Environmental Integration according to Buhrs

In this post, I will investigate what Environmental Integration Management (IEM) means by considerering the recent literature provided by Ton Buhrs, of Lincoln University. Chapter 1 of Buhrs' book "Environmental Integration: Our Common Challenge" (2009), endeavours to make sence of Environmental Integration.
Buhrs sets out to first to define what environmental integration is all about by identifying it's key aspects. Following this, he presents a framework for classifying forms of environmental integration, partially to make sence of the tools and mechanisms that are used to achieve integration, but also to identify some of the strengths and shortcomings of the various forms of integration.
Buhrs states that Environmental Integration is a challenge that humans face, rather than a problem for the environment itself, and to achieve integration is for all people to integrate environmental concerns into their thinking, knowledge, awareness, actions and behaviour. Some may view this as utopianism, but Buhrs views it as necessity. It is true that already many people frequently bring environmental concerns into their daily affairs and decision-making processes, but this is not sufficiently widespread and many do not do so consistently.
Buhrs identifies two forms of Environmental Integration: internal and external. By 'external' he means what needs to be integrated, such as the pieces of a puzzle and by 'internal' he means the way in which those pieces are coherently brought together by some common framework that ensures individuals act in ways that are mutually consistent. Buhrs acknowedges that his contemporaries, such as Laffery and Hovden, discuss related concepts under the classifications 'vertical' and 'horizontal' environmental policy integration, although he argues that these labels may imply certain interpretations that differ from what the author intended. He believes that 'internal' and 'external' more closely reflect the nature of the challenges.
Buhrs thinks that governments are our most important agents for instigating collective action and by that he doesn't mean through a totalitarian regime but by strengthening democracy. It should be noted that values and interests being balanced off against each other is not integration, but the merely the common practice of bargaining and politics. He argues that environmental rationality is a social construction, not an objective truth.
Buhrs identifies three management dimensions to environmental integration: (1) cognitive (ideas/views/assumptions), (2) policy (decisions, choices, actions) and (3) institutional (rules and organisations). He draws parallels with these management dimensions to the three aspects of sustainable development: 'environment', 'economic' and 'social', overlap with 'ecological', 'resource' and 'human environment'. Distinguishing between these concepts can be a muddy affair, however, finding definitions is necessary to avoid being lost in all encompassing notions, that become excessively broad and eventually meaningless. Buhrs discussion of these terms leads to the formation of a distinct classification system shown in the digram below, in an attempt to make sence of the forms and approaches used under various labels. Under this classificiation system he is able to form six categories: (1) cognitive-external, (2) cognitive-internal, (3) policy-external, (4) policy-internal, (5) institutional-external, and (6) institutional-internal. Once the framework has been established, the various tools or mechanisms can be assigned to the relevant category.
(1) Cognitive-external: Is about processes, means and mechanisms. It involves the greening of non-environmental knowledge or knowledge frameworks that guide human actions that impact on the environment. The types of mechanisms used in this category are environmental impact assessment, cost-benefit analysis, risk assessment and environmental education. (2) Cognitive-internal: Provides a framework, of various forms, to provide guidance on what needs to be integrated. The kinds of frameworks that have been adopted include sustainable development, ecosystems theory and ecological modernisation. (3) Policy-external: Involves the inclusion of environmental principles, knowledge and objectives into non-environmental policies. So it may involve the greening of economic, agriculture or transport policies. Some examples that governments have used to promote policy-external integration is through strategic environmental assessment (SEA) and voluntary agreements. (4) Policy-internal: Is the development of an overarching framework to ensure consistency between policies that potentially impact on the environment. The most prominent example of policy-internal integration is green-planning. Green planning is designed to be a comprehensive, integrated and long-term framework to co-ordinate environmental efforts across a range of sectors. (5) Institutional-external: Is about the greening of a full range of non-environmental instituions that includes universities, research institutes, the media, corporations and the state. Institutions are both formal and informal and include constitutions, organisations, conventions and processes. Institutional integration will influence the effectiveness of cognitive and policy external integration efforts. Examples of institutional-internal integration include environmental management systems, gree accounting and environmental reporting. (6) Institutional-internal: Buhrs describes this category as "efforts towards creating greater coherence and consistency in environmental management by the (re)design, introduction or reform of overarching institutions". Examples of this category are the adoption of the polluter pays principle and the establishment of agencies with a mandate to advance environmental integration.
In his conclusion Buhrs provides a concise definition of Environmental Integration as "the integration of an environmental dimension into all spheres of human thinking, decision-making, interaction, action and behaviour". He argues that both internal and external integration are essential for Environmental Integration to work and although changes must be made at the individual level, it ultimately requires collective deliberation and action.