GeoJournal

, Volume 55, Issue 2–4, pp 557–568 | Cite as

Local environmental action plans and the `glocalisation' of post-socialist governance: The Macedonian experience

  • Stefan Buzarovski
Article

Abstract

Local Environmental Action Plans (LEAPs) are a useful starting point for the theoretical and empirical unravelling of the global post-Fordist socio-economic drive, within the framework of environmental policy devolution in Transition. Accordingly, this paper aims to identify the interconnected economic, social and political specifities involved in the formulation and institutionalisation of such projects in the Republic of Macedonia. Seven LEAPs - broadly representative of the immense micro-scale physical and social diversity of the country - have been selected for detailed review, so as to provide more fine-tuned insights that should be relevant for the wider LEAP process in Macedonia and beyond. Preliminary evidence about the realisation of these initiatives indicates that comprehensive implementation is highly dependent upon the realistic political and economic abilities (and interests) of local and national elites, plus international organisations.

environmental policy devolution glocalisation local environmental action plans local governance Macedonia sustainable development the Balkans 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amin A. and Thrift N., 1995: Globalisation, institutional 'thickness' and the local economy. In: Healey P., Cameron S., Davoudi S., Graham S. and Madani-Pour A. (eds.), Managing Cities: The New Urban Context. Wiley, London; pp. 91–108.Google Scholar
  2. Bate R., 1997: What Risk?: Science Politics and Public Health. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.Google Scholar
  3. Cami G., 2000: Lokalen ekološki akcionen plan za Opština Debar. 'Dešat' Ecological Society, Debar.Google Scholar
  4. Chrislip D.D. and Larson C.E., 1994: Collaborative Leadership: How Citizens and Civic Leaders Can Make a Difference. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  5. Clark T.N., 1993: Local democracy and innovation in Eastern Europe. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 11(2): 171–198.Google Scholar
  6. Costi A., 1998: Environmental justice and sustainable development in Central and Eastern Europe. European Environment 8(4): 107–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crane K., 1991: Institutional legacies and the economic, social and political environment for transition in Hungary and Poland. American Economic Review 81(2): 318–322.Google Scholar
  8. Dnevnik, 2001: Opštinite i bez pari i bez vlast. Dnevnik 1530 (April 18th).Google Scholar
  9. Ekološko društvo 'Izgrev', 2000a: Lokalen ekološki akcionen plan za Opština Sveti Nikole. 'Izgrev' Ecological Society, Sveti Nikole.Google Scholar
  10. Ekološko društvo 'Izgrev', 2000b: Grag'anskoto opštestvo vo Regionalnata programa za obnova na zivotnata sredina. 'Izgrev' Ecological Society, Sveti Nikole.Google Scholar
  11. Ekološko društvo 'ODEK' (EDODEK), 2000: Lokalen ekološki akcionen plan za Opština Kavadarci. 'Mladost-M' Youth Information and Cultural Centre, Kavadarci.Google Scholar
  12. Elander I., 1997: Between centralism and localism: on the development of local self-government in post-socialist Europe. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 15(2): 143–161.Google Scholar
  13. Environmental Action Programme for Central and Eastern Europe, 1998: Setting priorities: abridged version of the document endorsed by the Ministerial Conference, Lucerne, Switzerland, 28–30 April 1993 World Bank, OECD, Washington, D.C. and Paris.Google Scholar
  14. Gerasimovski D., 1997a: Demografski karakteristiki na Republika Makedonija spored novata teritorijalna podelba. Statistical Institute of the Republic of Macedonia, Study 85, Skopje.Google Scholar
  15. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), 1999: Transition report 1999. EBRD, London.Google Scholar
  16. Gerasimovski D., 1997b: Prostornoto raspredeluvanje na naselenieto kako faktor za promenite vo mre_ata na naselenite mesta vo Republika Makedonija. Statistical Institute of the Republic of Macedonia, Study 86, Skopje.Google Scholar
  17. Gerasimovski D., 1998: Opštinite vo Republika Makedonija spored novata teritorijalna podelba. Geographical Reviews. Institute for Geography, Skopje, pp.32–33.Google Scholar
  18. Gibbs D. and Jonas A.E.G., 2000: Governance and regulation in local environmental policy: the utility of a regime approach. Geoforum 31: 299–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grochowski M., 1997: Public administration reform: an incentive for local transformation?' Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 15(2): 109–217.Google Scholar
  20. Hak T., 1996: Developing Local and Regional Environmental Action Plans: Case Studies of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and the Slovak Republic. REC, Budapest.Google Scholar
  21. Horváth T.M., 1997: Decentralisation in public administration and provision of services: the East-Central European view. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 15(2): 161–176.Google Scholar
  22. Jessop B., 1990: State Theory: Putting the Capitalist State in Its Place. Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  23. Jessop B., 1994: The transition to post-Fordism and the Schumpeterian workfare state. In: Burrows R. and Loader B. (eds.), Towards a Post-Fordist Welfare State? Routledge, London, pp. 13–37.Google Scholar
  24. Jessop B., 1997: A neo-Gramscian approach to the regulation of urban regimes: accumulation strategies, hegemonic projects and governance. In: Lauria M. (ed.), Reconstructing Urban Regime Theory. Sage, London, 51–73.Google Scholar
  25. Larson C.E., 1989: Teamwork: What Must Go Right, What Can Go Wrong Sage, Newbury Park.Google Scholar
  26. MacLeod G. and Goodwin M., 1999a: Reconstructing an urban and political economy: on the state, politics, scale and explanation. Political Geography 18: 697–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. MacLeod G. and Goodwin M., 1999b: Space, scale and state strategy: rethinking urban and regional governance. Progress in Human Geography 23(4): 503–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Markowitz P., 2000: Guide to Implementing Local Environmental Action Programmes in Central and Eastern Europe. Institute for Sustainable Communities and the REC, Montpelier and Szentendre.Google Scholar
  29. Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning, 1998: State of Environment Report – 'RESPONSE: on-going environment projects in the Republic Of Macedonia' http://www.soer.moe.gov.mk/water/ respons2.htm.Google Scholar
  30. Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning, 2000: Interview of the Minister Marjan Dodovski for the Macedonian Television (in Macedonian) http://www.mia.com.mk/moe/levomeni/aktuelnosti/ intervju.htm.Google Scholar
  31. Ministry for Urbanism, Construction and Protection of the Environment, 1996: National Environmental Action Plan. MUCPE, Skopje.Google Scholar
  32. O'Brien M., 2000: Making Better Environmental Decisions: an Alternative to Risk Assessment. MIT Press, Cambridge and London.Google Scholar
  33. Panov M., 1976: Geografija na Socijalistièka Republika Makedonija. Misla, Skopje.Google Scholar
  34. Peck, J. and Tickell A., 1992: Local modes of social regulation?: regulation theory, Thatcherism and uneven development. Geoforum 23(3): 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pickvance C.G., 1997: 'Decentralisation and democracy in Eastern Europe: a sceptical approach'. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy. 15(2), 129–42.Google Scholar
  36. Popovski V. and Panov M., 1998: Opštinite vo Republika Makedonija. Misla, Skopje.Google Scholar
  37. Regional Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern Europe (REC), 1998: Doors to Democracy: Current Trends and Practices in Public Participation in Environmental Decisionmaking in CEE. REC, Budapest.Google Scholar
  38. Regionalen centar za zaštita na zivotnata sredina za Centralna i Istocna Evropa (RCZZSCIE) – Lokalna kanceralija Makedonija, 1998: Lokalen ekološki akcionen plan za opštinite Centar, Veles, Zrnovci i Gevgelija. REC and Ministry for Urbanism, Construction and Environment, Skopje.Google Scholar
  39. Republièka geodetska uprava, 1982: Socijalistièka Republika Makedonija niz katastarskata evidencija. Republican Geodesy Directorate, Skopje.Google Scholar
  40. Republika Makedonija – Lokalni izbori 2000, 2000: Odredbi od Zakonot za lokalnata samouprava (http://www.izbori.gov.mk/politickisistem.html).Google Scholar
  41. Rhodes R. and Marsh D., 1992: New directions in the study of policy networks. Journal of Political Research 21: 181–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sluzben vesnik na Republika Makedonija, 1996: Zakon za teritorijalnata podelba na Republika Makedonija. Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia 49, Skopje.Google Scholar
  43. Stojmilov A., 1995: Geografija na Republika Makedonija. Prosvetno Delo, Skopje.Google Scholar
  44. Swyngedouw E., 1997: Neither global nor local: 'glocalisation' and the politics of scale. In: Cox K. (ed.), Spaces of Globalisation: Reasserting the Power of the Local. Guilford, New York.Google Scholar
  45. Swyngedouw E., 2000: Elite power, global forces and the political economy of 'global' development. In: Clark G.L., Fledman M.P. and Gertler M.S.0 (eds.), The Oxford handbook of economic geography. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 541–558.Google Scholar
  46. United Nations Environment Programme, 2000: Post-Conflict Environmental Assessment: FYR of Macedonia. UNEP, Nairobi.Google Scholar
  47. Utrinski Vesnik, 2001: 'se vrti okolu Ustavot. Utrinski Vesnik 571 571, (May 18th).Google Scholar
  48. Zavod za statistika na Republika Makedonija, 1994: 'instvata, stanovite i zemjodelskite stopanstva vo 1994 godina. Statistical institute of the Republic of Macedonia, Skopje.Google Scholar
  49. Zavod za statistika na Republika Makedonija, 1997: 'instva, stanovi i zemjodelski stopanstva vo spored novata administrativno-teritorijalna podelba vo 1996. Statistical institute of the Republic of Macedonia, Skopje.Google Scholar
  50. Zsamboki K. and Bell M., 1997: Local self government in CEE: decentralisation or deconcentration? Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 15(2): 177–186.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Buzarovski
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Geography and the EnvironmentUniversity of OxfordOxfordU.K.

Personalised recommendations