Energy
Waste
Water and Sewage
Transport
Green Blue
Buildings & land use
englishdeutsch
Project Summary Project Description Application of Tools Opinion of Tools Decision making process Contact Details

Decision making process

Name der Fallstudie
Dogme 2000

Decision making process - stages
Officers involved in Dogme all underline the commitment and embedding as an extremely important element of Dogme. In Dogme, the commitment is formalised as the city council signs the Dogme document, and the annual external audit will point out if the commitment is followed by action. The annual external audit shows how the municipality has performed on the nine points in Dogme 2000 (see below), and on which points there are strengths and weaknesses.

Example on a summary of an external Dogme-audit in a municipality. The annual audit includes an assessment that in a simple way summarises the municipality?s progress on the 3 Dogme?s and the subgoals, categorising the policy on a step from
Example on a summary of an external Dogme-audit in a municipality. The annual audit includes an assessment that in a simple way summarises the municipality?s progress on the 3 Dogme?s and the subgoals, categorising the policy on a step from "start phase" to "fully implemented".

According to the officers in the municipalities, it would be very problematic if the audit showed a lack of progress, as the municipality regard themselves as green, and the mayor reads the audit and feels a personal responsibility for the network.

The degree of commitment and engagement from the municipality is to a large extent due to the internal embeding of the environmental policy in the municipality. Traditionally, the municipality? sustainability initiatives are based in one department (for instance, the Department of Environment and Supply, or an Agenda 21-depatment). The department has to ask the other departments to support these initiatives, which requires extra services from them, and inevitably, extra work. Often, other departments are less willing to do so, as the initiative is seen as "owned" by the Department of Environment and Supply. In Dogme, the responsibility is instead put on the political level, which to a large extent solves this conflict; as long as the Dogme is a politically defined goal, it is legal to spent time and resources to achieve it. This is particularly important in a large municipality as Copenhagen, with 8 different departments, and was also a main reason for Copenhagen to join the network.

Interviews with officers involved in Dogme also demonstrated other mechanisms in Dogme that makes the concept to be embedded internally in the municipalities:
? Implementing Dogme 3c, environmental certification of the institutions in the municipality. Starting up with an environmental auditing makes Dogme very concrete for the parties involved. The environmental mapping and screening makes the different departments and institutions aware about their own consumption, and put them in a position to formulate their own goals (for instanced to reduce their water consumption). The feeling of ownership is one of the most important elements of Dogme; if the departments and institutions feel that they are just fulfilling goals that the municipality has formulated, their motivation is limited, but if they feel that they are pursuing goals they have formulated themselves, they are much more committed. This also goes for the certifications in general. As an example, one department in Copenhagen have been EMAS-certified, and completely defining it as their own achievement, without mentioning the Department of Environment (who have introduced Dogme), which demonstrates their feeling of ownership.
? The external audit, where many different persons in the municipal administrations are interviewed about how they contribute to Dogme 2000 and the different sub-goals makes Dogme known. The persons interviewed include mayors, directors, managers, and general staff in different departments and administrations in the municipality. In the smaller municipalities this includes 20-30 persons, and in Copenhagen more than 50 persons, each interview taking ?-1 hour. Having participated in the interview gives the persons a good knowledge about Dogme, and an awareness about the goals and commitments in Dogme
? In each municipality there are officers from different departments, having regular meetings on the different initiatives on Dogme, the strategies etc., which strengthens the SUD-collaboration internally in the municipality.
? The annual Dogme-conference makes Dogme visible, particularly in the municipality arranging the conference.

These embedding mechanisms are especially important in a time where many Danish municipalities have reduced their environmental staff and efforts, due to as well economic reductions as modifications of environmental policy under the present government. The officers in the municipalities are aware that the environmental initiatives under Dogme are absolutely voluntary, and the lack of legal obligations (national as international) makes it vulnerable to future cut-downs.

Another big challenge for the municipalities is the embedding outside the municipality, which is formulated in the Dogme 3a (embedding in neighbourhoods) and 3b (embedding in enterprises). The embedding in the neighbourhoods has been the most difficult element, where the municipalities have had problems in making progress. Even in Albertslund, where many neighbourhoods have made local Agenda 21-plans, and green accounts on neighbourhood-level have been published for many years, the audit pointed at a limited local embedding. According to the municipality, this is a real problem ? but it is also a problem how to measure "embedding" (interview with officer, Albertslund). Dogme measures the embedding in local neighbourhoods by the number of local Agenda 21-plans. The embedding of the sustainable initiatives in private enterprises is measured by the participation in formalised collaborations, for instance networks . However, more officers admit that counting the number of local Agenda 21-plans might give a wrong picture of the embedding; for instance if the plan was made 3 years ago, and haven?t been revised since, and more importantly, if it is not used locally. So the challenge is to find a good "measure stick", without using too many resources on collecting data for it. As a new goal for embedding in neighbourhoods, the Green Diploma is considered. This is because the idea of the diploma is simple, and based on mappings, goals and annual audits, similar to the Dogme-concept (interview with Mayor, Copenhagen). Instead of making the number of local Agenda-21 plans a measure stick for the local embedding, the number of buildings with a Green Diploma might be used.

Dogme is used in all stages of decisions on sustainable initiatives

Decision making process - levels
The commitment of the political level is very important in Dogme, but it is practically implemented on the technical level

Decision making process - sources of information
There are many sources of information to implement and embed Dogme, including information on goals, external audits, interviews, "story-telling"

Decision making process - who are the decision makers
The main decision-makers are the local politicians

Decision making process - who made the final decision for project implementation
Participation in Dogme is decided by local politicians


Name of tool
Dogme 2000

Decision making process - tools in decision-making process
Dogme is implemented in all stages of decision-making; the initial stages, monitoring the progress, and evaluating the initiatives. This includes politicians as well as technical staff in the municipality. </p> <p>There are several outputs from Dogme. One output is the goals formulated in Dogme, that the municipality has to pursue. For instance, the goal on publishing green accounts has motivated some municipalities to publish green accounts. Also, the goal of environmental certification (of the municipality and the municipality´s institutions) motivates for initiatives to start a certification of departments and institutions in the municipality. Another output is the annual evaluation, based on external audits. This motivates the politicians to pursue the goals formulated, as the audit very explicitly shows the areas where there is a lack of progress. </p> <p> The whole concept of Dogme is based on defining quantitative environmental goals and benchmarks. The commitment on Dogme has motivated the unicipalities to pursue the formulated goals, and a number of environmental initiatives. </p>


Decision making process - how was the information for the dmp disseminated
Information and dissemination of the goals in Dogme is a main challenge. A number of different methods are used, for instance: Directly information to the departments and the institutions in the municipality about Dogme and the goals (for instance EMAS-certification, or goals on organic food), interviewing the departments about their contribution to Dogme, establishing green networks with the local enterprises, and different initiatives to involve local residents and actors in neighbourhoods. The use of "story-telling" is seen as a way to achieve this. Therefore, a consultant has been hired to outline a communication strategy for the network, to maximise the communication of the good stories and message in Dogme. It is crucial for Dogme to become well known in the municipal administration, as a way to embed the concept as a general policy on the municipality. The politicians? needs success-stories to justify that the municipality is spending money and resources at Dogme, and local stakeholders need to be aware of Dogme as a policy in the municipality.

Decision making process - how was the public involved
The public will be involved according to the strategies mentioned above. Different initiatives are being made to involve the public on a local scale. In Albertslund, the municipality have publishing green accounts for each neighbourhood, encourage them to make local Agenda-21 plans, make EMAS-certification of some of the neighbourhood and establishing a local Agenda 21-center as a way to encourage the residents in the neighbourhoods to take environmental action. In Copenhagen, a number of Agenda 21-centers have been established in different neighbourhoods, as a way to start local initiatives. in the other municipalities, similar initiatives have been made.

Decision making process - was there public discussion over the project
There has been limited public involvement in the municipalities on the decision on whether to join Dogme or not, and on the goals formulated in Dogme. However, public participation and local embedding of environmental initiatives is a central goal in Dogme.

Welche Tools wurden verwendet, um Nachhaltigkeit zu beurteilen?

Dogme 2000

Weiterführende Informationen (nur auf Englisch):

Für den vollständigen Bericht hier klicken (pdf)