Abstract
AbstractMany efforts to solve environmental problems arising at the international or transnational level meet with limited success or even end in outright failure. But some efforts of this sort succeed. We construct an analytical model of such efforts leading to the conclusion that an ability to steer a course that avoids the twin perils of institutional reductionism and institutional overload is necessary to achieve success in this realm. We examine a range of risk factors or conditions likely to push processes of regime formation and implementation into one or the other of these pitfalls. We then analyze response strategies or procedures that negotiators and administrators can adopt to steer a course between the two perils, taking into account distinctive features of specific problems. We turn to marine issues to illustrate our reasoning. But the argument is applicable to the entire range of efforts to create and implement international environmental regimes.
Funder
Research Council of Norway
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations,Economics and Econometrics
Reference39 articles.
1. Barrett, S. (2007). Why cooperate?: The incentive to supply global public goods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Birch, A. H. (1984). Overload, ungovernability and delegitimization. British Journal of Political Science,14, 135–160.
3. Breitmeier, H., Underdal, A., & Young, O. R. (2011). The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Comparing and contrasting findings from quantitative research. International Studies Review,13(4), 579–605.
4. Breitmeier, H., Young, O. R., & Zürn, M. (2006). Analyzing international environmental regimes: From case study to database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Brennan, G., & Buchanan, J. M. (1985). The reason of rules: Constitutional political economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cited by
20 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献