Communicative Aspects of Environmental Management by Objectives: Examples from the Swedish Context

Management by objectives (MBO) is a technique for integrating ecological concerns into national political and administrative structures. Politicians determine environmental objectives and interim targets to be implemented and assessed by civil servants in national, regional, and local contexts. Well-developed organizational communication is a prerequisite for MBO. However, communication-related obstacles can arise when using MBO in public environmental management. We examine communicative aspects of environmental MBO, looking specifically at the implementation, administration, and assessment of Swedish environmental quality objectives. Our argument is illustrated by quotations from individual and focus group interviews. We conclude that communicative problems may arise, because different actors interpret messages from different perspectives, depending on their agendas, prior knowledge and experience, and positions in the administrative system. It is crucial to recognize the dialogical aspects of communication, by involving the receiver of a message in a process of response. In addition, the different timeframes underlying different arguments could contribute to misunderstandings between actors involved in handling environmental issues. In assessing the achievement of environmental objectives, indicators are used as communicative tools. It is important to investigate whether and how these indicators contribute to the de- and recontextualization of environmental objectives.

[1]  Fredrik Burström Von Malmborg,et al.  Environmental Information Management in Municipalities , 2002 .

[2]  Exploring focus groups : Analysing focus group data about genetically modified food , 2004 .

[3]  V. Voloshinov.  Marxism and the philosophy of language , 1973 .

[4]  Per Linell,et al.  Approaching Dialogue: Talk, Interaction and Contexts in Dialogical Perspectives , 1998 .

[5]  L. Lundqvist.  Sweden and ecological governance: Straddling the fence , 2004 .

[6]  John E. Hunter,et al.  A Foundation of Good Management Practice in Government: Management by Objectives , 1992 .

[7]  D. G. MacKay,et al.  Metaphor and Thought , 1980 .

[8]  B. Norton.  Searching for Sustainability , 2002 .

[9]  Gene Ray.  Conditioning adorno: ‘After Auschwitz’ Now , 2004 .

[10]  T. Busch.  Attitudes towards management by objectives: An empirical investigation of self-efficacy and goal commitment , 1998 .

[11]  R. Wurzel.  Environmental Policy-Making In Britain, Germany and the European Union: The Europeanisation of Air and Water Pollution Control , 2002 .

[12]  Fredrik von Malmborg,et al.  Environmental management systems, communicative action and organizational learning , 2002 .

[13]  D. Morgan.  Focus groups for qualitative research. , 1988, Hospital guest relations report.

[14]  Graeme Burton,et al.  MORE THAN WORDS: An Introduction to Communication , 1992 .

[15]  H Luiten.  A legislative view on science and predictive models. , 1999, Environmental pollution.

[16]  Linda L. Putnam,et al.  The Sage handbook of organizational communication : advances in theory, research, and methods , 2001 .

[17]  Hanna J. Cortner,et al.  Making science relevant to environmental policy , 2000 .

[18]  Peter Lamarque,et al.  Concise encyclopedia of philosophy of language , 1997 .

[19]  J. Meadowcroft.  The Politics of Sustainable Development: Emergent Arenas and Challenges for Political Science , 1999 .

[20]  S. Kvale.  Interviews : an introduction to qualitative research interviewing , 1996 .

[21]  Claude E. Shannon,et al.  The mathematical theory of communication , 1950 .

[22]  K. Eckerberg,et al.  The Use of Local Sustainability Indicators: case studies in two Swedish municipalities1 , 2003 .

[23]  S. Mccool,et al.  Indicators of Sustainability: Challenges and Opportunities at the Interface of Science and Policy , 2004, Environmental management.

[24]  Lennart J. Lundqvist,et al.  Capacity-building or social construction? Explaining Sweden’s shift towards ecological modernisation , 2000 .

[25]  Michael J. Reddy.  Metaphor and Thought: The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language , 1993 .

[26]  Stephen Morse,et al.  Breaking through the Glass Ceiling: Who really cares about sustainability indicators? , 2001 .

[27]  Per Linell,et al.  Discourse across boundaries: On recontextualizations and the blending of voices in Professional discourse , 1998 .

[28]  K. Brunsson.  Management or Politics - or Both? How Management by Objectives May Be Managed: A Swedish Example , 2002 .

[29]  J. Kitzinger,et al.  Developing Focus Group Research: Politics, Theory and Practice , 1998 .

[30]  Kathi K. Beratan,et al.  Sustainability Indicators as a Communicative Tool: Building Bridges in Pennsylvania , 2004, Environmental monitoring and assessment.

[31]  Claude E. Shannon,et al.  The Mathematical Theory of Communication , 1950 .

[32]  Karin Edvardsson,et al.  Using Goals in Environmental Management: The Swedish System of Environmental Objectives , 2004, Environmental management.