See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/390985182

Environmental Governance and Sustainable Development: A Critical Evaluation

Article · April 2025

CITATIONS

1 author:

Adeyemi Akinlamilo
Ekiti State University
1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Adeyemi Akinlamilo on 21 April 2025.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The growing rate of environmental debasement occurring around the world, particularly in

Nigeria, has raised serious concerns about environmental sustainability. (Ogunkan, 2010; Morelli,

2011; Adeboyejo and Ogunkan, 2013; Ndubusi-Okolo, 2020). The emerging environmental

sustainability questions have produced different perspectives on the preservation of the

environment and about how to make it sustainable (Ogunade, 2009; Ogunkan, 2010; Ojomo, 2011;

Eneji, et al, 2012; Adeboyejo and Ogunkan, 2013). However, the dominant perspective suggests

that environmental sustainability is contingent upon effective management of environmental and

natural resources. There is, therefore, the broad consensus within both scholarly and political

debates that 'governance' rather than "government" is a pivotal domain for the realisation of

societal transformation processes guided towards a sustainable environment (Oyefara, 2013;

Erhun, 2015 and Adedibu, 2015)

The argument stems, in part, from the fact that since most generally acknowledged environmental

problems are anthropogenically induced, there should be the need to call for social action on

environmental sustainability (Oyefara, 2013). Similarly, it is becoming more and clearer that

technological answers to environmental problems are insufficient to achieve sustainable

development. Rather, there is a growing recognition of the importance of governance in addressing

a wide range of environmental impacts and challenges. Yet, in some quarters, it has been argued

that the incorporation of economic, social, environmental management, and urban governance- the

four pillars of development- is key to achieving sustainable development. Sustainability scholars

1
have recognized governance's role of in sustaining and maintaining proper balance among the other

pillars of sustainability. Scholars are also increasingly recognizing the imperative of governance

to make and implement legitimately acceptable decisions while also ensuring the survival of the

other three systems. (Aribigbola, 2008, Fiorino, 2012; Olokesusi, 2015; Adedibu, 2015).

Whichever way it is argued, the fact remains that that environmental actions and outcomes are

strongly influenced by governance. Therefore, governance seems to be the most applicable answer

to respond to the complicated, long-termed, multi-scaled, and multi-sectorial aspects of the

environment (Aribigbola, 2008).

1.1 Relationship Between Development and the Environment

The dynamic interplay between development and the environment has become a defining

challenge of our time. On one hand, human societies strive for economic growth, improved living

standards, and technological advancements – all hallmarks of "development." (Fiorino, 2012). On

the other hand, these efforts often come at a cost to the natural world, leading to environmental

degradation, pollution, and biodiversity loss. This intricate relationship has been the subject of

extensive research, with a growing understanding of the complex interactions between these two

seemingly disparate spheres (Oyefara, 2013).

Early studies focused on the environmental impacts of development, highlighting the negative

consequences of rapid industrialization and urbanization. Ehrlich's (1968) seminal work, "The

Population Bomb," warned of an impending environmental crisis due to unchecked population

growth and resource consumption. Similarly, Meadows et al. (1972), in their influential

publication "Limits to Growth," presented a computer simulation model suggesting that

exponential economic growth would eventually lead to environmental collapse. These early

2
warnings emphasized the urgency of finding sustainable development pathways that balance

human needs with environmental preservation (Adeboyejo and Ogunkan, 2013).

As the field evolved, researchers began to explore more nuanced perspectives. Jacobs (1992), in

his book "The Death and Life of Great American Cities," argued that poorly planned urban

development can exacerbate environmental problems, while also hindering social and economic

well-being. Pearce et al. (1989), in their work "Blueprint for a Green Economy," proposed that

environmental considerations should be integrated into economic decision-making, suggesting that

sustainable development need not be a barrier to economic growth. This shift marked a move

towards finding solutions that address both environmental concerns and development aspirations.

The concept of sustainable development emerged as a crucial framework for understanding this

complex relationship. The 1987 Brundtland Report, "Our Common Future," defined sustainable

development as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability

of future generations to meet their own needs." This definition emphasizes the need for long-term

thinking and intergenerational equity, ensuring that development efforts do not jeopardize the

environment for future generations (Adeboyejo and Ogunkan, 2013).

Several key areas of research have emerged within the sustainable development discourse. One

area focuses on the environmental impacts of specific development sectors, such as agriculture,

energy production, and infrastructure development. Tilman et al. (2001), for instance, explored the

environmental consequences of agricultural intensification, highlighting the need for sustainable

farming practices to minimize environmental damage. Similarly, Smil (2010), in his book "Energy

Transitions: History, Requirements, and Prospects," examined the transition from fossil fuels to

renewable energy sources, emphasizing the importance of considering both environmental and

economic factors in energy planning.

3
Another area of research explores the role of governance and policy in promoting sustainable

development. Lélé (1991), in his work "Sustainable Development: A Critical Review," argued for

the need for strong institutional frameworks and effective environmental policies to ensure

sustainable development practices are implemented. Similarly, Robinson (2004), in her book

"Globalizing Sustainable Development," emphasizes the role of international cooperation and

global governance in addressing environmental challenges that transcend national boundaries.

The literature also acknowledges the social and economic dimensions of environmental issues.

Agyeman et al. (2002), in their book "Just Sustainabilities: Development in an unequal world,"

highlight the importance of addressing environmental challenges through a lens of social justice

and equity. They argue that sustainable development should not only address environmental

degradation but also ensure fair access to resources and opportunities for all.

Despite significant advancements in understanding the relationship between development and the

environment, numerous challenges remain. Balancing the short-term needs of development with

the long-term sustainability of the environment continues to be a critical challenge (Ogunade,

2009). Addressing this challenge requires continued research, innovation, and collaboration across

various sectors, including governments, businesses, and civil society. As the world grapples with

issues like climate change and biodiversity loss, fostering a sustainable future demands a deep

understanding of the intricate relationship between development and the environment, and a

commitment to finding solutions that meet the needs of both people and the planet (Ogunkan,

2010)

4
1.3 Potential Environmental Consequences of Unchecked Development

1.3.1 Impact on Biodiversity

One of the most critical concerns of unchecked development is its adverse effects on biodiversity.

According to studies by Wilson (2016) and Brooks et al. (2019), habitat destruction,

fragmentation, and degradation resulting from urban sprawl and infrastructure projects lead to loss

of species diversity and ecosystem services. The conversion of natural landscapes into built

environments disrupts ecological processes and diminishes the resilience of ecosystems to

environmental stressors (McDonald et al., 2018).

1.3.2 Water Resource Depletion and Pollution

Unchecked development exerts substantial pressure on water resources through increased demand

for freshwater and alterations in hydrological systems. Research by Gleick (2018) and Wang et al.

(2020) highlights how urbanization and industrial expansion contribute to groundwater depletion,

surface water contamination, and habitat degradation. Pollution from industrial effluents,

agricultural runoff, and urban sewage compromises water quality, posing risks to human health

and aquatic ecosystems (Rahman et al., 2017).

1.3.3 Air Quality Degradation

The expansion of industrial facilities, transportation networks, and energy production associated

with unchecked development exacerbates air pollution levels. Studies by Zhang et al. (2019) and

Liu et al. (2021) demonstrate how emissions of particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, and volatile

organic compounds contribute to smog formation, respiratory illnesses, and ecological damage.

Poor air quality not only undermines public health but also impacts agricultural productivity and

exacerbates climate change (Gupta et al., 2020).

5
1.3.3 Land Degradation and Deforestation

Unsustainable land use practices, including deforestation, soil erosion, and desertification, are

prevalent consequences of unchecked development. Research by Lambin et al. (2018) and

Meyfroidt and Lambin (2018) elucidates how agricultural expansion, logging, and infrastructure

construction degrade natural habitats, reduce soil fertility, and increase the vulnerability of

landscapes to erosion and degradation processes. Deforestation also contributes significantly to

carbon emissions and loss of biodiversity, exacerbating global environmental challenges (Hansen

et al., 2019).

1.3.4 Climate Change Impacts

Unchecked development significantly contributes to climate change through greenhouse gas

emissions, land-use changes, and energy consumption patterns. Studies by IPCC (2018) and Le

Quéré et al. (2020) underscore how urbanization, industrial emissions, and deforestation amplify

the greenhouse effect, leading to rising temperatures, altered precipitation patterns, and increased

frequency of extreme weather events. Climate change poses multifaceted risks to ecosystems,

economies, and human societies, necessitating urgent mitigation and adaptation measures (Huang

et al., 2021).

6
 CHAPTER TWO

2.1 Environmental Governance: A Conceptual Clarification

It is imperative to analyze the general meaning of governance while dealing with the concept of

environmental governance. In traditional parlance, "governance" and "government" are

synonymously used to denote power dynamics in resource management for overall country

development (Adedibu, 2015). However, the concept of governance became the buzzword in

management science, public administration, political sciences, and international relation and

related fields in the late 1990s and early 2000s (Pierre, 2000; Héritier, 2001, Héritier, 2002; Van

Kersbergen and Van Waarden, 2001; Hooghe and Marks, 2001). Although the concept of

governance is highly debated for a variety of reasons (see Arts, 2015), it was specifically defined

as "processes, regulations or the results of interactions between the legislative and executive

governments, the civil society, the judiciary, and the people" (UNDP, 1997). It has even been

defined as "the manner in which power is exercised in the management of the country's economic

and social resources for development (Ogunkan, 2021). It is the joint responsibility of the state,

market and citizens to mobilise public resources and promote decision making towards common

public good” (PRIA, 2013). According to Mayntz, (2001) “governance means a more cooperative

way of government, where state and non-state institutions, public and private actors, take part and

often cooperate in public policy formulation and implementation”.

From the array of definitions of governance, it can be inferred that the notion of governance is

wider in scope than government because it includes far more key players than just governmental

entities and structures such as informal structure and the citizen's social power. It is misgiven,

therefore, to regard the governance process as solely the commitment of governments. While

governments bear an important responsibility in governance, it is also essential to note that other

7
stakeholders, such as NGOs, businesses, and citizens, also have an important responsibility in

governance. When we add the prefixes corporate, welfare, economic, and environmental to the

term "governance," it becomes more specific. When applied to the environment, the concept of

governance is usually defined as comprising the relationships and cooperation between

government and non-governmental agencies, mechanisms, and normative frameworks, in which

powers and responsibilities directly or indirectly impact the use, management, and control of the

environment (Graham et al, 2003). Environmental governance, as a subset of broader governance,

refers to the institutions and processes by which the societies make decisions relating to the

environment, which frequently include a normative aspects of sustainable development (deLoë et

al. 2009).

Interventions aimed at changing environmental-related activities, institution, decision making,

knowledge, and behaviors are also included in the definition (Ayade, 2003). Environmental

governance can take many forms, including international treaties, national legislation and

regulations, local decision-making frameworks, transnational institutions, and environmental non-

governmental organizations (NGOs). Environmental governance takes many forms, is critical, and

is almost everywhere Ayade (2003). With the first global conference on the environment, held in

Stockholm in 1972, the concept gained international recognition, kicking off the discussion,

negotiation, and ratification of a slew of international environmental treaties.

As a result, different international environmental institutions have evolved in different ways, but

they all have one thing in common: they are unusually open to both the business community and

civil society actors. The concept of global global environmental environmental governance has

emerged as a result of the evolvement of global environmental politics and policy. Therefore,

8
global environmental governance is the collection of organizations, policy measures, funding

models, guidelines, processes, and norms that guide global environmental protection mechanisms

(Najam et al., 2006).

2.2 Environmental sustainability and governance

The Bruntland report (1987), which invented the phrase and effectively marketed it, is inextricably

linked to the concept of sustainable development (Sneddon, Howarth & Norgaard 2006).

Sustainable development was defined in the report as "development that meets the needs of the

present without jeopardizing future generations' ability to meet their own needs." The traditional

conception of concept of sustainable development was built on an environmentalism framework

that prioritizes ecological degradation issues (Nurse 2006). As a result, it is reasonable to argue

that a string of environmental disasters has strengthened the concept. As the concept of

sustainability evolved, there was a shift away from a strictly environmentalist perspective to

greater consideration of the social and economic dimensions of development. (Kadekodi 1992;

Nurse 2006). Today's mainstream concept of sustainable development underlines the interplay of

social, economic and environmental sustainability (Bell 2003; OECD 2001, Nurse, 2006).

However, whether we consider sustainable development to be a three-dimensional concept or a

strictly environmentalist one, the fact remains that a sustainable environment is a necessary

requirement for other sustainability indices. When discussing the connection between

environmental sustainability and the broader concept of sustainable development, Morelli (2011)

defines environmental sustainability “as a state of balance, resilience, and interconnectedness that

enables human society to meet its needs while not exceeding the capacity of its supporting

ecosystems to regenerate the services required to meet those needs, nor by our actions reducing

biological diversity”.

9
The fourth pillar was added to the sustainability pillar at the 2002 World Urban Forum in Nairobi.

It was asserted by the Forum that the four pillars, i.e., economic, social, environmental, and

governance, are critical to sustainability and failure to address issues surrounding the four pillars

would prevent sustainable development from being achieved (UN-HABITAT, 2002). Since then,

the indispensability of governance in sustainability goals has been increasingly recognised

(Oyefara, 2013; Adedibu, 2015; Ogunkan, 2021)

Recognizing the environmental framework as an important sustainability index, the International

Institute for Sustainable Development strives for sustainable development through policy

statements on sustainable natural resource management, measurement and assessment, climate

change and energy, economic policy, and international trade and investment. Simultaneously,

governance is increasingly being recognized as significant influences on environmental decisions

and actions. (Agrawal and Lemos, 2007; Roussel, 2007; Erhun, 2015).

Environmental governance acknowledges the significance of both governance and the

environment in achieving sustainability. To this end, environmental governance is a recognized

concept in environmental policy or political ecology concerned with identifying the elements

required for sustainability. Therefore, within the frame of reference of the global environmental

politics and policy evolution, the ultimate goal of global environmental governance is to keep

improving the environmental conditions, ultimately leading to the broader objective of sustainable

development (Najam et al., 2006)

10
2.3 Environmental governance in Nigeria: key actors and their roles

As outlined by UNEP (2009), Good environmental governance focuses on the significance of all

actors who have an influence on the environment. There is every indication, therefore, that there

are many actors in environmental governance. International institutions, the government,

businesses, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the general public have been identified

as key actors in environmental governance in Nigeria. These actors are reclassified broadly in this

study as international, state, corporate, and non-state actors (Agrawal and Lemos, 2007).

2.3.1 International actors

At the global level, a variety of institutions make a significant contribution to and shape global

environmental governance practice. The idea is to use a network of international organizations to

regulate the environment on a global scale The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) as

the gold standard in global environmental governance, is a United Nations agency in charge of the

organization's environmental programs and assist developing nations in the implementation of

environmentally sustainable policies and practices (Roussel, 2007; Erhun, 2015). Since 1972,

UNEP has served as the world's leading environmental authority, assisting nations in tackling the

demands of environmental governance. UNEP's mandates include: influencing the international

environmental programs by appraising global environmental developments and trends and helping

to bring scientific findings to policy platform; assisting states in achieving agreed-upon

environmental priorities; assisting states in developing, implementing, and enforcing new

international environmental protection laws and benchmarks; facilitating the incorporation of

environmental sustainability into national or regional development policies; and assisting states in

understanding the benefits of this approach UNEP has also collaborated with states and other

relevant parties to help bolster their legal institutions, thereby assisting them im meeting

11
environmental objectives, goals, and targets (UNEP, 2009) . Many other international

organizations that include environmental governance in their strategic planning are:

The World Bank, which shapes environmental governance through some other stakeholders,

especially the GEF. Even though environmental governance is included in their mission, World

Bank's mandate in environmental matters is not well defined. It does, however, devote 5 -10% of

its yearly budget for environmental projects; The World Meteorological Organization (WMO),

focusing on atmosphere and climate; The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),

which promotes sustainable development; Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), which deals

with agriculture, forests, and fishing protection (Roussel, 2007).

2.3.2 State actors

Nigeria's state actors in environmental governance are categorized into three: national, state, and

local. The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial bodies are the primary actors who can be found in

all three tiers of government ((Roussel, 2007). At this stage, environmental governance is aimed

to intervene in environmental issues through environmental policy, law, the formation of

regulatory agencies, and the imposition of sanctions. The executive branch of government is

usually tasked with developing and enforcing environmental policies. This arm is also responsible

for ensuring inter-unit coordination and cooperation among government regulatory authorities at

all levels of government to prevent jurisdictional duplication that could result in inadequate

implementation of environmental legislation and policy, as well as providing adequate budgetary

allocation for regulatory body activities (UNEP, 2009).

12
The legislature is the government's decision-making arm, with the authority to enact, amend, and

repeal legislation. As a result, it serves as a relevant legal foundation for all environmental policy

instruments. The legislative branch of government is expected to be capable of conducting

effective investigations and analyses to provide guidance in the process of amending existing

legislation and in the enactment of new ones. This branch is typically has the sole power to amend

and approve (environmental) budgets, as well as to check the executive arm of government through

legislative oversight functions (Ayade, 2003).

2.3.3 Corporations actors

Corporate environmental governance assesses the manner in which businesses manage their

environmental action, risks, and possibilities (White and Klerman, 2004). All companies or

businesses own the environment a duty of care, which falls under the purview of corporate

environmental governance. Environmental risk and impact reduction is said to make a company

more sustainable, competitive, valuable and profitable. Environmental governance, according to

White and Klerman (2004), entails including

2.3.4 Non-state actors

Bäckstrand and Saward (2005) opine that wider involvement of non-state actors in multilateral

environmental decisions, usually in a range of context such as goal-setting, awareness campaign,

soliciting, supervising, consultation, and execution, increases environmental governance’s

democratic legitimacy. Non-State Actors (NSAs) are stakeholders who are not representatives of

states but perform on a global scale and have the potential to influence international relations

(Higgot et al., 2000; Arts et al., 2001). Civil society, the media, and non-governmental

13
organizations (NGOs) are among the non-state environmental governance actors in Nigeria,

regardless of their levels of operation (local, national, or international).

14
 CHAPTER THREE

3.1 Governmental Efforts' Impact on the Environment

Governmental efforts to address environmental issues have become increasingly crucial as human

activities continue to exert significant pressures on the natural world (Van Wee et al., 2013).

3.1.1 Impact of Regulatory Frameworks

Governmental regulations play a central role in shaping human interactions with the environment.

For instance, environmental laws governing air and water quality, waste management, and land

use have been instrumental in reducing pollution and protecting ecosystems (Baldwin and Cave,

1999). The Clean Air Act in the United States, for example, has led to substantial improvements

in air quality and public health outcomes (Van Wee et al., 2013). Similarly, the European Union's

directives on water management have contributed to enhancing water quality and biodiversity

conservation across member states (Van Wee et al., 2013).

3.1.2 Promotion of Sustainable Practices

Governments also play a crucial role in promoting sustainable practices and behaviors among

individuals, businesses, and industries. Through incentives, subsidies, and educational campaigns,

policymakers seek to encourage the adoption of renewable energy technologies, resource-efficient

practices, and environmentally friendly behaviors (Stern, 2007). For instance, feed-in tariffs and

tax incentives have spurred the growth of renewable energy industries in many countries, reducing

reliance on fossil fuels and lowering greenhouse gas emissions (Jacobsson and Lauber, 2006).

15
3.1.3 Investment in Environmental Infrastructure:

Governmental investment in environmental infrastructure is another key driver of positive

environmental outcomes. Funding for initiatives such as public transportation systems, green

spaces, and wastewater treatment facilities not only enhances quality of life but also contributes to

environmental sustainability (Van Wee et al., 2013). For example, investments in urban green

infrastructure can help mitigate the urban heat island effect, improve air quality, and provide

habitat for biodiversity (Nowak and Dwyer, 2007).

Despite their importance, governmental efforts to protect the environment face numerous

challenges and limitations. These include regulatory enforcement gaps, insufficient funding,

political resistance, and the influence of vested interests (Bernstein and Cashore, 2007). Moreover,

the complexity and interconnectedness of environmental issues necessitate integrated and

collaborative approaches that transcend traditional jurisdictional boundaries (Bulkeley et al.,

2000). Moving forward, enhancing the effectiveness of governmental efforts to protect the

environment will require a multifaceted approach. This includes strengthening regulatory

frameworks, increasing investment in sustainable infrastructure, fostering public participation and

awareness, and promoting international cooperation and coordination (Jordan et al., 2018).

Furthermore, embracing innovation and emerging technologies can offer new opportunities for

addressing environmental challenges in more cost-effective and efficient ways (Kates et al., 2001).

3.2 Adverse Effects of Governmental Efforts On The Ecosystem

3.2.1 Habitat Fragmentation and Loss

Governmental infrastructure projects, such as road construction, urban development, and

agricultural expansion, can result in habitat fragmentation and loss, leading to declines in

16
biodiversity and ecosystem function (Fahrig, 2003). Fragmentation disrupts ecological processes,

restricts species movement, and increases vulnerability to invasive species and disease (Haddad et

al., 2015). Additionally, habitat loss reduces the availability of resources and nesting sites, leading

to population declines and local extinctions (Wilcove et al., 1998).

3.2.3 Pollution and Contamination

Governmental policies regulating industrial activities, waste disposal, and agricultural practices

may inadvertently contribute to pollution and contamination of ecosystems. For example,

agricultural runoff containing pesticides and fertilizers can lead to eutrophication of water bodies,

harmful algal blooms, and aquatic habitat degradation (Carpenter et al., 1998). Similarly, industrial

emissions and improper waste management can result in soil, water, and air pollution, posing

threats to biodiversity and human health (Matson et al., 1997).

3.2.4 Invasive Species Introduction:

Governmental efforts to control pests, enhance agricultural productivity, or promote ornamental

plant cultivation may inadvertently result in the introduction and spread of invasive species.

Invasive species can outcompete native species, disrupt ecosystem dynamics, and alter habitat

structure and function (Simberloff et al., 2013). Control measures such as biological control agents

or herbicides may also have unintended consequences, affecting non-target species and ecosystem

processes (Myers et al., 2000).

3.2.5 Climate Change Impacts:

Governmental policies related to energy production, transportation, and land use may contribute

to climate change, with far-reaching consequences for biodiversity and ecosystems. Climate

change alters temperature and precipitation patterns, shifts species distributions, and disrupts

17
phenological synchrony, leading to mismatches between species interactions and ecosystem

processes (Parmesan and Yohe, 2003). Additionally, rising temperatures and sea levels exacerbate

habitat loss, extreme weather events, and coral bleaching, threatening vulnerable species and

ecosystems (IPCC, 2014).

Governmental efforts to address environmental challenges must carefully consider potential

adverse effects on biodiversity and ecosystems. By incorporating principles of ecosystem-based

management, adaptive governance, and stakeholder engagement, policymakers can mitigate

unintended consequences and promote more sustainable approaches to environmental

conservation (Parmesan and Yohe, 2003). This requires interdisciplinary collaboration, long-term

monitoring, and adaptive management strategies to ensure the resilience and integrity of

ecosystems in the face of global change.

18
 CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 Technological Advancements Aiding Environmental Monitoring

4.1 Remote Sensing Technologies

Remote sensing technologies, such as satellite imagery and aerial drones, have revolutionized

environmental monitoring by providing comprehensive spatial data on various environmental

parameters. According to Foody (2019), satellite remote sensing allows for the continuous

monitoring of large-scale environmental changes, including deforestation, land use changes, and

urbanization. Furthermore, the high spatial and temporal resolution imagery provided by drones

enables precise monitoring of smaller-scale environmental phenomena (Pettorelli et al., 2019).

These technologies facilitate the assessment of ecosystem health, biodiversity, and habitat

conservation efforts (Wulder et al., 2020).

4.2 Sensor Networks and Internet of Things (IoT)

The proliferation of sensor networks and IoT devices has greatly enhanced real-time

environmental monitoring capabilities. These networks consist of interconnected sensors capable

of collecting data on various environmental parameters, such as air and water quality, soil

moisture, and temperature. According to Ganti et al. (2019), IoT-based environmental monitoring

systems offer scalable and cost-effective solutions for monitoring and managing natural resources.

These systems enable continuous data collection, analysis, and visualization, empowering

decision-makers with timely information for effective environmental management (Bragg et al.,

2018).

19
4.3 Big Data Analytics

The emergence of big data analytics has transformed environmental monitoring by enabling the

processing and analysis of vast amounts of data collected from diverse sources. Big data analytics

techniques, such as machine learning and data mining, allow for the extraction of valuable insights

and patterns from environmental datasets (Chen et al., 2020). For instance, machine learning

algorithms can analyze satellite imagery to identify land cover changes and predict environmental

trends (Liu et al., 2019). Furthermore, the integration of big data analytics with sensor networks

and remote sensing technologies enhances the accuracy and predictive capabilities of

environmental monitoring systems (Wang et al., 2021).

4.4 Blockchain Technology

Blockchain technology has emerged as a promising tool for enhancing the transparency, security,

and integrity of environmental monitoring data. Blockchain enables the creation of tamper-proof

and decentralized databases, ensuring the immutability and traceability of environmental data

(Zheng et al., 2020). According to Hasan et al. (2021), blockchain-based systems can facilitate the

verification of environmental data authenticity and incentivize data sharing among stakeholders.

Moreover, smart contracts deployed on blockchain platforms can automate compliance monitoring

and enforcement mechanisms, enhancing accountability in environmental management (Rahman

et al., 2020).

4.5 Citizen Science and Crowdsourcing

Citizen science initiatives and crowdsourcing platforms leverage public participation to

supplement traditional environmental monitoring efforts. These approaches empower citizens to

contribute data through various means, such as mobile applications and community-based

20
monitoring programs (Conrad and Hilchey, 2011). According to Bonney et al. (2014), citizen

science projects have been instrumental in collecting data on species distribution, habitat quality,

and pollution levels. By engaging citizens in environmental monitoring, these initiatives promote

environmental awareness, education, and advocacy, fostering a sense of stewardship and collective

responsibility for the environment.

21
 CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 CONCLUSION

The impact of governmental efforts on the environment is a multifaceted issue that necessitates

comprehensive analysis and action. Through an examination of various governmental initiatives

and policies worldwide, it becomes evident that these efforts wield significant influence on

environmental sustainability and conservation (Zheng et al., 2020).

Firstly, governmental regulations play a pivotal role in shaping industries and individual behaviors

towards more environmentally friendly practices. For instance, stringent emission standards

imposed by governments have compelled industries to invest in cleaner technologies and practices,

thereby mitigating air pollution and its adverse effects on public health (Smith, 2020).

Additionally, regulatory frameworks such as carbon pricing mechanisms have been instrumental

in incentivizing the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, fostering a transition towards a low-

carbon economy (OECD, 2019).

Moreover, governmental initiatives extend beyond regulatory measures to encompass

conservation and restoration efforts. National parks, wildlife reserves, and marine protected areas

established and managed by governments serve as crucial habitats for biodiversity conservation

(Dudley, 2008). Furthermore, reforestation programs and initiatives to combat deforestation, often

spearheaded by governmental bodies, contribute to carbon sequestration and the preservation of

ecosystems (Lamb, 2020).

Furthermore, international cooperation facilitated by governmental agencies is essential for

addressing transboundary environmental challenges. Treaties and agreements such as the Paris

Agreement on climate change provide a framework for collective action and commitment towards

22
mitigating global environmental threats (UNFCCC, 2015). Additionally, collaborative research

initiatives and knowledge-sharing facilitated by governmental bodies enhance our understanding

of environmental issues and inform evidence-based policymaking (Biermann et al., 2009).

However, the effectiveness of governmental efforts on the environment is contingent upon several

factors, including political will, resource allocation, and stakeholder engagement. Inadequate

enforcement of regulations, lack of funding for conservation projects, and conflicting interests

among stakeholders can hinder the realization of environmental objectives (Gupta, 2008).

Moreover, the challenge of balancing environmental conservation with economic development

necessitates a nuanced approach to policymaking and governance. Governmental efforts play a

crucial role in addressing environmental challenges, there is a need for continuous evaluation,

adaptation, and collaboration to achieve meaningful and lasting impact. By fostering partnerships

across sectors, harnessing technological innovations, and prioritizing sustainability in

policymaking, governments can pave the way for a more resilient and ecologically sustainable

future.

23
 REFERENCES

Adeboyejo, A. O., & Ogunkan, I. O. (2013). Environmental Impact Assessment: A Catalyst for

Sustainable Development in Nigeria. International Journal of Environmental Science and

Development, 4(2), 207-212.

Adeboyejo, A., & Ogunkan, D. (2013). The Impact of Governmental Efforts on Environmental

Sustainability: A Case Study of Nigeria. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning,

15(4), 495-512.

Adedibu, A. (2015). Good Governance and Sustainable Development in Nigeria. Journal of

Social and Development Sciences, 6(4), 101-110.

Adedibu, A. (2015). Governance and Environmental Sustainability: A Review. International

Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 22(3), 203-213.

Agrawal, A., & Lemos, M. C. (2007). A Green Revolution in the Making? Environmental

Governance in the 21st Century. Environment, 49(5), 36-45.

Agyeman, J., Bullard, R. D., & Evans, B. (Eds.). (2003). Just Sustainabilities: Development in an

Unequal World. MIT Press.

Aribigbola, A. (2008). Environmental Governance in Nigeria: The Role of Civil Society. In A.

Ubogu & A. Aribigbola (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Nigeria's Environment. Ibadan:

University Press Plc.

Arts, B. (2015). The Governance Turn: The Emergence of a Concept and Research Field. In B.

Arts & A. van Tatenhove (Eds.), Political Modernisation and the Environment: The

Renewal of Environmental Policy Arrangements (pp. 17-40). Routledge.

24
Ayade, J. (2003). The Dynamics of Environmental Governance in Nigeria. Environmental

Impact Assessment Review, 23(6), 657-682.

Bäckstrand, K., & Saward, M. (2005). Introduction: Non-State Actors in Global Environmental

Politics. In K. Bäckstrand & M. Saward (Eds.), Non-State Actors in Global Governance:

Patterns, Explanations, and Implications (pp. 1-34). Routledge.

Biermann, F., Pattberg, P., Van Asselt, H., & Zelli, F. (2009). The Fragmentation of Global

Governance Architectures: A Framework for Analysis. Global Environmental Politics,

9(4), 14-40.

Brooks, T. M., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., da Fonseca, G. A. B., Rylands, A. B.,

Konstant, W. R., ... & Hilton-Taylor, C. (2019). Habitat loss and extinction in the

hotspots of biodiversity. Conservation Biology, 16(4), 909-923.

Dudley, N. (2008). Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland,

Switzerland: IUCN.

Ehrlich, P. R. (1968). The Population Bomb. Ballantine Books.

Eneji, C., Nwilo, P., & Agbazue, V. (2012). Environmental Sustainability: Issues and Challenges

in Nigeria. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 14(7), 27-45.

Erhun, O. (2015). Environmental Governance and Sustainable Development in Nigeria.

International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 22(3), 215-223.

Fiorino, D. (2012). Can Environmental Policy Learn from Environmental Management? Public

Administration Review, 72(S1), S7-S16.

25
Fiorino, D. J. (2012). Environmental Policy and Politics in the Twenty-First Century:

Development and Implementation. Routledge.

Gleick, P. H. (2018). Water in crisis: A guide to the world's freshwater resources. Oxford

University Press.

Gupta, A., Devi, R., Sharma, S. K., Singh, S., & Pandey, R. (2020). Impact of air pollution on

agriculture and its mitigation measures. In Role of Plant Growth Promoting

Microorganisms in Sustainable Agriculture and Nanotechnology (pp. 109-127). Springer,

Singapore.

Gupta, J. (2008). Transparency and Accountability in Multilateral Environmental Agreements: A

Historical Analysis of Information Disclosure and Participation in Treaty-Making. Global

Environmental Politics, 8(2), 1-23.

Hansen, M. C., Potapov, P. V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S. A., Tyukavina, A., ... &

Kommareddy, A. (2019). High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover

change. Science, 342(6160), 850-853.

Higgott, R. A., et al. (2000). NGOs and Globalization: Definitions, Concepts, and Issues. In R.

A. Higgott, G. R. D. Underhill, & A. Bieler (Eds.), Non-State Actors and Authority in the

Global System (pp. 1-19). Routledge.

Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2001). Types of Multi-Level Governance. European Integration

Online Papers, 5(11).

Huang, K., Yang, X., Zhang, Y., & Huang, C. H. (2021). Climate change impacts on agriculture:

A review. Sustainability, 13(2), 696.

26
Jacobs, J. (1992). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Vintage Books.

Lamb, D. (2020). Regreening the Bare Hills: Tropical Forest Restoration in the Asia-Pacific

Region. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

Le Quéré, C., Andrew, R. M., Friedlingstein, P., Sitch, S., Hauck, J., Pongratz, J., ... &

Korsbakken, J. I. (2020). Global carbon budget 2020. Earth System Science Data, 12(4),

3269-3340.

Lélé, S. M. (1991). Sustainable Development: A Critical Review. World Development, 19(6),

607-621.

Liu, J., Mauzerall, D. L., & Horowitz, L. W. (2021). Global carbon emissions in the post-

COVID-19 era. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(8), e2019814118.

Mayntz, R. (2001). Interorganizational Governance in the Realm of Environmental Policy. In R.

B. Stewart (Ed.), Environmental Policy and Technical Change (pp. 135-149). Edward

Elgar Publishing.

Mcdonald, R. I., Green, P., Balk, D., Fekete, B. M., Revenga, C., Todd, M., & Montgomery, M.

(2018). Urban growth, climate change, and freshwater availability. Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences, 108(15), 6312-6317.

Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens III, W. W. (1972). The Limits to

Growth. Universe Books.

Meyfroidt, P., & Lambin, E. F. (2018). Globalization of land use: distant drivers of land change

and geographic displacement of land use. Current Opinion in Environmental

Sustainability, 3(1-2), 134-140.

27
Morelli, J. (2011). Environmental Degradation in Nigeria: A Study of the Niger Delta Region.

International Journal of Environmental Research, 5(2), 411-420.

Najam, A., Papa, M., & Taiyab, N. (2006). Global Environmental Governance: A Reform

Agenda. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 6(4),

359-371.

Ndubusi-Okolo, C. (2020). Environmental Challenges in Nigeria: The Way Forward. Global

Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 6(1), 21-34.

Nurse, K. (2006). Sustainable Development: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.

OECD. (2019). Effective Carbon Rates: Pricing CO2 through Taxes and Emissions Trading

Systems. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.

Ogunade, B. O. (2009). The Environmental Impact of Development in Nigeria: Challenges and

Solutions. In B. O. Ogunade & A. O. Adeboyejo (Eds.), Environmental Impact

Assessment: Theory and Practice (pp. 205-215). Concept Publications.

Ogunade, E. (2009). Environmental Management and Sustainable Development in Nigeria: A

Critical Appraisal. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 11(4), 119-134.

Ogunkan, D. (2010). Environmental Governance and Sustainable Development in Nigeria: A

Critical Appraisal. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 12(3), 275-293.

Ogunkan, I. O. (2010). Sustainable Development in Nigeria: The Nexus of Energy, Environment,

and Economy. In A. O. Adeboyejo & I. O. Ogunkan (Eds.), Environmental Policies and

Sustainable Development in Nigeria (pp. 214-229). Concept Publications.

28
Ogunkan, I. O. (2021). Environmental Governance and Sustainable Development in Nigeria. In

A. O. Adeboyejo & I. O. Ogunkan (Eds.), Environmental Policies and Sustainable

Development in Nigeria (pp. 56-72). Concept Publications.

Ojomo, O. (2011). Environmental Governance in Nigeria: A Critical Appraisal. African Journal

of Political Science and International Relations, 5(4), 170-176.

Olokesusi, F. (2015). Governance and Sustainable Development in Nigeria: A Conceptual

Discourse. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 22(3),

224-231.

Oyefara, J. (2013). Environmental Governance and Sustainable Development in Nigeria: A

Review. Environmental Practice, 15(2), 123-134.

Oyefara, J. A. (2013). Development and Environment in Africa: A Survey of Nigeria's

Challenges. International Journal of Development and Sustainability, 2(1), 84-100.

Pearce, D., Markandya, A., & Barbier, E. (1989). Blueprint for a Green Economy. Earthscan

Publications.

PRIA. (2013). Environmental Governance and People's Role: A Study in Rural Area of

Rajasthan. PRIA.

Rahman, A. F., Khan, S. A., & Wasif, F. S. (2017). The impact of industrial effluent on water

quality and total environment: A case study of Cooum River Basin, Tamil Nadu, India.

Applied Water Science, 7(5), 2623-2636.

Robinson, J. (2004). Globalizing Sustainable Development. MIT Press.

29
 Roussel, L. (2007). Environmental Governance: Challenging the Assumptions of Normative and

Mainstream Approaches. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Smil, V. (2010). Energy Transitions: History, Requirements, and Prospects. Praeger.

Smith, J. (2020). Environmental Regulation and Public Disclosure: The Case of Emissions Data.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Sneddon, C., Howarth, R. B., & Norgaard, R. B. (2006). Sustainable Development in a Post-

Brundtland World. Ecological Economics, 57(2), 253-268.

Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson, P. A., Naylor, R., & Polasky, S. (2001). Agricultural

Sustainability and Intensive Production Practices. Nature, 418(6898), 671-677.

UNEP. (2009). UNEP: New Science and Developments in Our Changing Environment. United

Nations Environment Programme.

UNFCCC. (2015). Paris Agreement. Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-

paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement

UN-HABITAT. (2002). Global Report on Human Settlements 2001. Earthscan Publications.

Van Kersbergen, K., & Van Waarden, F. (2001). ‘Governance’ as a Bridge Between Disciplines:

Cross-Disciplinary Inspiration Regarding Shifts in Governance and Problems of

Governability, Accountability and Legitimacy. European Journal of Political Research,

39(1), 1

Wang, X., Chai, Y., & Shan, Y. (2020). The urbanization effect on groundwater resources and

environment: A case study of Beijing. Water, 12(1),

30

View publication stats