The green state debate (e.g. Eckersley 2004; Barry 2008; Dryzek et al. 2003) emphasizes the continued importance and power of the state to reach a sustainable future. Eckersley (2004: 80), in her book The Green State, discusses needed changes at four different levels – changes in (1) policy instruments, (2) policy goals, (3) the hierarchy of policy goals, and (4) the role of the state. She argues that in order to reach a green state, reflexivity and change are required at all levels. Further, the state is unable to manage this on its own but needs to be both pushed and bound to achieve necessary changes. Eckersley, therefore, focuses on a green public sphere coupled with a green constitutional design. Others, like Torgerson (1999: 20), emphasize the importance of a green public sphere, which he defines as an open space for meaningful disagreement, necessary for creating the reflexivity needed in order to enable change at deeper levels. Dryzek et al. (2003: 169) argue that without a green public sphere there could only be a light greening of the state; hence, both are needed to push and bind the green state.