The Governance Capacity of Local Environmental NGOs within the Framework of Ecological Democracy Theory: A Proposed Model

Öz

This study proposes a unique model that examines the governance capacities of local environmental civil society organizations at a theoretical level within the context of ecological democracy theory. Andrew Dobson's conceptualization of ecological citizenship and John Dryzek's theory of deliberative democracy form the theoretical basis of the study. In the ongoing debate in the literature on the relationship between the environment and democracy, the effectiveness of democratic processes in ensuring environmental sustainability is questioned. Based on this questioning, the role that local environmental NGOs can play in sustainable environmental governance by combining the principles of ecological citizenship and deliberative processes with green co-production mechanisms has been modeled theoretically. A conceptual and theoretical approach was followed in the study. The theoretical model obtained aims to contribute to strengthening the democratic legitimacy of sustainable environmental policies at the local level. The research questions and the literature based on these questions are presented, followed by the conceptual model. Subsequently, the advantages and potential obstacles of the proposed model are evaluated in the discussion section. In conclusion, a new theoretical framework for the governance of environmental issues has been developed through the integration of the normative and practical dimensions of ecological democracy theory.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Governance
• Ecological Democracy
• Civil Society Organizations

Ekolojik Demokrasi Kuramı Çerçevesinde Yerel Çevre STK’larının Yönetişim Kapasitesi: Bir Model Önerisi

Öz

Ekolojik demokrasi kuramı bağlamında, yerel çevre sivil toplum kuruluşlarının yönetişim kapasitelerini kuramsal düzeyde incelendiği bu çalışmada, özgün bir model önerilmektedir. Andrew Dobson’ın ekolojik vatandaşlık kavramsallaştırması ile John Dryzek’in deliberatif (müzakereci) demokrasi kuramı, çalışmanın kuramsal temelini oluşturmaktadır. Literatürde çevre ve demokrasi arasındaki ilişkiye dair süregelen tartışmalarda, demokratik süreçlerin çevresel sürdürülebilirliği sağlamadaki etkinliği sorgulanmaktadır. Bu sorgulamaya dayanarak, yerel çevre STK’larının, ekolojik vatandaşlık ilkelerini ve deliberatif süreçleri yeşil ortak üretim mekanizmalarıyla birleştirerek, sürdürülebilir çevre yönetişiminde oynayabileceği rol, kuramsal olarak modellenmiştir. Çalışmada, kavramsal ve kuramsal bir yöntem izlenmiştir. Elde edilen kuramsal model, yerel düzeyde sürdürülebilir çevre politikalarının demokratik meşruiyetle güçlendirilmesine katkı sunmayı amaçlamaktadır. Araştırma soruları ve bu sorulara dayalı literatür ortaya konulmakta, buna bağlı olarak kavramsal model sunulmaktadır. Akabinde, tartışma bölümünde önerilen modelin sağlayacağı avantajlar ve karşılaşabileceği engeller değerlendirilmektedir. Sonuç olarak, ekolojik demokrasi kuramının normatif ve pratik boyutlarının entegrasyonu yoluyla, çevresel sorunların yönetişiminde yeni bir kuramsal çerçeve geliştirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yönetişim
• Ekolojik Demokrasi
• Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları

Kaynakça

1. Anthony, B. P. (2025). Ecological Citizenship and Responsible Participatory Practices. Discourses of Ethics, 1(25), 51–68.
2. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225.
3. Baber, W. F., & Bartlett, R. V. (2005). Deliberative Environmental Politics: Democracy and Ecological Rationality. MIT Press.
4. Bell, D. (2005). Liberal Environmental Citizenship. Environmental Politics, 14(2), 179–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010500054863
5. Betsill, M. M., & Corell, E. (2008). NGO Diplomacy: The Influence of Nongovernmental Organizations in International Environmental Negotiations. MIT Press.
6. Bey, N. (2022). Configurational Analysis of Environmental NGOs and Their Influence on Environmental Policy in Turkey. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9, Article 427. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01458-0
7. Bilgili, M. Y. (2015). Anayasal Bir Hak Olarak Çevre Hakkı. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 6(2), 563-584.
8. Bosselmann, K., & Taylor, P. (2017). Ecological Approaches to Environmental Law. Edward Elgar Publishing.

9. Brandsen, T., & Pestoff, V. (2006). Co-production, the Third Sector and the Delivery of Public Services. Public Management Review, 8(4), 493–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030601022874.
10. Bulkeley, H., & Betsill, M. M. (2005). Rethinking Sustainable Cities: Multilevel Governance and The “Urban” Politics of Climate Change. Environmental Politics, 14(1), 42–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/0964401042000310178
11. Can, Ö., & Gönenç, D. (2022). Ege Bölgesi’ndeki Çevreci Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları: Örgütsel Özellikler ve İlişkiler. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 20(44), 329-356. https://doi.org/10.35408/comuybd.907175
12. Cesuroğlu, M., & Atmaca, Y. (2023). Kamu Politikalarının Karar Verme Sürecinde Bir Aktör Olarak Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları ve Etkinlik Düzeyi. MTÜ Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi, 3(2), 305-324.
13. Chambers, S., & Warren, M. E. (2023). Why Deliberation and Voting Belong Together. Res Publica, 31(2), 279–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-023-09635-x
14. Choudry, A., & Kapoor, D. (Eds.). (2013). NGOization: Complicating the Story of Development and Activism. Zed Books.
15. Curato, N., Dryzek, J. S., Ercan, S. A., Hendriks, C. M., & Niemeyer, S. (2017). Twelve Key Findings in Deliberative Democracy Research. Daedalus, 146(3), 28–38. https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_00444
16. Çüm, B., & Artan, T. (2025). Yeşil Sosyal Hizmet Bağlamında İklim Değişikliğiyle Mücadelede Bireysel Bir Çaba: Ekolojik Vatandaşlık. Mavi Atlas, 13(1), 127-143. https://doi.org/10.18795/gumusmaviatlas.1577931
17. Dobson, A. (2003). Citizenship and the Environment. Oxford University Press.
18. Dobson, A. (2006). Citizenship. In A. Dobson & R. Eckersley (Eds.), Political Theory and The Ecological Challenge (pp. 216–231). Cambridge University Press.
19. Dobson, A. (2016). Are There Limits to Limits? In T. Gabrielson, C. A. Hall, J. M. Meyer, & D. Schlosberg (Eds.), The Oxford hand-book of environmental political theory (pp. 289–303). Oxford University Press.
20. Dryzek, J. S. (1987). Rational Ecology: Environment and Political Economy. Blackwell.
21. Dryzek, J. S. (2000). Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford University Press.
22. Dryzek, J. S. (2010). Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. Oxford University Press.
23. Dryzek, J. S. (2013). The Politics of The Earth: Environmental Discourses (3rd ed.). Oxford University Pres.
24. Dryzek, J. S., & Stevenson, H. (2011). Global Democracy and Earth System Governance. Ecological Economics,70(11), 1865–1874.
25. Eckersley, R. (2004). The Green State: Rethinking Democracy and Sovereignty. MIT Press.
26. Eckersley, R. (2020). Ecological Democracy and the Rise and Decline of Liberal Democracy: Looking Back, Looking Forward. Environmental Politics, 29(2), 214- 234. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2019.1594536
27. Elçi, M., & Alpkan, L. (2006). Etik İklimin Örgütsel Vatandaşlık Davranışlarına Etkileri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(1), 141-170.
28. Eryılmaz, Ç., & Akman, F. (2016). Kolektif Bir Çevre Hareketi Olarak Artvin’de Maden Karşıtı Direniş. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 25, 17–33.
29. Eryılmaz, Ç. (2018). Türkiye’de Çevreci Örgütlerin Dönüşümü: Merkezi Profesyonel Lobici Örgütler ve Yerelde Gönüllü Protestocular. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 73(1), 49–76. https://doi.org/10.1501/SBFder_0000002489
30. Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00667.x
31. Goodin, R. E. (1992). Green Political Theory. Polity.
32. Haus, M., & Sweeting, D. (2006). Local Democracy and Political Leadership: Drawing a Map. Political Studies, 54(2), 267–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2006.00605.x
33. Itten, A., & Mouter, N. (2022). When Digital Mass Participation Meets Citizen Deliberation: Combining Mini- and Maxi-publics in Climate Policy-making. Sustainability, 14(8), 4656. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084656
34. Jamison, A. (1996). The Shaping of the Global Environmental Agenda: The Role of Nongovernmental Organizations. In S. Lash, B. Szerszynski, & B. Wynne (Eds.), Risk, Environment and Modernity (pp. 224–245). Sage.
35. Lepori, M. (2019). Towards a New Ecological Democracy. Environmental Values, 28(1), 75–100.
36. Light, A. (2003). Urban Ecological Citizenship. Journal of Social Philosophy, 34(1), 44–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9833.00164
37. Maniates, M. F. (2001). Individualization: Plant a Tree, Buy a Bike, Save the World? Global Environmental Politics, 1(3), 31–52. https://doi.org/10.1162/152638001316881395
38. Melo-Escrihuela, C. (2008). Promoting Ecological Citizenship: Rights, Duties and Political Agency. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 7(2), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.14288/acme.v7i2.799
39. Newig, J., & Fritsch, O. (2009). Environmental Governance: Participatory, Multi-level –and Effective? Environmental Policy and Governance, 19(3), 197–214.
40. Niemeyer, S. (2004). Deliberation in the Wilderness: Displacing Symbolic Politics. Environmental Politics, 13(2), 347–372.
41. Niemeyer, S. (2013). Democracy and Climate Change: What Can Deliberative Democracy Contribute? Australian Journal of Politics & History, 59(3), 429–448. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajph.12025
42. OECD. (2017). Mobilising Bond Markets for a Low-carbon Transition. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264272323-en
43. Okudan Dernek, K., & Tırış, G. (2020). Yurttaşlığı Yeniden Düşünmek: Ekolojik Yurttaşlık Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme. Ekonomi Politika ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(3), 745-772. https://doi.org/10.30784/epfad.739676
44. Ophuls, W. (1977). Ecology and the Politics of Scarcity. W.H. Freeman.
45. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.
46. Paker, H., Adaman, F., Kadirbeyoğlu, Z., & Özkaynak, B. (2013). Environmental Organisations in Turkey: Engaging the State and Capital. Environmental Politics, 22(5), 760–778. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2013.825138
47. Pickering, J., Backstrand, K., & Schlosberg, D. (2020). Between Environmental and Ecological Democracy: Theory and Practice at the Democracy–Environment Nexus. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 22(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2020.1703276
48. Pickering, J., Hickmann, T., Backstrand, K., Kalfagianni, A., Bloomfield, M., Mert, A., Ransan-Cooper, H., & Lo, A. Y. (2022). Democratising Sustainability Transformations: Assessing The Transformative Potential of Democratic Practices in Environmental Governance. Earth System Governance, 11, 100131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esg.2021.100131
49. Purdy, J. (2015). After Nature: A Politics for the Anthropocene. Harvard University Press.
50. Schlosberg, D., Backstrand, K., & Pickering, J. (2019). Reconciling Ecological and Democratic Values: Recent Perspectives on Ecological Democracy. Environmental Values, 28(1), 1– 8. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327119X15445402369545
51. Siccardi, F. (2022). Will Green Activism Save Turkey’s Democracy? Carnegie Europe. https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2022/06/will-green-activism-save-turkeys-democracy?lang=en¢er=europe
52. Smith, G. (2003). Deliberative Democracy and the Environment. Routledge.
53. Tan Gülcan, D. (2018). Ekolojik Kriz Karşısında Devletin Rolü Üzerine İdeolojik Bir Tartışma. Uluslararası İlişkiler, 13(59), 49–63.
54. Torgerson, D. (2008). Constituting Green Democracy: A Political Project. The Good Society, 17(2), 18–24.
55. UN-Habitat. (2020). Financing Sustainable Urban Development. UN-Habitat.
56. Ünal, Y. (2012). Türkiye’de Yerel Yönetimlerde Karar Verme ve Karar Verme Sürecinde Yeralan Faktörlerin Analizi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(3), 259-282.
57. Wapner, P. (1996). Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics. State University of New York Press.
58. White, D. F. (2019). Ecological Democracy, Just Transitions and a Political Ecology of Design. Environmental Values, 28(1), 31–53.
59. Willis, R., Curato, N., & Smith, G. (2022). Deliberative Democracy and The Climate Crisis. WIREs Climate Change, 13(2), e759. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.759
60. Wolf, J., Brown, K., & Conway, D. (2009). Ecological Citizenship and Climate Change: Perceptions and Practice. Environmental Politics, 18(4), 503–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010903007377
61. Wong, J. K. (2016). A Dilemma of Green Democracy. Political Studies, 64(1 Suppl.), 136–155.
62. Yıldırım, S. (2024). Yerel Demokrasi: Katılım Mekanizmalarının Yerel Yönetişim Yaklaşımı Açısından İncelenmesi. Mukaddime, 15(2), 385-415. https://doi.org/10.19059/mukaddime.1507620.
63. Yıldız Karakoç, D., & Kemahlı Garipoğlu, F. (2025). Akbelen’de Kadın Direnişi Bağlamında Ekofeminizm ve Çevresel Adalet: Eleştirel Söylem Analizi. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi, 32(3), 425-456. https://doi.org/10.18657/yonveek.1687210