In the last decade, many authors have observed shifts from government to governance in the environmental policy domain. However, a clear conceptual framework to differentiate between modes of environmental governance is lacking and our understanding of when, how and why environmental governance changes from one mode to another is limited. In this paper we propose such a framework and we illustrate its usefulness by applying it to two environmental policy sectors in the Netherlands: urban environmental policy and policy regarding sustainable production and consumption. We show how the application of our framework leads to detailed, replicable and comparable claims about character and intensity of shifts in environmental governance. From this analysis, we conclude that character and intensity of shifts in environmental governance vary significantly. Furthermore, we show that modes of governance build on rather than completely replace one another. Finally, we point to a number of possible explanations for shifts in environmental governance, recognized in literature and in practice. We conclude with some suggestions for further research. Copyright• first, improving the performance of the regulatory approach and its enforcement; • second, extending the application of economic incentives such as eco-taxes, and • third, stimulating business sectors to take responsibility, relying on voluntary agreements combined with financial support promoting innovation and diffusion (see Keijzers, 2000;Vermeulen, 2002).

No abstract

Adaptation to a changing climate is unavoidable. Mainstreaming climate adaptation objectives into existing policies, as opposed to developing dedicated adaptation policy, is widely advocated for public action. However, knowledge on what makes mainstreaming effective is scarce and fragmented. Against this background, this paper takes stock of peer-reviewed empirical analyses of climate adaptation mainstreaming, in order to assess current achievements and identify the critical factors that render mainstreaming effective. The results show that although in most cases adaptation policy outputs are identified, only in a minority of cases this translates into policy outcomes. This Bimplementation gap^is most strongly seen in developing countries. However, when it comes to the effectiveness of outcomes, we found no difference across countries. We conclude that more explicit definitions and unified frameworks for adaptation mainstreaming research are required to allow for future research syntheses and well-informed policy recommendations.

No abstract