JournalTOCs

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics
Journal Prestige (SJR): 0.847

Citation Impact (citeScore): 2
Number of Followers: 14

Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
ISSN (Print) 1573-1553 - ISSN (Online) 1567-9764
Published by Springer-Verlag

[2469 journals]

Reflecting on twenty years of international agreements concerning water
governance: insights and key learning
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract The purpose of this article is to examine the research advanced in the journal, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics that represents key insights into international agreements on water and their political, legal, economic and cross-disciplinary dimensions for water governance. The article analyses evidence and lessons learnt over the last twenty years to inform policy through a review of theoretical advances, innovations in principles and policy instruments, outcomes of problem-solving and knowledge gained regarding water agreements and associated institutions. Important international agreement principles of no significant harm and economic frames of water as a ‘commons’ advance equity and community of interest in relation to water. The studies on water, sanitation and hygiene point to the ways the role of the state can be advanced in achieving Sustainable Development Goals and in complex contexts of water scarcity and public private partnerships. Cross-disciplinary learnings substantiate the existence and utility of multiple water frames in legal arrangements and use of multiple policy instruments. Cross-disciplinary insights are significant in addressing equity, whether through the nascent development of water indicators or in advancing social learning. Water governance frameworks increasingly focus on adaptation by incorporating multiple stakeholders. These findings that advance equity and inclusivity are tempered by crucial lessons in our understanding of the very contested, power-laden nature of water governance that impact agency at multiple scales and policy coordination across sectors of water, food and energy.
  PubDate: 2022-06-01
The politics of multilateral environmental agreements lessons from
20 years of INEA
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract This review article addresses the question: What lessons can we learn from work published in International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics regarding the politics of multilateral environmental agreements' What are the implications of these lessons for those responsible for creating and administering these agreements' Based on an analysis of 147 articles published over the past 20 years, the article explores issues of institutional design, institutional politics, implementation, and effectiveness. It concludes that key conditions for success in this realm include: (a) developing a toolkit that is not limited to rules-based governance, (b) paying attention to matters of implementation, (c) bearing in mind the overall regime complex, (d) developing effective leadership based on credibility and accountability, and (e) allowing for institutional adaptation.
  PubDate: 2022-06-01
Lessons learnt in global biodiversity governance
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract INEA has featured many articles covering the dilemmas, puzzles, and tensions related to global biodiversity governance; this coverage was infrequent in earlier issues but has steadily increased as both environmental diplomacy and international law on biodiversity conservation and environmental justice have expanded. Using the definition found in the Convention on Biological Diversity, we scanned INEA articles and derived several lessons learnt over the 2000–2020 period. These include: implementation remains a central challenge, but challenge should not be conflated with ineffectiveness; multilateral environmental agreements are vital for success; coordination and policy coherences are often lacking, insufficient, or superficial; institutional change and policy reform within existing institutions are incremental at best; understanding local political dynamics is critical; equity concerns remain central to biodiversity policy development at all levels; the role of non-state actors and private voluntary standards fluctuates; tensions over state sovereignty and collective action and the commons have often been visible but as often lurk in the shadows of environmental diplomacy and most ongoing discussions of global biodiversity governance. After elaborating on each of these lessons, we offer some insights on research gaps and potential thematic directions for future contributors to INEA.
  PubDate: 2022-06-01
Europe’s nature governance revolution: harnessing the shadow of
heterarchy
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract In the battle to address Europe’s biodiversity crisis, fixing its implementation gap—the gap between EU nature law on the books, and on the ground—is vital. Europe’s private nature governance revolution, underpinned by the UNECE Aarhus Convention, is a core part of its response. This article breaks new empirical ground in understanding how those mechanisms have been working in practice, and their knock-on effects for traditional enforcement by the State. We develop an innovative methodological tool, the Nature Governance Effectiveness Indicators (“NGEIs”), enabling the first quantitative measurement of the effectiveness of public and private nature governance in practice. In collecting data on these indicators, we create a novel dataset spanning three jurisdictions and 23 years, giving a unique insight into Europe’s “environmental democracy in action”. We regress the NGEIs against the Nature Governance Index, an original longitudinal index measuring the evolution in nature governance laws over this period. Our results provide the first systematic empirical evidence that, despite the widespread embrace of private nature governance laws on the books across our studied jurisdictions from 1992 to 2015, the enhanced citizens’ rights conferred by these laws are not being consistently used in practice. They also reveal that, despite these inconsistencies in usage of the Aarhus mechanisms in practice, passing private governance laws can in fact improve levels of State enforcement of EU nature law in practice. For policymakers seeking to increase enforcement of EU nature law on the ground, harnessing what we term the shadow of heterarchy, by strengthening private governance rights, may therefore be a more effective means of doing so than simply ratcheting up existing traditional governance mechanisms such as levels of maximum criminal penalties or civil fines.
  PubDate: 2022-05-11
Lessons learnt from two decades of international environmental agreements:
law
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract As Patricia Birnie cautiously and prophetically put it in the inaugural issue of this journal (INEA 1, January 2001, p. 74), “we do not know whether States and the tentative regimes they have so far established can withstand the pressures of globalization of trade and degradation and over-exploitation generated by advances in technologies for locating, fertilizing, harvesting, processing and modifying natural resources and biodiversity. This is truly terra incognita in which such seeds of destruction may already be implanted.” Among the 600 or so papers and reviews published in INEA from 2001 to 2020, more than 70 deal wholly or partly with legal aspects of environmental problems and the international dimensions of environmental justice. While the main focus of INEA has been on issues of public international (inter-state) law, there have also been important inputs drawn from comparative legal analysis (of national legislation and judicial decisions) and from “transnational administrative law” that influence the effectiveness of multilateral treaties and their associated international institutions. Novel concepts and practices emerging from the environmental field (such as recourse to a range of “soft law” principles; flexible delegated standard-setting in the face of global change; and equitable differentiation of compliance duties) have inspired developments in related areas of contemporary international law-making and law-applying. At the same time, the very proliferation of multilateral and bilateral environmental instruments raised new questions and expressions of alarm over “treaty congestion” and “fragmentation” within the international law system. It is not the intention of this paper to explore the general interaction of international environmental law with neighboring disciplines such as international economic law or human rights law, but simply to record the “seismographic” impact of INEA on legal-intellectual discourse over these past two decades. To some extent, the role of the Journal in identifying both new prospects and new risks in this field could indeed be likened to that of a “canary in the coal-mine.” The lessons so learnt may thus offer new insights to help in averting the destruction which Birnie visualized, and to advance inter-generationally and intra- generationally shared values of environmental justice.
  PubDate: 2022-04-16
Economic analysis of international environmental agreements: lessons
learnt 2000–2020
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract On the occasion of the 20th anniversary of International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law & Economics, we conduct an extensive review of papers published in this journal that address the economic dimensions of international environmental agreements (IEAs). We focus particularly on the lessons learnt from this body of literature and the implications for the assessment and design of IEAs in relation to goals such as efficiency, effectiveness, and equity. Our key conclusions run as follows. First, at the international level, universal coalitions are more cost-efficient and effective than fragmented regimes, but more difficult to negotiate and less stable. Second, in developing countries, there is need for substantial external funding to cover the short-run costs of environmental compliance. Third, market-based solutions have been increasingly applied in international agreements but with mixed results. For example, cap-and-trade systems have the potential to achieve greenhouse gas emissions reductions and least economic cost. But in the provisioning of water services, private sector solutions often result in outcomes that are unaffordable for low-income groups or nonviable for businesses, suggesting well-designed public–private partnerships. At the international level, Green Bond markets can attract investors for climate and environmental projects, but implementation failures tend to weaken outcomes. Finally, in practical politics, economically optimal designs are rarely achieved. Future applied economic research should therefore critically investigate institutions and the scope for their reform. Gains in knowledge are expected to come from economic analyses taking a broader perspective on “the economy”, taking institutions and social and ecological relations into account from the start.
  PubDate: 2022-04-15
Designed to be stable: international environmental agreements revisited
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract In a three-stage game, we revisit the non-cooperative coalition approaches into international environmental agreements by tackling a fundamental design flaw in these approaches. We show how a treaty can effectively remove the free-riding problem from its roots by farsightedly choosing its members’ emissions. We prove that under this approach, the grand coalition is a self-enforcing equilibrium. We will argue how the modified timing of the coalition game suggested in this article is more realistic and consistent with real-world practices. Another advantage of the farsighted rule is its simplicity and applicability to all coalition game settings, regardless of whether agents are homogeneous or heterogeneous.
  PubDate: 2022-04-15
Consensus decision-making in CCAMLR: Achilles’ heel or fundamental
to its success'
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract The Commission for the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources is the body responsible for the conservation and management of most species in the Southern Ocean. The Convention mandates that decisions be made by consensus agreement of its Members. This approach has been largely successful in delivering strong management decisions across both complex issues and widely ranging national interests. However, recent failures to progress the implementation of a network of marine protected areas or to agree any concrete response actions to climate impacts raise concerns about its effectiveness. This paper reviews the level of uptake of Member-driven proposals and then examines examples of proposals that were not resolved within the usual three years to analyse the processes utilised by Members to find resolution. It concludes that CCAMLR has been successful in reaching agreements when focusing on fisheries management but less so on issues within its broader conservation mandate, such as area protection for biodiversity purposes or non-fishery management focused scientific study, or for issues that are perceiv ed to extend the competency of the Convention. It notes that CCAMLR lacks operational mechanisms to facilitate agreement in the absence of compromise text or when one or two Members cannot accept a proposal.
  PubDate: 2022-04-07
Agency dynamics of International Environmental Agreements: actors,
contexts, and drivers
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract The structural elements of global environmental governance are notoriously difficult to change and align with the needs of a rapidly deteriorating earth system. This, however, only increases the need to focus on the role of agency in this context. This paper does so by taking stock of what we know about agency in relation to International Environmental Agreements (IEAs) and suggests directions for future research. We contribute a conceptual framework to enable the mapping of research on agency related to IEAs and advance more systematic study of agency in this context. The framework differentiates between the negotiation of IEAs, their implementation and outcomes, and includes agency-related and context-related drivers of agency in these processes. We subsequently review articles published between 2003 and 2020 in the journal International Environmental Agreements (as one of the few journals exclusively focusing on IEAs) dealing with actors’ agency and analyse how these articles address agency in the context of IEAs. We conclude firstly by identifying avenues for how further research can fill important gaps, including a need for increased transparency on the methods and theories used in articles, and more comparative research particularly on agency dynamics in implementation; and secondly by highlighting important pointers for policy-makers including the need to re-evaluate the role of national sovereignty and address the forces that counteract equality and justice. Key lessons include the need to improve global south countries' capacity to influence IEA negotiations (input legitimacy), the central role of public and peer pressure on countries to implement commitments, the impact of multilevel governance dynamics and the importance of ensuring that IEAs benefit local communities (output legitimacy).
  PubDate: 2022-04-05
Equity, justice and the SDGs: lessons learnt from two decades of INEA
scholarship
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract Environmental justice issues have been incrementally but consistently covered within this journal in the last two decades. This article reviews theoretical and empirical approaches to justice in INEA scholarship in order to identify trends and draw lessons for the interpretation and implementation of the 2030 Agenda and for living within environmental limits. Our review traces how justice considerations were initially covered within new institutionalist scholarship on collective action and social practices, to conceptualizing justice as ‘access and allocation’, to newer notions of planetary justice. We link these trends to scholarship on diverse epistemologies and typologies of justice, including conservative, corrective, distributive and procedural justice, and examine their operationalization within the empirical domains of climate, water and sustainable development. In concluding, we draw out implications for the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda. We argue that a just approach is essential to living within environmental limits, with greater synergies needed between collective action and social practice approaches. While justice can be unpacked for practical and political reasons into access and allocation, we find that (procedural) access considerations are more politically palatable in practice than a concern with allocation (distributive justice), which remains much more contested. As such, dominant approaches promote ‘conservative’ or thin market-based notions of justice. We conclude by noting that just allocation is a precondition to just access. A failure to prioritize and achieve more corrective and distributive forms of justice will, without doubt, contribute to exacerbating global ecological degradation.
  PubDate: 2022-04-05
Lessons learnt from international environmental agreements for the
Stockholm + 50 Conference: celebrating 20 Years of INEA
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  PubDate: 2022-03-29
Population growth, family planning and the Paris Agreement: an assessment
of the nationally determined contributions (NDCs)
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract Under the Paris Agreement, nations made pledges known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs): national climate plans detailing countries’ ambitions to adapt to climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Population growth is a driver of both climate vulnerability and climate-altering emissions. We asked, to what extent do countries take population growth into account in their NDCs, beyond simple statements of population trends' Our research method was a comprehensive text review of 164 NDCs submitted by countries. About one-third (49) of countries’ NDCs either link population growth to a negative effect and/or identify population growth as a challenge or trend affecting societal needs. Common impacts of population growth noted were increased energy demand, natural resource degradation, vulnerability to climate impacts, and decreased food and water security. Seven NDCs included strategies to slow population growth, and none specified implementation measures. Overall, the adaptation potential and mitigation co-benefits associated with slowing population growth through meeting the unmet need for family planning are largely overlooked in national NDC documents, suggesting that they are also neglected in countries’ climate change planning. In upcoming rounds of NDC updates, we recommend that governments consider the potential impact of population growth on adaptation and mitigation efforts, prioritize meeting their unmet needs for family planning, and integrate population-health-environment projects in their national climate plans.
  PubDate: 2022-03-28
Global climate governance: rising trend of translateral cooperation
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract The transformation from the Kyoto Protocol to the Paris Agreement has been analyzed by international relations scholars, international law, and transnational governance theory. The international relations literature looks at the climate regime from a perspective of power distribution, state interests, institutions, and multilateral negotiations. International law theory focuses on legal analysis and design of international climate agreements. The transnational governance literature examines the participation of transnational actors at different levels of governance. However, each of these theories overlooks a bilateral trend of cooperation in a multilateral setting that arises as part of the construction or reconstruction of the international regime. Why do national and subnational public actors in global climate governance cooperate bilaterally when multilateral cooperation already exists' What type of bilateral cooperative agreements do these actors prefer, and why' Using qualitative methods, combining content analysis subsequent interviews, this research empirically demonstrates the role and importance of bilateral transatlantic cooperation and informal agreements between national and subnational actors in global climate governance. Using the EU-US case study, this research identifies a diagonal dimension of interaction between states and transnational actors. It introduces and defines the terms “translateral cooperation” and “translateral agreements” in the new climate regime.
  PubDate: 2022-03-26
CHANS-Law: preventing the next pandemic through the integration of social
and environmental law
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract Zoonotic viruses have sacrificed hundreds of millions of people throughout human history. There are currently 1.7 million unidentified viruses estimated to be circulating in mammal and bird populations. It is foreseeable that in the near future, another of these will transmit to people, heralding the start of the next pandemic—one potentially more deadly than COVID-19. At the core of this article is a call for pre-emptive protection of the natural environment and its regenerative systems as the first fundamental step in the prevention of future epidemics and pandemics. While zoonoses originate in nature, the predominant legal discipline, managing these crises, is international health law which is invoked reactively once an outbreak has been reported. In this paper, we identify the need for a legal shift in epidemic and pandemic responses. In particular, we call for the incorporation of international environmental agreements to prevent the initial viral spillover from animal to human populations. We propose a strategy of strengthening existing agreements and a coupling of legal disciplines, such as health and environmental law, emphasizing the need for synergies across legal disciplines to enhance the emergence and management of future pandemics and epidemics. We introduce Coupled Human and Natural Systems (CHANS) Law to frame the required integration across legal instruments to regulate inextricably human-nature connections and advocate for the development of a Convention on Epidemics and Pandemics.
  PubDate: 2022-03-13
20 Years of global climate change governance research: taking stock and
moving forward
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract Research on global climate change governance is no longer primarily concerned with the international legal regime, state practice and its outcomes, but rather scrutinizes the intricate interactions between the public and the private in governing climate change. This broad trend has also taken center stage within the pages of INEA. Two decades after its establishment, we sketch the main theoretical debates, conceptual innovations and empirical findings on global climate change governance and survey the new generation of climate governance scholarship. In more detail, we sketch how climate governance research has developed into three innovative sub-debates, building on important conceptualizations and critical inquiries of earlier debates. Our aim is not so much to provide an all-encompassing assessment of global climate change governance scholarship in 2022, but rather to illustrate in what important ways current research is different from research in the early phase of INEA, and what we have learned in the process. First, we discuss scholarship on the bottom-up nature of climate governance, developing from earlier ideas on agency beyond the state and the transnationalization of governance arenas. Second, we review contributions that have more systematically engaged with the concept of governance architectures, resulting in a stimulating new academic debate on the characteristics of complex governance systems and the consequences of governance complexity and fragmentation. Third, we note a distinct normative turn in global environmental scholarship in general and global climate governance in particular, associated with question of access, accountability, allocation, fairness, justice and legitimacy. The assessment of each of these debates is centered around questions of effective and legitimate climate governance to counter the climate emergency. Finally, as a way of concluding, we critically reflect on our own scholarly shortcomings and suggest a modest remedy.
  PubDate: 2022-03-03
  DOI: 10.1007/s10784-022-09568-5
Institutional interplay in global environmental governance: lessons
learned and future research
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract Over the past decades, the growing proliferation of international institutions governing the global environment has impelled institutional interplay as a result of functional and normative overlap across multiple regimes. This article synthesizes primary contributions made in research on institutional interplay over the past twenty years, with particular focus on publications with International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics. Broadening our understanding about the different types, dimensions, pathways, and effects of institutional interplay, scholars have produced key insights into the ways and means by which international institutions cooperate, manage discord, engage in problem solving, and capture synergies across levels and scales. As global environmental governance has become increasingly fragmented and complex, we recognize that recent studies have highlighted the growing interactions between transnationally operating institutions in the wake of polycentric governance and hybrid institutional complexes. However, our findings reveal that there is insufficient empirical and conceptual research to fully understand the relationship, causes, and consequences of interplay between intergovernmental and transnational institutions. Reflecting on the challenges of addressing regulatory gaps and mitigating the crisis of multilateralism, we expound the present research frontier for further advancing research on institutional interplay and provide recommendations to support policy-making.
  PubDate: 2022-03-02
  DOI: 10.1007/s10784-022-09569-4
Development of corporate investment funds as a tool to achieve the goals
of international treaties in the field of climate change
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract The UNFCCC and Paris Climate Agreement set the environmental agenda for many years to come, making environmental protection a global trend. Herewith, these documents created many unprecedented challenges for business, shifting the focus from the original role of commercial benefit to the trade-off between profit and social responsibility. The need to adapt business strategies to the existing agenda has created new requirements for shaping the investment environment. In this aspect, there arises the question regarding the organizational and legal form the investment activities can be carried out in and what additional regulatory instruments can be applied to simplify the procedure for attracting environmental investments. In the current conditions, corporate investment funds may be considered as promising instruments for achieving the goals of international climate agreements. The study suggests that corporate investment funds can become an effective tool for attracting environmental investments. The study purpose is to assess the role of corporate investment funds in international climate agreements goals achievement, to consider the possibility of development strategies to improve management efficiency in the corporate investment funds in terms of their linkage to UNFCCC, Paris Climate Agreement and in a comparative perspective. The study methodology is based on the analysis of world and Russian law enforcement practices in the corporate activities field through the application of a systematic approach. The relationship between corporate governance represented by big businesses and the state is considered in the framework of the investment mechanism and the institutional environment, which is visualized in the model of the business landscape of a corporate investment fund in order to determine management strategies in the operation and development of a corporate investment fund. The study results can be put into practice by financial market participants and other entities in order to increase the efficiency of the use of assets and knowledge of national jurisdictions in the context of world and Russian practices.
  PubDate: 2022-03-01
  DOI: 10.1007/s10784-021-09551-6
Understanding international non-state and subnational actors for
biodiversity and their possible contributions to the post-2020 CBD global
biodiversity framework: insights from six international cooperative
initiatives
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract While multilateral approaches and national policies have been unable to halt the unprecedented loss of biodiversity, responses from non-state and subnational initiatives are increasing. The successful implementation of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework (GBF), to be agreed upon under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), ultimately depends on commitments and action by state and non-state actors, including subnational actors. However, non-state and subnational actors have so far received little attention in academic analysis of global biodiversity governance. In order to better understand and harness the potential of non-state and subnational involvement, this paper addresses the ways in which non-state initiatives contribute to global biodiversity governance and how productive linkages can be built between state and non-state actors in the post-2020 GBF. This paper applies an explorative case study approach and analyses six international cooperative initiatives (ICIs) that highlight novel approaches in international biodiversity governance. We analyse the qualities of ICIs for biodiversity governance in terms of strengths and potential, the governance functions that they fulfil, and how they are engaging with the CBD and the post-2020 GBF. Based on this analysis, we discuss challenges and opportunities related to non-state and subnational actors involvement in global biodiversity governance and identify possible steps forward. We emphasise the importance of a collaborative framework for non-state action within the CBD that builds on existing and emerging activities of non-state actors, organises monitoring and review as part of an accountability framework of state and non-state actors, and provides for learning, capacity building and follow-up action.
  PubDate: 2022-03-01
  DOI: 10.1007/s10784-021-09547-2
Domestic and international climate policies: complementarity or
disparity'
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract Climate change is a global crisis that requires countries to act on both domestic and international levels. This paper examines how climate policies in these two arenas are related and to what extent domestic and international climate ambitions are complementary or disparate. While scholarly work has begun to assess the variation in overall climate policy ambition, only a few studies to date have tried to explain whether internationally ambitious countries are ambitious at home and vice versa. According to the common view, countries that are more ambitious at home can also be expected to be more ambitious abroad. Many scholars, however, portray the relationship instead as disparate, whereby countries need to walk a tightrope between the demands of their domestic constituencies on the one hand and international pressures on the other, while preferring the former over the latter. This study uses quantitative methods and employs data from the OECD DAC dataset on climate finance to measure international climate ambitions. Overall, the present work makes two major contributions. First, it provides evidence that international climate financing ambition is complementary to domestic climate ambition. Second, the article identifies the conditional effect of domestic ambition—with regard to responsibility, vulnerability, carbon-intensive industry and economic capacity—on international climate ambition.
  PubDate: 2022-03-01
  DOI: 10.1007/s10784-021-09542-7
Environmental agreement under the non-interference principle: the case of
ASEAN agreement on transboundary haze pollution
- Free pre-print version: Loading...
  Rate this result: What is this?
  
  Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
  A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
  
  Abstract: Abstract It is widely understood that the environmental problem is getting borderless and challenging, requiring concerted efforts of many states and increasing the need for international agreements. However, only for the agreement to exist may not be sufficient—the agreement needs to be credible: obliging the signatories with actions associated with the goal, displaying clear and unambiguous rules, and involving third parties in the dispute settlement. Unfortunately, in the presence of the non-interference principle, the creation of a credible agreement may be implausible as, conceptually, the principle is innately antipodal to hard obligations and third-party involvement in the dispute settlement. This case study seeks to understand how the legalization of the ASEAN Agreement of Transboundary Haze Pollution conformed to the non-interference principle and influenced Indonesia, the main laggard, in dealing with the predicament accordingly. Diverging with the common understanding, the agreement seems to carry strong obligation and precision, as shown in the main agreement and its protocols. However, the apparent downside lies in the lack of delegation dimension, as the current dispute resolution is made through diplomatic efforts that led to fruitless outcomes. This study counters the simplistic view of the association between the non-interference principle and the lack of obligations. Overall, this study points out the importance of the delegation dimension in regionalization and encourages the interventionist approach concerning global environmental protection.
  PubDate: 2022-03-01
  DOI: 10.1007/s10784-021-09545-4