Mapping the fragmentation of the international forest regime complex: institutional elements,conflicts and synergies

In the field of global environmental governance, a plethora of international regimes have emerged over the past decades. In some issue areas, multiple regimes aim to govern the issue, sometimes reinforcing, oftentimes conflicting with each other. Consequently, international regime complexes are an empirical phenomenon, which are inherently characterized by specific degrees of fragmentation. For any given issue area, one of the key questions is whether the institutional fragmentation encountered in such regime complexes is synergistic or conflictive in nature. Scrutinizing this question poses methodological challenges of how to delineate a regime complex and how to assess its fragmentation. Drawing on the highly fragmented case of the international forest regime complex, this paper aims to map its institutional fragmentation and to analyse the degrees to which it is conflictive or synergistic. For this we conceptualize the notion of institutional elements and develop a novel method for mapping regime complexes based on their core institutional elements. We then employ tools from the sub-discipline of policy analysis on the complex’s institutional elements for analysing in detail, which of the elements are mutually synergistic and conflictive with other elements of the regime complex. Our results indicate that synergistic relations mostly exist among rather vague elements, often built around sustainability as a core principle. On the contrary, conflictive relations prevail as soon as the elements are designed in more concrete and substantial ways. We conclude that the forest regime complex displays only degree of seemingly synergistic fragmentation through a number of non-decisions and the use of “sustainability” as an empty formula. De facto, conflictive fragmentation prevails among elements of concrete subject matter. This raises questions on whether vast parts of regime complexes merely serve symbolic functions, while conflicts on substance are being camouflaged.

     

Environmental policy integration among multilateral environmental agreements: the case of biodiversity

The system of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) comprises hundreds of conventions and protocols designed to protect the environment. Institutional interaction within the MEA system raises issues of environmental policy integration (EPI), i.e. balancing different environmental objectives and considerations. Mainstream proposals for enhancing EPI in environmental governance build upon the assumption that environmental institutions are fragmented. However, recent research reveals that the MEA system has been defragmenting over the years such that EPI is less a problem of institutional fragmentation than of effective management of institutional interplay. This paper examines the factors affecting EPI among MEAs by looking at experiences in the cluster of biodiversity-related multilateral agreements. The analysis is based on a series of interviews with MEA secretariat officials and international experts conducted between September 2011 and January 2012. The paper identifies institutional, political and cognitive barriers constraining interplay management efforts. While some have proposed regulatory changes in the cluster, national-level co-ordination appears to be the best way to advance EPI.     

Interplay management: enhancing environmental policy integration among international institutions

This article investigates how and to what extent the current management of inter-institutional relationships within International Environmental Governance (‘interplay management’) contributes to Environmental Policy Integration (EPI), and identifies options for enhancing EPI among international institutions. To this end, it first develops a framework for the systematic analysis and assessment of interplay management as a means for achieving ‘strong’ EPI, distinguishing four levels and two principal modes of management. On this basis, the article assesses the current contribution of International Environmental Governance to advancing EPI as regards three categories of institutional interaction. The analysis demonstrates the need to fit interplay management to the particular governance conditions of varying interaction situations and highlights the lack of systematic and consistent support for EPI among international institutions. Options to improve this situation include in particular promoting inter-institutional learning and assistance for the benefit of environmental institutions as well as ensuring consideration of and respect for environmental requirements. Adapting the statutes and mandates of individual institutions and developing suitable guidance under general international (environmental) law have the highest potential for implementing these options. In contrast, joint management initiatives and a strengthened international environmental organisation have a much more limited, supplementary potential.     

Environmental policy integration and bilateral development assistance: challenges and opportunities with an evolving governance framework

The aim of this article is to examine progress so far, as well as current challenges and opportunities for EPI in bilateral official development assistance (ODA). A short review of progress shows that effectiveness has so far been limited. Although there has been intense donor activity in relation to stating commitment to the EPI principle and developing a wide range of processes, institutions, and tools, a large part of ODA still is likely to have directly harmful impacts on the environment. The implications for EPI of the emerging governance framework for ODA, namely, the principles stipulated in the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, are then discussed. Both challenges and opportunities are presented, and these are empirically illustrated with a case study of the integration of climate change adaptation in ODA. Finally, this article proposes that at least four special conditions apply to EPI in the bilateral ODA context as compared with domestic EPI: two or more jurisdictions, electorates, and governments are involved; a negotiation context characterized by sovereign states but with a potential power asymmetry; potential conflicts of interest and equity concerns in cases where environmental objectives refer to global environmental problems primarily caused by developed countries; and a policy-making process characterized by a comparatively wide span of both strategic and operational decisions, where EPI can take on very different meanings. The initial exploration presented in this article suggests that these conditions hold, and that, as a consequence, EPI arguably involves more ‘high-politics’ decisions and questions than in a domestic policy context.     

The rational design of regional regimes: contrasting Amazonian,Central African and Pan-European Forest Governance

Forests have been an important issue in world politics at least since the UNCED conference in Rio in 1992. Since then the focus of academic attention has been on global forest governance by an international forest regime complex consisting of several forest-related regimes. This strong focus leaves a research gap regarding regional regimes addressing forests as an issue area, which recently greatly gained in empirical and academic relevance. It is particularly important to understand the institutional structures on the one hand, and the policies developed within such regimes on the other. In order to obtain a better understanding of this in the forest case, the aim of this article is to analyse the institutional design of three regional forest regimes and to develop fields and hypotheses for future research. We built upon the rational design of international institutions framework developed by Koremenos et al. (Int Organ 55(4):761–799, 2001), and based our findings on content analysis of key documents as well as participant observations and expert interviews in selected occasions. The regional regimes chosen for this study were Amazonian, the Central African and pan-European forest cooperation. The results indicate that the designs of the three regimes greatly differ regarding membership, scope, control, centralisation, and flexibility. This seems to be mainly due to differing degrees of formality of the regimes (from treaty to non-treaty to hybrid regimes) as well as different power structures amongst members and regional hegemons involved. Based on our findings, future research fields for the study of regional forest-related environmental, trade, commodity, and management regime structures as well as regime policies are identified. Such insights advance our understanding of international forest governance not only by global, but by regional forest regimes as well. This is particularly true for our understanding that similar issue-specific problems, such as sustainable forest management, in terms of regime structures and regime policies may be addressed quite differently, largely depending on the preferences of regional powers and hegemons and other potential region-specific factors. We conclude by questioning a hypothesised diffusion of international institutions and propose the more precise concept of institutional osmosis instead.     

China's Legal and Policy Frameworks for Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit-Sharing from their Use

Access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing has been an issue heatedly debated and negotiated in the past decade, at both national and international levels. While most of the international negotiations are slowly dragging on, countries have begun to turn to national legislation or policy making to safeguard their interests. As one of the countries rich in genetic resources, China's responses under these circumstances are important in shaping the final outcomes of the international negotiations, but also the future implementation of relevant international instruments, if any. This article captures important access and benefit-sharing-related provisions or elements in China's key related laws and policies, in particular the most recent ones, with a view to identifying existing gaps and future challenges.     

Environmental Governance: The Role of Institutions in Causing and Confronting Environmental Problems

This article describes and explains in accessible terms major findings arising from the work of the long-term international research project on the Institutional Dimensions of Global Environmental Change (IDGEC). In analyzing the roles institutions play in both causing and confronting environmental problems, the project directs attention to three analytic themes – known as the problems of fit, interplay, and scale – and seeks to illuminate these concerns through empirical studies of marine, terrestrial, and atmospheric systems. IDGEC science has highlighted the pervasiveness of institutional misfits and begun to identify the reasons why misfits often prove difficult to eliminate, even when their existence becomes widely known. Research conducted under the auspices of the project demonstrates the growing impact of national and even international institutions on the effectiveness of local resource regimes. Similarly, IDGEC research has identified reasons why policy instruments that work well at the national level (e.g., tradable permits) are frequently difficult or impossible to transfer to the international level. To make the discussion of these findings concrete, the project has explored the problem of fit with particular reference to the performance of Exclusive Economic Zones, the problem of interplay through an analysis of the fate of tropical forests, and the problem of scale through an account of the limits of emissions trading as a policy instrument in the climate change regime.     

论中国环境标志法律制度的建立和完善

在世界贸易中,环境标志的实施有利于产品的销售,也有成为发达国家新的贸易壁垒的趋势,利用环境标志设置绿色壁垒已成为不可回避的环境标志制度问题,特别是WTO关于环境标志议题达成的共识对协调国际贸易的自由化和可持续发展具有重要意义,因此,本文旨在探讨中国环境保护政策为中国产品顺利进入国际市场方面的基础作用,并系统分析了WTO环境标志议题对中国的影响和面临的新的机遇及挑战,提出了充分利用WTO现行规制以完善中国环境标志制度、积极开展环境标志的国际合作和国际互认的法律措施以及促进贸易与环境协调发展的对策。     

Planes, Trains and Automobiles: The Impact of the WTO 'Court' on Canada in its First Ten Years

Observers interested in the nature and scope of judicial policy-makingtraditionally focused on the extent to which domestic courtsshaped national policy arrangements. With the emergence of morerobust international tribunals, however, many are raising questionsabout the degree to which foreign judges are influencing domesticlegal regimes. This project addresses one corner of this debateby analysing the impact of the WTO ‘court’ on Canada.The legal challenges have provoked considerable controversyas the country has lost, either in whole or in part, each casebrought against it. Moreover, there has been widespread publicconcern about these disputes as many have involved significantsocial issues. Yet despite the country’s successive defeatsbefore the WTO ‘court’, the policy impact of thetrade tribunal has been relatively modest. Contrary to suggestions,the WTO dispute settlement mechanism has not superimposed someform of neo-liberal order on the Canadian state via its judicialdecision-making process.     

Distributed Generation of Electricity: The Role of Academic Research and Advice in California’s “Clean DG” Policy Network

Deregulation and the combined threats of energy crises and global warming concern nations around the world, yet these issues continue to be addressed more directly by domestic regulatory systems than by international institutions. The present analyses of the integration of distributed sources of power generation (DG) into California’s electric utility system suggests that domestic environmental dilemmas with international repercussions provide an obvious entrée for global environmental policy specialists into the practice of environmental policy-making and law. Here I review current scholarship on policy networks that illuminates the contributions that technical and policy experts can make to such networks surrounding environmental issues. I then introduce the key members of California’s “clean DG” policy network that emphasizes the role of academic experts in this influential political system, and discuss how my own research has impacted the development of the state’s DG policy. I conclude that scholars are well positioned to observe and engage domestic and international environmental policy networks, and thereby also to influence environmental politics and law.     

Dispelling the Chimera of 'Self-Contained Regimes' International Law and the WTO

International lawyers have in recent years expressed much uneaseabout the perceived fragmentation of their legal system. Intruth, however, international law has always been fragmentedwithout losing its ability to operate. A threat, rather, arisesfrom the ongoing proliferation of special regimes endowed withstrong institutional frameworks and an ability to set new internationalnorms. This expansion begs an uncomfortable question: What ifsuch – seemingly independent – entities were toclaim autonomy and challenge the validity of general internationallaw? A salient feature of this debate is the preoccupation with‘self-contained regimes’ and their status underinternational law. In a recent report to the International LawCommission, for instance, Martti Koskenniemi concluded thatno such regime can be created outside the scope of general internationallaw. Drawing on a particularly controversial example, this articletherefore reviews the law and practice of the World Trade Organizationto determine how that body has positioned itself in the debate.While its judiciary has recognized that the rules on world tradedo not exist in isolation of general international law, a closerlook at actual case law unveils a far more ambivalent picture.The chimera of self-contained regimes, in other words, is noteasily dispelled.     

Stateless Crimes,Legitimacy, and International Criminal Law: The Case of Organ Trafficking

Organ trafficking and trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ transplantation are recognized as significant international problems. Yet these forms of trafficking are largely left out of international criminal law regimes and to some extent of domestic criminal law regimes as well. Trafficking of organs or persons for their organs does not come within the jurisdiction of the ICC, except in very special cases such as when conducted in a manner that conforms to the definitions of genocide or crimes against humanity. Although the United States Code characterizes trafficking as “a transnational crime with national implications,” (22 U.S.C. § 7101(b)(24) (2010)), trafficking is rarely prosecuted in domestic courts. It has thus functioned in practice largely as what might be judged a “stateless” offense, out of the purview of both international and national courts. Yet these forms of organ trafficking remain widespread—and devastating to those who are its victims. In this article, we begin by describing what is known about the extent of organ trafficking and trafficking in persons for the purpose of removal of organs. We then critically evaluate how and why such trafficking has remained largely unaddressed by both international and domestic criminal law regimes. This state of affairs, we argue, presents a missed chance for developing the legitimacy of international criminal law and an illustration of how far current international legal institutions remain from ideal justice.     

Establishing Reliable Foundations for the International Scientific Investigation of Noise Pollution in the Oceans

Noise in the oceans is an issue that has become the subject of concern in a number of national, regional and international organizations. However, the current scientific investigations surrounding the topic of noise pollution are currently inadequate because they are often limited in their application, contradictory in places, and some of the current research is tarnished by assertions which suggest that it has less than full integrity. Against such a backdrop, multiple sections of the international community are calling for a comprehensive, global and robust analysis of the issue.
This current impasse over the utility of the existing scientific material on noise pollution in the oceans, and the need for an internationally focused scientific endeavour to resolve the uncertainties, is not unique to this area. Rather, such impasses have a long history in a large number of areas in international environmental law. Accordingly, international environmental law and policy has developed a clear set of methods and rules to create reliable scientific reports, from which the political will to form agreements can be built. The necessary foundations from which reliable, internationally based, scientific reports are produced are strong membership of scientific bodies; the facilitation of independent scientific opinion; a deliberative process which is open and transparent; information that is publicly available; and, finally, as much financial independence as possible. If these five requirements are applied to the scientific investigation of noise in the ocean, the first step will be taken in building the foundations from which national, regional and international agreements may be formed to address this issue meaningfully.     

The Role of UNEP and UNDP in Multilateral Environmental Agreements

This study examines the role of the UN’s programmes for environment and development (UNEP and UNDP) in the genesis and implementation of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs). This is set in the wider context of the changing dominant focus of the international agenda, from ‘environment’ at the Stockholm Conference in 1972, to ‘environment and development’ at Rio in 1992, and ‚sustainable development’ in Johannesburg in 2002. UNDP is a development organisation strongly rooted in its country office network. Its role is becoming increasingly normative however, particularly since 2002 when UNDP opted to root most of its activities on the Millennium Development Goals. UNEP, as an environmental organisation has been successful at catalysing MEAs at the global and regional level; but without a significant increase in its budget over 30 years, its capacity has been spread very thinly. Many of the institutional arrangements for MEAs have effectively become independent of UNEP resulting in a very loosely and sometimes poorly coordinated network. Two case studies are used to illustrate the current institutional arrangements: UNEP’s Regional Seas Conventions and Protocols, and the Convention for Biological Diversity. These illustrate the fragmentation of current institutions, the need for strengthened technical and scientific support, the importance of addressing problems at their root causes and the need to increase the devolution of global governance to the regional level. Satisfying the identified needs requires actions within the remit of both UNEP and UNDP. It is argued that current institutional arrangements have not kept pace with the requirements of evolving policy. As part of a reform process, one option may be to merge the two programmes into a single structure that conserves and strengthens vital technical functions but enables a balanced and integrated approach to sustainable development.     

Building better science-policy interfaces for international environmental governance: assessing potential within the Intergovernmental Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

This article addresses implementation failure in international environmental governance by considering how different institutional configurations for linking scientific and policy-making processes may help to improve implementation of policies set out in international environmental agreements. While institutional arrangements for interfacing scientific and policy-making processes are emerging as key elements in the structure of international environmental governance, formal understanding regarding their effectiveness is still limited. In an effort to advance that understanding, we propose that science-policy interfaces can be understood as institutions and that implementation failures in international environmental governance may be attributed, in part, to institutional mismatches (sic. Young in Institutions and environmental change: Principal findings, applications, and research, MIT Press, Cambridge 2008) associated with poor design of these institutions. In order to investigate this proposition, we employ three analytical categories—credibility, relevance and legitimacy, drawn from Cash et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(14):8086–8091, (2003), to explore basic characteristics of the institutions proscribed under two approaches to institutional design, which we term linear and collaborative. We then proceed to take a closer look at institutional mismatches that may arise with the operationalisation of the soon to be established Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). We find that, while there are encouraging signs that institutions based on new agreements, such as the IPBES, have the potential to overcome many of the institutional mismatches we have identified, there remain substantial tensions between continuing reliance on the established linear approach and an emerging collaborative approach, which can be expected to continue undermining the credibility, relevance and legitimacy of these institutions, at least in the near future.     

Oran Young and international institutions

Current understandings of global environmental governance owe much to the numerous theoretical, empirical, and methodological contributions of Oran Young. Over the course of 50 years, Young has created many of the theories and typologies we use to explain why international environmental institutions form and what types of effects they have and the conditions under which they have them. His contributions have been central to the development of the concepts of institutional dynamics, interplay, and scale. He has made major contributions to environmental policy globally and in the Arctic, both through his own work and by fostering the work of other scholars. This article summarizes the contributions Young has made to the field and introduces the articles in this special issue that honor those contributions.     

Reforming International Environmental Governance: An Institutionalist Critique of the Proposal for a World Environment Organisation

This article argues that a World Environment Organisation (WEO) does not promise to enhance international environmental governance. First, we claim that the establishment of an international organisation alone in a policy field currently populated by regimes cannot be expected to significantly improve environmental governance because there is no qualitative difference between these two forms of governance institutions. Second, we submit that significant improvement of international environmental governance through institutional re-arrangement must rely on a modification of decision-making procedures and/or a change of institutional boundaries. Third, we develop three principal models of a possible WEO. A WEO formally providing an umbrella for existing regimes without modifying issue-areas and decision-making procedures would be largely irrelevant. A WEO integrating decision-making processes of existing regimes so as to form comprehensive world environment rounds of intergovernmental bargaining would be largely dysfunctional and prone to a host of negative side-effects. A supranational WEO including large-scale use of majority decision-making and far-reaching enforcement mechanisms across a range of environmental issues might considerably enhance international environmental governance, but it appears to be grossly utopian. In conclusion, a WEO cannot be at the same time realistic, significant and beneficial for international environmental governance. Available political resources should be invested in advancing existing and emerging sectoral environmental regimes rather than in establishing a WEO.     

Regulating the invisible: interaction between the EU and Norway in managing nano-risks

Over the last decade, the need for governance of human health and environmental safety risks of nanotechnology (NT) has received increased attention at international, national and EU levels. There were early calls for increased funding of independent research, risk analysis and voluntary or mandatory regulation, but currently overall regulatory efforts have not materialised. One possible explanation is that research has revealed little need to regulate environmental and health safety risks of NT. Alternatively, there is a gap between politics and governance and the evolving state of knowledge. Such a gap can be caused by various factors including change in interests, saliency and organisation. Organisational challenges related to the science–policy interface at national, international and the EU can affect how new knowledge is channelled into decision-making processes. Decrease in public saliency is another possibility. Finally, opposition to regulation among affected producers may have increased and in turn stalled regulation through lobbying. The two explanations are analysed in a multi-level governance context. Norway is chosen as an interesting case: Highly profiled as a frontrunner i.a. in regulating gene technology, but currently awaiting regulations in the EU due to the European Economic Area agreement.     

Global Climate Change and the Fragmentation of International Law

Born into the wider body of international law, the climate regime needs to be understood in light of preexisting regimes. By drawing on the current debate about fragmentation in international law, this article highlights challenges for international lawyers and policymakers in navigating the relationship between the climate regime and the biodiversity regime, and the relationship between the climate regime and the multilateral trading system. This article concludes that a narrow focus on conflicts misrepresents the multifaceted nature of climate change and precludes an adequate jurisprudential understanding of the relationship between the climate regime and other regimes. An improved understanding, particularly with respect to interactions with the biodiversity regime, requires a broadening of the debate that takes account of the institutional aspects of these relationships that may allow enhanced political cooperation and coordination. Further, international law, and in particular the emerging concept of systemic integration, has the potential to make a positive contribution to the climate‐trade interplay.     

企业社会责任的制度化

面对后金融危机时代以来中国经济可持续发展的强风险导向,现代产业网络核心的企业,已经越来越难以离开与利益相关方涉及经济、环境和社会等不同要素层面的交互和嵌入。更多地承担企业社会责任,不仅成为现代企业融入产业网络的标签,而且越来越借助制度的约束力,以保证切实践行。本研究在完成专门指向"制度性要素"的国内外文献和经验整理的基础上,归纳CSR责任制度化的世界理论共识和中国难题,藉此分析中国企业社会责任制度化的现状、问题和矛盾,在此基础上,以作为中国经济发展引擎的上海地区近200家产业和信息化领域企业为调研样本,甄别和发现责任制度化的关键议题和优先顺位,进而提出当下中国企业责任制度化的多元路径实现方案。