve all interested parties to induce compliance | How are decisions made? How are rules monitored? How are rules enforced? |
| Involve all interested parties to encourage adaptation and change | Which tools are used? How are rules revised? Are there any strategies for dealing with change? |
| Allocate authority to provide infrastructure | Who provides physical infrastructure? Who provides technical infrastructure? Who provides institutional infrastructure? |
| Allocate authority to encourage adaptation and change | How are decisions delegated? Are there any links between administrative levels? |
| Employ a mixture of institutional types to deal with conflicts | How are conflicts dealt with within the organization? How are conflicts dealt with between different sectors? |
| Employ a mixture of institutional types to provide infrastructure | How is institutional diversity being used? |
| Employ a mixture of institutional types to encourage adaptation and change | What institutional alternatives exist? |
Table 2
Summary of comparison between CTI-CFF, HELCOM and CCAMLR
| Link | CTI-CFF | HELCOM | CCAMLR |
|---|---|---|---|
| Involve all parties in information sharing, compliance and adaptation | Information sharing is dominated by NGOs. Compliance is regulated at state level. Adaptation plans are developed. | Information sharing is dominated by government agencies and science. Compliance is regulated at state level. Adaptation strategies are not developed. | Information sharing is dominated by government agencies and science, with contributions from non-state actors. Compliance is evaluated annually. Continuous adaptation through annual revisions of rules. |
| Allocate authority to provide infrastructure and encourage adaptation | Infrastructure contributions are ad hoc by NGOs. Adaptation is steered by non-state actors such as the Asian Development Bank. | Infrastructure is provided by national, bilateral, and regional initiatives. Adaptation strategies are managed at the state level. | Infrastructure is provided by the secretariat and ad hoc initiatives by member states. Adaptation is handled by the commission and at the state level. |
| Employ a mixture of institutions to deal with conflicts, to provide infrastructure and to encourage adaptation | There are no conflict resolution mechanisms in place. Infrastructure is first and foremost provided by NGOs. Adaptation is steered by the private sector. | There are no conflict resolution mechanisms in place if disputes occur between a contracting party and a non-contracting party. Infrastructure is provided by the secretariat, nation states, the EU, banks and private funds. Adaptation is managed at the state level. | Conflicts are resolved at the commission meetings or in international courts. Infrastructure is provided by the secretariat, and by international, regional and national organizations. Adaptation is steered by the commission and within nation states. |
Table 3
Comparison of HELCOM with an ideal type of adaptive governance
| Ideal type | HELCOM |
|---|---|
| All interested parties provide encompassing information in a transparent manner. | Information is first and foremost provided by government agencies from respective member states and science collaborations. Environmental NGOs also have the possibility of providing information. Stakeholders such as agriculture and industry are not adequately represented. All information is publicly available a couple of months after a meeting has been held. |
| All interested parties are involved in decision making, monitoring and rule enforcement. | Decision making is made by the contracting parties. Monitoring is performed by a special sub-group in HELCOM where scientists and national authorities are represented. Rules are implemented in national legislations where compliance is evaluated. |
| All interested parties are involved in making rules that are revisable and developing tools and strategies that ensure adaptation and change. | Recommendations are seldom revised, but future revisions of the BSAP are planned. Strategies exist for how to respond to sudden oil spills or spills of hazardous substances, but an overall plan for how to deal with changes does not exist. |
| Different levels of authority are linked but also involved in ensuring rule enforcement, adaptation and change. | HELCOM can only delegate to the nation states. There are very weak links between different levels of authority within the Baltic Sea regime. |
| Different levels of authority provide physical, technical and institutional infrastructure. | HELCOM secretariat, state-led initiatives, bilateral cooperation, and EU initiatives are all involved in providing infrastructure. |
| Conflicts within the organization and between different sectors are handled by and at a mixture of institutional types. | There are no conflict resolution mechanisms in place. Conflicts should be resolved at the different meetings (but these do not include all stakeholders). |
| A mixture of institutional types provides physical, technical and institutional infrastructure. | Public initiatives as well as private funds and banks are involved in providing infrastructure. |
| A mixture of institutional types is involved in revising and developing tools and strategies for adaptation and change. | Revisions of rules are regulated by the Helsinki Convention and other national and international agreements. Limited access to and participation by sectoral interests, for example agriculture and fishery. |