IEM, what for and how it works?

Hello mates! It’s been a while since my last post and I do wish you all well. As of the last article, we have provided a definition of IEM to develop a clear understanding and appreciation of its concept. As promise, today we will be talking about what are the benefits that can be derived from IEM and what processes are involved in its implementation.

The first question therefore is what do we gain from IEM or what do IEM tries to achieve? Cairns (1991:5) enumerated some of the benefits of IEM: ‘(1) long-term protection of the resource; (2) enhanced potential for non-deleterious multiple use; (3) reduced expenditure of energy and money on conflicts over competing uses and the possibility of redirecting these energies and funds to environmental management; (4) more rapid and effective rehabilitation of damaged ecosystems to a more usable condition (more ecosystem services provided; and cost effectiveness’. The said benefits are somehow specifically address to resources and their uses. It is the desire of IEM therefore to promote development without causing any detrimental effects to the underlying ecosystems and provide viable solutions for long-term protection and sustainability of the environment.

Born and Margerum (1995:35-36), on the other hand, brings the idea of comprehensiveness and interconnections. IEM, thus, facilitate a broader analysis and understanding of the interrelationships that exist between and among varying environmental problems. It considers the ecological, institutional, and socio-economic interconnections and linkages of different systems that ensure a holistic approach to environmental governance. In addition, Buhrs (2009) put forward the possibility of ‘greening’ of knowledge, institutions and policy which may result to effective environmental management. Overall, what IEM’s can provide toward the betterment of environmental management is quite appealing.

But how IEM actually works? Born and Sonzogni (1995:169) provided a conceptual framework for IEM that make considerations of four principal dimensions: comprehensive, interconnective, strategic, and interactive/coordinative. Comprehensiveness implies a degree of inclusivity by defining the scope and scale of environmental management activities. To be comprehensive and eventually succeed, IEM must embrace the underlying ecosystems and its components, the resource management functions and most importantly the stakeholders. Interconnective dimension on the other hand describes the interrelationships and linkages between and among the ecosystems components, conflicting resource uses and the varying community of interest. In other words, the interactions and coordination among the diverse component of the environment are defined.

The strategic dimension is similar to a filtering process (Born and Sonzogni, 1995:171). It ‘aims to make environmental planning and management adaptive, anticipatory, and more attuned to the realities of the political decision arena’. In contrast, interactive/coordinative component not only is interorganizational and intergovernmental but also embrace directly and indirectly affected interests. Thus, public involvement is recognized as an essential factor to ensure successful implementation through effective interaction and coordination that eliminates conflicts and confusions.

In addition, Margerum (1999) presented a set of elements that are critical for the successful initiation, operation, and implementation of IEM. Within the initiation stage of IEM, legal, institutional, and organizational elements are considered, hence the following elements: (1) Laws and policies should support an integrated approach; (2) Resources must be available to support the planning process; (3) Willingness to participate of major stakeholders; (4) Legitimate stakeholder committee membership and participation; and (5) The need for people with skills and time to lead the effort. Operation stage deals with the elements that make stakeholders functions effectively. Among the important elements under this include: (1) The need for stakeholders to develop effective and clear processes for communicating; (2) The need for clear decision rules or consensus; (3) Effective identification and management of conflicts; (4) Consultation with the general public; and (5) Stakeholders should base management decisions on a sound understanding of environmental systems and interrelationships.

Lastly, the implementation stage which are referred to as the outputs and outcomes address the following elements: (1) Stakeholders need to foster familiarity, common goals, and mutual understanding; (2) Development of strategic and adaptable strategy; (3) Development of management approach that include environmental, social, and economic factors; (4) Stakeholders need to support implementation actions; (5) Identification of intervention leverage points to achieve management goals; (6) Stakeholder committees need to assert their role in management activities; (7) Creation of structures and mechanisms for coordinating decision making; (8) Implementation of information and education programs; (9) Resources to support implementation; and (10) immediate implementation of actions and activities.

Below is an IEM framework diagram that we can use as a guide in implementing IEM. In using this framework, it is important to remember the themes of IEM which are comprehensive, interconnective, strategic and interactive and coordinative. Moreover, it is essential to incorporate some points put forward by Buhrs (1995:14), to: ‘(1) Think politically; (2) Think analytically and laterally; and Think practically and strategically’.

 

On my next blog, I will try to discuss in detail the importance of defining a problem in order to arrive at correct IEM approach/measures. Truly, there is no single formula that can define successful IEM implementation. There is also no guarantee of achieving complete integration. In practice, IEM implementation may be differ in scope or coverage and varied in terms of location or space as it is continuously influenced by various factors such as political systems and community values.But can it be done or will it be done? Indeed it is a challenge up to this date on how to progress with IEM. The task is so huge and not easy. But, the most important thing, however, is that we are taking the right direction in embracing IEM as an effective tool for environmental governance. So what do you think mates? How can we effectively implement an IEM?    

         

References

Born, Stephen M. and Margerum, Richard D.  (1995). Integrated Environmental Management: Improving the Practice in Wisconsin. Department of Urban and Regional Planning. University of Wisconsin.

Born, Stephen M. and Sonzogni, William C. (1995). Integrated Environmental Management: Strengthening the Conceptualization. Environmental Management Vol. 19. No. 2, pp. 167-181. Springer-Verlag New York Inc.

Buhrs, Ton (1995). Integrated Environmental Management: Towards a Framework for Application. Environmental Management and Design Division. Lincoln University. New Zealand.

Buhrs, Ton (2009). Environmental Integration: Our Common Challenge. SUNY Press, Albany.

Cairns, John Jr. and Crawford, Todd V., Ed. (1991). Integrated Environmental Management. Chelsea, MI, Lewis Publishers.

Margerum, Richard D. (1999). Integrated Environmental Management: The Foundations for Successful Practice. Environmental Management Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 151-166. Springer-Verlag New York Inc.