Abstract
Many global environmental agreements have shown diverse changes in their long-term implementation. Comparative studies on international regimes are limited, and research on change in such regimes is not well developed. A comparative typological study of change in global environmental regimes is presented in this paper. Ernst B. Haas’s “three models of change” is chosen as a framework to explain change in the regimes. The models are (1) incremental growth, (2) turbulent nongrowth, and (3) managed interdependence. They reflect the shift of power balance among member states and their knowledge of policies. The models are applied to five case studies covering the Ramsar, CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna), Basel, Ozone, and Climate regimes, which have been in effect for over 15 years. The three models help explain diverse changes in those regimes. Five factors, (1) shift of power balance and political leadership, (2) the scope of the regime (narrow or wide), (3) institutional legacy, (4) consensual knowledge and conflict of political value, and (5) learning between rival groups, have made major contribution to the change in those regimes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Young (2010) discusses the regimes of a limited number of developed countries and a regional system in addition to global regimes.
E. B. Haas mentioned only epistemic communities, but not advocacy networks, so I slightly modified his models accordingly.
In this paper, the OECD countries include Liechtenstein.
The USA had not ratified the convention by the end of July 2013. This has affected the balance between the EU and other OECD countries.
Byrd–Hagel Resolution, July 25, 1997. Available at http://www.nationalcenter.org/KyotoSenate.html, last visited September 24, 2013.
Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer, March 28, 2001. Available at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=47500, last visited at November 21, 2012.
The Kyoto Protocol entered into force in 2005, after the EU, Japan, and Russia concluded it.
References
Andersen, S. O., & Sarma, K. M. (2002). Protecting the ozone layer: The United Nations history. London: Earthscan.
Benedick, R. E. (1998). Ozone diplomacy: New directions in safeguarding the planet—Enl. ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Boardman, R. (1981). International organization and the conservation of nature. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Bolin, B. (2007). A history of the science and politics of climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bonner, R. (1993). At the hand of man. London: Simon and Schuster Ltd.
Breitmeier, H., et al. (2006). Analyzing international environmental regimes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Canan, P., & Reichman, N. (2002). Ozone connections: Expert networks in global environmental governance. Sheffield: Grennleaf Publishing Ltd.
Chasek, P. S., Downie, D. L., & Brown, J. W. (2006). Global environmental politics. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Curlier, M., & Andersen, S. (2002). International trade in endangered species: The CITES regime. In E. L. Miles, et al. (Eds.), Environmental regime effectiveness (pp. 357–378). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
FAO. (2010). The report of the third FAO expert advisory panel for the assessment of proposals to amend appendices I and II of CITES concerning commercially-exploited aquatic species, FIRF/R925(En). Rome: FAO.
Haas, E. B. (1980). Why collaborate?: Issue-linkage and international regimes. World Politics, 32(3), 357–405.
Haas, E. B. (1990). When knowledge is power. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.
Haas, P. M. (1996). Banning chlorofluorocarbon: Epistemic community efforts to protect stratospheric ozone. In P. M. Haas (Ed.), Knowledge, power, and international policy coordination (pp. 187–224). Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
Haas, P. M., Keohane, R. O., & Levy, M. A. (Eds.). (1995). Institutions for the earth. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hect, A., & Tirpak, D. (1995). Framework agreement on climate change: A scientific and policy history. Climate Change, 29(4), 371–402.
Holdgate, M. (1999). The green web: A union for world conservation. London: Earthscan.
IEA. (2011). CO2 emissions from fuel combustion highlights (2001st ed.). Paris: IEA.
IISD. (1999). Summary of the seventh meeting of the conference of contracting parties to the Ramsar Convention on wetlands: 10–18 May 1999. Earth Negotiations Bulletin, 17(9). Available at http://www.iisd.ca/ramsar/cop7/. Accessed May 8, 2012.
IISD. (2005). Summary of the ninth meeting of the conference of contracting parties to the Ramsar Convention on wetlands: 8–15 November 2005. Earth Negotiations Bulletin, 17(25). Available at http://www.iisd.ca/ramsar/cop9/. Accessed May 8, 2012.
IISD. (2008). Summary of the tenth meeting of the conference of contracting parties to the Ramsar Convention on wetlands: 28 October–4 November 2008. Earth Negotiations Bulletin, 17(32). Available at http://www.iisd.ca/ramsar/cop10/. Accessed May 8, 2012.
IISD. (2009). Summary of the Copenhagen climate change conference: 7–19 December 2009. Earth Negotiations Bulletin, 12(459). Available at http://www.iisd.ca/climate/cop15/. Accessed May 8, 2012.
IUCN. (1964). Eighth general assembly: Proceedings. Nairobi September 1963: IUCN.
IUCN, UNEP, & WWFF. (1980). World conservation strategy. Gland: IUCN.
Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Kempel, W. (1999). The negotiations on the Basel convention on the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes and their disposal: A national delegation perspective. International Negotiation, 4, 411–431.
Liefferink, D., & Andersen, M. S. (2005). Strategies of the ‘green’ member states in EU environmental policy-making. In Andrew Jordan (Ed.), Environmental policy in the European Union (pp. 49–66). London: Earthcan.
Miles, E. L., et al. (2002). Environmental regime effectiveness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mofson, P. (2000). Zimbabwe and CITES: Influencing the international regime. In J. Hutton & B. Dickson (Eds.), Endangered species, threatened convention (pp. 107–122). London: Earthscan.
Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt. New York: Bloomsbury Press.
Parson, E. A. (2003). Protecting the ozone layer: Science and strategy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sand, P. H. (1997). Whither CITES? The evolution of a treaty regime in the borderland of trade and environment. The European Journal of International Law, 8(1), 29–58.
Sharp, R. (1997). The African elephant: Conservation and CITES. Oryx, 31(2), 111–119.
Tolba, M. K., & Rummel-Bulska, I. (1998). Global environmental diplomacy: Negotiating environmental agreements for the world, 1973–1992. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
TRAFFIC. (1989). CITES Conference in Switzerland. TRAFFIC Bulletin 11(2/3). Available at http://www.traffic.org/cites/, accessed May 7, 2012.
TRAFFIC. (1997). Report of the tenth meeting of the conference of the parties to CITES. TRAFFIC Bulletin, 17(1): 5–19. Available at http://www.traffic.org/cites/. Accessed May 7, 2012.
Western, D. (2002). In the dust of Kilimanjaro. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Wijnstekers, W. (2001). The evolution of CITES. Geneva: CITES Secretariat.
Young, O. R. (Ed.). (1999). The effectiveness of international environmental regimes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Young, O. R. (2010). Institutional dynamics: Emergent patterns in international environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Zito, A. R. (2000). Creating environmental policy in the European Union. New York: PALGRAVE.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kamigawara, K. Comparative typological study of change in global environmental regimes. Int Environ Agreements 15, 179–197 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-013-9229-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-013-9229-y