Transparency and Earth System Governance

Introduction What can transparency contribute to those seeking to improve the effectiveness of earth system governance? This article distinguishes among various policies designed to promote transparency based on the mechanisms by which they influence behavior and, thereby, seeks to identify the conditions under which we might expect them to promote socially desirable behavior and to discourage socially undesirable behavior. Transparency has " become a pervasive cliché of modern governance " that often receives " uncritical reverence " (Hood 2006, 3). While many have claimed that transparency brings unalloyed benefits to efforts to improve governance, others have countered that " it is not necessarily true that more disclosure makes the agent behave better " (Prat 2006, 91) and that transparency may not improve trustworthiness (O'Neill 2006). Many students and scholars of international relations enjoy a good " fight " as evident in some of the debate between proponents of transparency and those more cautious about its value. A more policy-useful version of this debate can be generated, however, by developing a more nuanced typology of different types of transparency and then attempting to identify the conditions under which each type of transparency is likely to be effective or ineffective. This article attempts to develop such a typology of transparency policies and the condition under which they work. A first step is to recognize that scholars of governance use " transparency " to refer to two distinct concepts. One segment of the governance literature addresses transparency that is designed to increase government accountability. This has variously been referred to as " downward transparency " or " procedural accountability, " but essentially refers to policies and institutions that seek to promote conditions in which " the 'ruled' can observe the conduct, behavior, and/or 'results' of their 'rulers' " (Heald 2006, 27; Auld and Gulbrandsen 2010). In essence, this literature examines open governance structures designed " to permit post-hoc accountability of decisions already made, or to facilitate citizen participation in decision-making " (Florini 2010, ~7). We might call this " transparency OF governance. " Another segment of the governance literature, however, addresses itself to what has been called " upwards transparency " or " outcome transparency " (Heald 2006, 27; Auld and Gulbrandsen 2010). In these cases, the transparency in question involves a flow of information about regulated or unregulated behaviors that is designed so that " the hierarchical superior/principal can observe the conduct, …