Transparency, accountability and empowerment in sustainability governance: a conceptual review

Abstract

This paper offers a conceptual examination of the power-effects of transparency, as information disclosure, on those making accountability claims against actors deemed to be causing significant environmental harm. Informed by Lukes's (2005) multi-dimensional theory of power, I review recent scholarship to interrogate four hypotheses positing empowerment for accountability claimants arising from the disclosure of sustainability information. Across public and private governance forms, academic research suggests that information disclosure promotes the communication of the sustainability interests of affected parties, and in some cases enhances the capacity of these parties to evaluate justifications provided by relevant power-wielders. However, evidence is weaker that disclosure of sustainability information empowers accountability claimants to sanction or otherwise steer those responsible; and there is little support that transparency fosters wider political interrogation of the configurations of authority producing environmental harm. Differentiating between behavioural and non-behavioural understandings of power allows an evaluation of these research findings on the power-related effects of information disclosure.

Performing accountability: face-to-face account-giving in multilateral climate transparency processes

“…In our empirical analysis, we thus assess the kind of answerability sought and generated through these processes: i.e. whether it is a substantive, outcome-oriented answerability concerned with meeting formal commitments; or a procedurally-oriented answerability centred on facilitating learning and empowerment of participants (see also Mason, 2020). A further question is whether procedural, learning-oriented accountability generates substantive consequences, such as enhanced actions (Gupta and van Asselt, 2019;Weikmans et al, 2020).…”

“…While the term 'accountability' does not appear in UNFCCC agreements, the concept is increasingly evoked in relation to the ever-greater levels of climate transparency demanded within multilateral processes. Transparency is widely assumed to be a precondition for enhanced accountability (Gupta et al, 2020;Mason, 2020). The assumption is that making visible what countries are doing will further accountability, and enhance mutual trust that progress is being made by all countries in meeting climate pledges (CEW, 2018;Gupta & Mason, 2016, Gupta and Van Asselt, 2019, Weikmans et al, 2020.…”

Transparency in Environmental and Resource Governance: Theories of Change for the EITI

“…While a full review of the environmental and resource governance-bydisclosure literature falls beyond the scope of this article (see, e.g., Gupta and Mason 2014;Zalik and Osuoka 2020), the main arguments have been that governance-by-disclosure reduces informational asymmetries and increases the capacity of stakeholders to evaluate performances, but that it falls short in actually enhancing capacity to change the status quo and modify behaviors and the power of incumbent decision makers (Mason 2020). Ciplet et al (2018), for example, find that disclosure in climate finance implemented under the Paris Agreement did not translate into widespread accountability in emissions, possibly because of the propensity of transparency initiatives to foster technocratization rather than democratization (Gupta and Mason 2016)with empirical research on transparency identifying the "public" as the weak point of governance-by-disclosure (Fox 2015;Lujala et al 2020).…”

Nested Climate Accounting for Our Atmospheric Commons—Digital Technologies for Trusted Interoperability Across Fragmented Systems

“…International assessment and review-which hinges on data availability-can foster transparency, trust, and accountability among different actors (Asselt, Pauw, and Saelen 2015). Transparency is a widely assumed precondition for creating mutual trust within the multilateral processes and enhance accountability of the individual actor's progress towards meeting their climate pledges (Gupta and van Asselt 2019;Mason 2020;Weikmans et al, 2020;Gupta et al, 2021). In this paper, we focus on all processes, mechanisms and tools related to "climate change accounting and reporting" (Gulluscio et al, 2020), which can apply to greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories for the purposes of complying with regulations or international frameworks like the Paris Agreement, or voluntary management.…”