Assessing the institutional effectiveness of state environmental agencies in Turkey

Environmental Management

Volumn 38, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 823-836

  Yasamis, Firuz D ^a  

^a YEDITEPE UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Delphi Technique; Environmental management; State environmental agencies; Turkey

Indexed keywords

DELPHI TECHNIQUES; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; STATE ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCIES;

DECISION MAKING; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION;

DELPHI ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; INSTITUTIONAL REFORM;

ARTICLE; DECENTRALIZATION; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; GOVERNMENT; INSTITUTIONALIZATION; LEGAL ASPECT; NON GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION; ORGANIZATION; PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; POLICY; POLITICS; POLLUTION; QUESTIONNAIRE; TURKEY (REPUBLIC);

DELPHI TECHNIQUE; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; GOVERNMENT AGENCIES; TURKEY;

EURASIA; TURKEY;

EID: 33749533417     PISSN: 0364152X     EISSN: 14321009     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-004-2330-9     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Ament R. H. 1973. Comparison of Delphi forecasting studies. Pages 164-175 in Search for alternatives: Public policy and the study of the future. Winthrop Publications, London
2. Busch P. O., H. Jörgens, and K. Tews (eds). 2004. The global diffusion of regulatory instruments: The making of a new international environmental regime. Available from http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2004-021a.htm
3. China State Environmental Protection Administration. 2001. CIPPS: New information tools for China's environmental agencies: A final project report to infoDev. Available from www.infodev.org/projects/environment/147CIPPS/147final. pdf
4. Clerici N., A. Bodini, and A. Ferrarini. 2004. Sustainability at the local scale: Defining highly aggregated indices for assessing environmental performance. The Province of Reggio Emilia (Italy) as a case study. Environmental Management. Online 17. November 2004, 39(4):530-608
5. DeLurgio S. A. 1998. Forecasting principles and applications. Irwin/McGraw-Hill, New York
6. Edvardsson K. 2004. Using goals in environmental management: The Swedish system of environmental objectives. Environmental Management 34(2):170-180
7. Enzer, S. 1973. Delphi and cross impact techniques: An effective combination for systematic future analysis. in Search for alternatives: Public policy and the study of the future. Winthrop Publications, London, pp 143-163
8. Gokhale A. A. 2001. Environmental initiative prioritization with a Delphi approach: A case study. Environmental Management 28(2):187-193
9. Helmer O. 1967a. Systematic use of expert opinions. The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica California, USA
10. Helmer O. 1967b. Analysis of the future: The Delphi method. The Rand Corporation, California
11. INECE. 2003. Measuring what matters. Proceedings from the INECE-OECD workshop on environmental compliance and enforcement indicators, 3-4 November 2003. OECD, Paris
12. Jantsch E. 1967. Technological forecasting in perspective: A framework for technological forecasting, its technique and organisation; a description of activities and an annotated bibliography. OECD, Paris
13. Jantsch E. 1972. Technological planning and social futures. Hallstead Press New York, N.Y., USA
14. Linstone H. A., and M. Turoff (eds). 2002. The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N. J., USA. Electronic book. Available from http://www.is.njit.edu/pubs/delphibook
15. Markandya A., R. Parelet, P. Mason, and T. Taylor. 2003. Dictionary of environmental economics. Earthscan Publications, London, U.K
16. Martino J. P. 1972. Technological forecasting for decisionmaking. McGraw-Hill, New York
17. OECD. 1992. Environmental policies in Turkey. OECD, Paris (in Turkish)
18. OECD. 1999. Environmental performance review: Turkey. Available from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/30/2452088.pdf
19. OECD. 2001. Environmental outlook. OECD, Paris. Electronic book. Available from www1.oecd.org/publications/e-book/9701011E.PDF
20. Republic of Turkey. 1926. Code Civil (in Turkish)
21. Republic of Turkey. 1930. Code of Municipalities (1930) (in Turkish)
22. Republic of Turkey. 1930a. Code on Public Health (in Turkish)
23. Republic of Turkey. 1949. Code on Provincial Administration (in Turkish)
24. Republic of Turkey. 1983. Code of Environment (in Turkish)
25. Republic of Turkey. 1985. Decree Law on the Specially Protected Zones (in Turkish)
26. Republic of Turkey. 2003. Code Civil (in Turkish)
27. Republic of Turkey. 2004a. Code on Freedom of Information (in Turkish)
28. Republic of Turkey. 2004b. Penal Code (in Turkish)
29. Ryding S. O. 1992. Environmental management handbook. Lewis, Amsterdam
30. Sezer S., G. Kocasoy, C. Aruoba. 2003. How vital is the "lack of funding" in effective environmental management in Turkey? Waste Management 23(5):455-461
31. Smith T. B. 2000. Evolving strategies for environmental management in Asia: From command-and-control to voluntary compliance. Australian Journal of Public Administration 22(1):3-32
32. SPO. 1998. National development plan. State Planning Organization, Turkey. Available from http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/plan/viii/plan8i.pdf
33. SPO. 1999. National environmental strategies and action plan (NEAP). State Planning Organization, Turkey. Available from http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/ cevre/eylempla/neap.html
34. US Congress. 1993. Governmental performance and results act. Available from www.whitehouse.gov/omb/mgmt-gpra/gplaw2m.html
35. Wang M. S., J. K. Fang, W. M. Bowen. 2000. An integrated framework for public sector environmental management in developing countries. Environmental Management 25(5):463-476
36. Yasamis, F. D. 2003. Environmental impact assessment. Ankara (in Turkish), CEKUR - The Foundation for the Promotion and Protection of the Environment anf Cultural Heritage, Istanbul, Turkey