Yönetişim Teorileri ile Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Amaçları Arasındaki İlişkilerin İncelenmesi

Abstract

Sürdürülebilir kalkınma için gerek kamu yönetiminde gerekse de toplumsal düzlemde gerçekleştirilmesi gereken değişim ve dönüşümün yönetimi açısından son dönemde ortaya konulan yönetişim teorileri oldukça önemlidir. Çalışmada sürdürülebilir kalkınma amaçları ile ilgili olabilecek değişimi yönetmeye ilişkin bazı temel teoriler hakkında genel bilgiler verilmesi hedeflenmektedir. Bu teoriler seçilirken, temel karakterlerine, sürdürülebilirlik yönetimini açıkladıkları noktalara, ilgili teorilerin sürdürülebilir kalkınma amaçları için yönetimde faydalı olma potansiyeline ve karşılıklı uyumluluğuna dikkat edilmiştir. Çalışmada; karmaşık sürdürülebilirlik konularını yönetmek için mevcut teoriler ile bunların birbirleri ile kesiştikleri noktalar dikkate alınarak sürdürülebilirlik yönetişimi ile ilgili geçiş teorisi, meta yönetişim, çok merkezlilik, ağ yönetişimi ve deneysel yönetim teorileri “bütünleştirici sürdürülebilirlik yönetişimi” bağlamında ele alınmıştır. Son olarak, farklı teoriler arasındaki ilişkiler, birbirleriyle olan bağlantıları ile aralarındaki ortak ve farklı noktalarına dikkat çekilmiştir. Çalışmada sürdürülebilirlik yönetişimi üzerine literatürde yer alan ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma amaçlarının başarılmasıyla ilgili çeşitli unsurların, teorilerin ve kavramların değeri, özgünlüğü ve zenginliğine işaret edilmek hedeflenmiştir.

Keywords

• Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma
• Geçiş Teorisi
• Meta Yönetişim
• Çok Merkezlilik
• Ağ Yönetişimi

The Relationship between Governance Theories and Sustainable Development Goals

Abstract

In order to achieve the goals of sustainable development, it is necessary to consider the function of management and the theories of management that have been put forward in the recent years in terms of the change and transformation management, which should be carried out both in public management and at the social level for sustainable development. The article aims to provide an overview of some basic theories of change management that may be related to the Sustainable Development Goals. In the study; in order to steer complex sustainability issues, considering the existing theories and their intersections, the theories related to sustainability governance, namely transition theory, meta governance, polycentricity, network governance and experimental management, are discussed in the context of “integrative sustainability governance”. Finally, the relations between different theories, their connections, and the common and different points between theories have been highlighted. The study attempts to demonstrate the value, originality and richness of various elements, theories and concepts related to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals in the literature on sustainability management.

Keywords

• Sustainable Development
• Transition Theory
• Meta-Governance
• Multicentricity
• Network Governance

References

1. ANDONOVA, Liliana B. ve MITCHELL, Ronald B. (2010), “The Rescaling of Global Environmental Politics”, Annual Review of Environment and Resources, s.35, ss.255-282.
2. BRIDGES, William ve MITCHELL, Susan (2000), “Leading Transition: A New Model for Change”, Leader to leader, S.16(3), ss.30-36.
3. BULKELEY, Harriat, ANDONOVA, Liliana B., BETSILL, Michele M., COMPAGNON, Daniel, HALE, Thomas, HOFFMANN, Matthew J., NEWELL, Peter, PETERSON, Matthew, ROGER, Charles ve VAN DEVEER, Stacy D. (2014), Transnational Climate Change Governance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
4. CASTELLS, Manuel (2004), “Informationalism, Networks, and the Network Society: A Theoretical Blueprint”, The Network Society: A Cross-Cultural Perspective (Ed. Manuel Castells), Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham (UK), ss.3-48.
5. COHEN, Joshua ve SABEL, Charles F. (2005) “Global Democracy”, NY University Journal of International Law Politics, S.37, ss.763–797.
6. DAVIDSON, Debra J. ve FRICKEL, Scott (2004), “Understanding Environmental Governance: A Critical Review”, Organization & Environment, S.17(4), ss.471–492.
7. DE CALUWÉ, Leon ve VERMAAK, Hans (2004), “Change Paradigms: An Overview”, Organizational Development Journal, S.22, 9-18.
8. DOĞAN, Kadir Caner (2017), “Postmodern Kamu Yönetiminin Kuramsal Temelleri Çerçevesinde Yönetişim Yaklaşımı: Literatür Taraması”, Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, S.10(1), Ss.27-45.

9. EKSTROM, Julia A. ve YOUNG, Oran R. (2009), “Evaluating Functional Fit between a Set of Institutions and an Ecosystem”, Ecological Sociology, S.14(2), ss.6(1-18).
10. EU - EUROPEAN UNION (2012), Global Trends 2030: Citizens in an Interconnected and Polycentric World, Institute for Security Studies of the European Union Publisher, Paris (FR).
11. FRANTZESKAKI, Niki (2011), “Dynamics of Societal Transitions: Driving Forces and Feedback Loops”, Dissertation Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delf (Holland).
12. GÖRG, Christoph ve RAUSCHMAYER, Felix (2009), “Multi-Level Governance and the Politics of Scale: The Challenge of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment”, Environmental Governance: Power and Knowledge in a Local-Global World (Ed. Ronnie D. Lipschutz, Gabriela Kutting), Routledge Publisher, London (UK), ss.81–99.
13. GRIN, John, ROTMANS, Jan ve SCHOT, Johan (2010), Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change, Routledge Publisher, London (UK).
14. HAJER, Maarten A. ve VERSTEEG, Wytske (2008), “The Limits to Deliberative Governance”, Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association Conference, 28-31 August 2008 – Bosten, ss.28-31.
15. HALE, Thomas ve HELD, David (2011), Handbook of Transnational Governance: Institutions and Innovations, Polity Press, Cambridge (UK).
16. HAUGHTON, Graham ve ALLMENDINGER, Phil (2008), “The Soft Spaces of Local Economic Development”, Local Economy: The Journal of the Local Economy Policy Unit, S.23, ss.138-148.
17. HOOGHE, Liesbet ve MARKS, Gary (2001), “Types of Multi-Level Governance”, European Integration Online Papers (EIoP), S.5(11), ss.1-30, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.302786.
18. KAPUCU, Naim (2010), Governance Reforms: Comparative Perspectives, USAK Publications, Ankara.
19. KOCAKULA, Özge (2021), “Örgütsel Etik Bağlamında Psikolojik Güvenlik Kavramı ve Etik Liderlik”, Yönetim ve Etik (Ed. Perihan Gözüm), Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara, ss.141-172.
20. LOORBACH, Derk (2007), Transition Management: New Mode of Governance for Sustainable Development, International Books Publisher, Dublin.
21. MARKARD, Jochen, RAVEN, Rob ve TRUFFER, Bernhard (2012), “Sustainability Transitions: An Emerging Field of Research and its Prospects”, Research Policy, S.41, ss.955-967.
22. MATHIJS, Erik (2008), Towards Integral Transition Management: The Case of the Sustainable Materials Usage Transition in Belgium, Society of Organizational Learning Publisher, Masqat.
23. MEADOWCROFT, James, FARRELL, Katharine N. ve SPANGENBERG, Joachim (2005), “Developing a Framework for Sustainability Governance in the European Union”, International Journal of Sustainable Development, S.8(1-2), ss.3-11.
24. MEADOWCROFT, James (2007) “Who is in Charge Here? Governance for Sustainable Development in a Complex World”, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, S.9, ss.299-314.
25. MECEK, Mehmet ve KOCAKULA, Özge (2019), “E-Devlet ve E-Yönetişimde İdari, Siyasi ve Etik Sorunlar”, E-Yönetişim: Kavramsal/Kuramsal Çerçeve, Ülke İncelemeleri ve Türkiye’ye Yansımaları (Ed. Bekir Parlak, Kadir Caner Doğan), Beta Yayınları, İstanbul, ss.195-230.
26. MEULEMAN, Louis (2008), Public Management and the Metagovernance of Hierarchies, Networks and Markets: The Feasibility of Designing and Managing Governance Style Combinations, Springer Publisher, New York (US).
27. MEULEMAN, Louis (2012), Transgovernance: Advancing Sustainability Governance, Springer Publisher, New York (US).
28. MEULEMAN, Louis ve TROMP, Henk (2010), “The Governance of Useable and Welcome Knowledge: Two Perspectives”, Knowledge Democracy: Consequences for Science, Politics and Media (Ed. Roeland In’t Veld), Springer Publisher, New York (US), ss.201-226.
29. MONKELBAAN, Joachim (2019), Governance for the Sustainable Development Goals: Exploring an Integrative Framework of Theories, Tools, and Competencies, Springer Publisher, Singapore.
30. MONKELBAAN, Joachim (2015), Experimentalist Sustainability Governance: Jazzing up Environmental Blues?, (Public Participation and Climate Governance Working Paper Series), CISDL – GEM – University of Lapland Joint Publisher, Rovaniemi (Finland).
31. MOSS, Timothy ve NEWIG, Jens (2010), “Multilevel Water Governance and Problems of Scale: Setting the Stage for a Broader Debate”, Environmental Management, S.46, ss.1-6.
32. OKCU, Murat (2012), “Değişen Dünyayı Anlamak İçin Önemli Bir Kavram: Yönetişim”, Yönetişim ve Yönetim Ekseninde Kamu Yönetimi (Ed. GENÇ, Fatma Neval), Ekin Yayınları, Bursa, ss.9-29.
33. OSTROM, Elinor (2009), Understanding Institutional Diversity, Princeton University Press, Princeton (UK).
34. PAHL-WOSTL, Claudia (2009), “A Conceptual Framework for Analysing Adaptive Capacity and Multi-Level Learning Processes in Resource Governance Regimes”, Global Environmental Change, S.19(3), ss.354-365.
35. ROTMANS, Jan, KEMP, René ve VAN ASSELT, Marjolein (2001), “More Evolution than Revolution: Transition Management in Public Policy”, Foresight, S.3(1), ss.15-31.
36. ROTMANS, Jan ve LOORBACH, Derk (2010), “Towards a better Understanding of Transitions and Their Governance: A Systemic and Reflexive Approach”, Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change (Ed. John Grin, Jan Rotmans, Johan Schot), Routledge Press, London (UK), ss.105-221.
37. SABEL, Charles F. ve ZEITLIN, Jonathan (2012), “Experimentalist Governance”, The Oxford Handbook of Governance (Ed. David Levi-Faur), Oxford University Press, Oxford, ss.169–185.
38. SASSEN, Saskia (2002), Global Networks, Linked Cities, Routledge Publisher, London (UK).
39. SMITH, Adrian ve STIRLING, Andy (2007), “Moving Outside or İnside? Objectification and Reflexivity in the Governance of Socio-Technical Systems”, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, S.9(3-4), ss.351-373.
40. SMITH, Neil (2012), “Homeless/Global: Scaling Places”, Mapping the Futures: Local Cultures, Global Change (Ed. John Bird, Barry Curtis, Tim Putnam, Lisa Tickner) Routledge Press, London, ss.87-119.
41. SWYNGEDOUW, Erik (1996), “Reconstructing Citizenship, the Re-Scaling of the State and the New Authoritarianism: Closing the Belgian Mines”, Urban Studies, S.33, ss.1499-1521.
42. SWYNGEDOUW, Erik (2004), “Globalisation or ‘Glocalisation’? Networks, Territories and Rescaling”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, S.17(1), ss.25-48.
43. TELLUS INSTITUTE (2015), “Great Transition Initiative: Towards a Transformative Vision and Praxis”, Great Transition Corporate Web Page, http://www.greattransition.org/about/what-is-the-great-transition (Erişim Tarihi: 25.12.2022).
44. TERMEER, Catrien Jam ve DEWULF, Art (2012), “Towards Theoretical Multiplicity for the Governance of Transitions: The Energy-Producing Greenhouse Case”, International Journal of Sustainable Development, S.5, ss.37-53, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2012.044033.
45. TRUTNEVYTE, Evelina, STRACHAN, Neil, DODDS, Paul E., PUDJIANTO, Danny ve STRBAC, Goran (2015), "Synergies and Trade-Offs between Governance and Costs in Electricity System Transition", Energy Policy, S.85, ss.170-181.
46. TUNÇ, Ahmet, BELLİ, Aziz ve AYDIN, Abdullah (2019), “Yerelde Yönetişim Algısı Üzerine Bir Alan Araştırması: Kahramanmaraş Büyükşehir Belediyesi Örneği”, Gaziantep Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, S.18(1), ss.256-270.
47. YILMAZ, Vedat ve MECEK, Mehmet (2021), “Kavram ve Kuramsal Açıdan Türkiye’de Dijital Kamu Yönetimi ve Dönüşümü”, Kamu Yönetiminde Değişim Olgusu: Global Trendler ve Yeni Paradigmalar (Ed. Berat Akıncı), Nobel Yayınları, Ankara, ss.103-137.