Advertisement

Oran Young and international institutions

Original Paper

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Global environmental governance International regimes Effectiveness 

Abbreviations

ETS

Emissions Testing Service

EU

European Union

IDGEC

Institutional Dimensions of Global Environmental Change

IHDP

International Human Dimensions Programme

IRD

International Regimes Database

NGO

Non-governmental Organization

NSF

National Science Foundation

Notes

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank Michele Betsill, Maria Gordon, Franklyn Griffiths, Joyeeta Gupta, Agni Kalfagianni, Leslie King, Gail Osherenko, Carmen Scherkenbach, Falk Schmidt, Heike Schroeder, and Arild Underdal for contributions to and comments on this article as it developed. Remaining errors remain the responsibility of the author.

References

  1. Adger, W. N., Arnell, N. W., & Tompkins, E. (2005). Successful adaptation to climate change across scales. Global Environmental Change, 15(2), 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Breitmeier, H., Young, O. R., & Zürn, M. (2006). Analyzing international environmental regimes: From case study to database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brown Weiss, E., & Jacobson, H. K. (Eds.). (1998). Engaging countries: Strengthening compliance with international environmental accords. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bulkeley, H. (2005). Reconfiguring environmental governance: Towards a politics of scales and networks. Political Geography, 24(8), 875–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cash, D. W. (2001). “In order to aid in diffusing useful and practical information… ”: cross-scale boundary organizations and agricultural extension. Science, Technology and Human Values, 26(4), 431–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cash, D. W., Adger, W. N., Berkes, F., Garden, P., Lebel, L., & Olsson, P., et al. (2006). Scale and cross-scale dynamics: Governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecology and Society, 11(2), Article 8.Google Scholar
  8. Cash, D. W., & Moser, S. C. (2000). Linking global and local scales: Designing dynamic assessment and management processes. Global Environmental Change, 10(2), 109–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chayes, A., & Chayes, A. H. (1995). The new sovereignty: Compliance with international regulatory agreements. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Frohlich, N., Oppenheimer, J. A., & Young, O. R. (1971). Political leadership and collective goods. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gehring, T. (1994). Dynamic international regimes: Institutions for international environmental governance. Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang.Google Scholar
  12. Gehring, T., & Oberthür, S. (2008). Interplay: Exploring institutional interaction. In O. R. Young, L. A. King, & H. Schroeder (Eds.), Institutions and environmental change: Principal findings, applications, and research frontiers (pp. 187–224). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Gulbrandsen, L. H. (2004). Overlapping public and private governance: Can forest certification fill the gaps in the global forest regime? Global Environmental Politics, 4(2), 75–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gupta, J. (2008). Global change: Analyzing scale and scaling in environmental governance. In O. R. Young, L. A. King, & H. Schroeder (Eds.), Institutions and environmental change: Principal findings, applications, and research frontiers (pp. 225–258). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Haas, P. M., Keohane, R. O., & Levy, M. A. (Eds.). (1993). Institutions for the earth: Sources of effective international environmental protection. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Harsem, Ø., & Hoel, A. H. (2013). Climate change and adaptive capacity in fisheries management: The case of Norway. International Environmental Agreements, this issue.Google Scholar
  17. Hovi, J., Sprinz, D. F., & Underdal, A. (2003a). The Oslo-Potsdam solution to measuring regime effectiveness: Critique, response, and the road ahead. Global Environmental Politics, 3(3), 74–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hovi, J., Sprinz, D. F., & Underdal, A. (2003b). Regime effectiveness and the Oslo-Potsdam solution: a rejoinder to Oran Young. Global Environmental Politics, 3(3), 105–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jinnah, S. (2010). Overlap management in the World Trade Organization: Secretariat influence on trade-environment politics. Global Environmental Politics, 11(2), 54–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Keohane, R. O., & Levy, M. A. (Eds.). (1996). Institutions for environmental aid: Pitfalls and promise. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Keohane, R. O., & Victor, D. G. (2011). The regime complex for climate change. Perspectives on Politics, 9(1), 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krasner, S. D. (1982). Structural causes and regime consequences: Regimes as intervening variables. International Organization, 36(1), 185–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Levy, M. A., Young, O. R., & Zürn, M. (1995). The study of international regimes. European Journal of International Relations, 1(3), 267–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lindblom, C. E., & Cohen, D. K. (1979). Usable knowledge: Social science and social problem solving. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Meadowcroft, J. (2002). Politics and scale: Some implications for environmental governance. Landscape and Urban Planning, 61(1), 169–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Miles, E. L., Underdal, A., Andresen, S., Wettestad, J., Skjærseth, J. B., & Carlin, E. M. (Eds.). (2002). Environmental regime effectiveness: Confronting theory with evidence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Mitchell, R. B., Clark, W. C., Cash, D. W., & Dickson, N. (Eds.). (2006). Global environmental assessments: Information and influence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. Oberthür, S., & Gehring, T. (Eds.). (2006). Institutional interaction in global environmental governance: Synergy and conflict among international and EU policies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Oberthür, S., & Stokke, O. S. (2011). Managing institutional complexity : Regime interplay and global environmental change (Institutional dimensions of global environmental change). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  30. Osherenko, G., & Young, O. R. (1989). The age of the Arctic: Hot conflicts and cold realities. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Raustiala, K., & Victor, D. G. (2004). The regime complex for plant genetic resources. International Organization, 58(2), 277–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rittberger, V., & Zürn, M. (1991). Regime theory: Findings from the study of East-West regimes. Cooperation and Conflict, 26(4), 165–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Skjærseth, J. B. (2013). Governance by EU Emissions Trading (ETS): resistance or innovation in the oil industry. International Environmental Agreements, this issue.Google Scholar
  34. Stokke, O. S. (Ed.). (2001). Governing high seas fisheries: The interplay of global and regional regimes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Stokke, O. S. (2013). Regime interplay in Arctic shipping governance: Explaining regional niche selection. International Environmental Agreements, this issue.Google Scholar
  36. Strange, S. (1983). Cave! hic dragones: A critique of regime analysis. In S. D. Krasner (Ed.), International regimes (pp. 337–354). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Underdal, A. (2002). One question, two answers. In E. L. Miles, A. Underdal, S. Andresen, J. Wettestad, J. B. Skjærseth, & E. M. Carlin (Eds.), Environmental regime effectiveness: Confronting theory with evidence (pp. 3–45). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Underdal, A. (2013). Meeting common environmental challenges: The co-evolution of policies and practices. International Environmental Agreements, this issue.Google Scholar
  39. Underdal, A., & Young, O. R. (Eds.). (2004). Regime consequences: Methodological challenges and research strategies. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  40. Victor, D. G., Raustiala, K., & Skolnikoff, E. B. (Eds.). (1998). The implementation and effectiveness of international environmental commitments: Theory and practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  41. Webster, D. G. (2009). Adaptive governance: The dynamics of Atlantic fisheries management. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  42. Young, O. R. (1967). The intermediaries: Third parties in international crises. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Young, O. R. (1968a). Political discontinuities in the international system. World Politics, 20(3), 369–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Young, O. R. (1968b). The politics of force: Bargaining during international crises. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Young, O. R. (1968c). Systems of political science (Foundations of modern political science series). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  46. Young, O. R. (1968d). The United Nations and the international system. International Organization, 22(4), 902–922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Young, O. R. (1969). Interdependencies in world politics. International Journal, 24(4), 726–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Young, O. R. (1972a). Intermediaries: Additional thoughts on third parties. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 16(1), 5165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Young, O. R. (1972b). The perils of Odysseus: On constructing theories of international relations. World Politics, 24(Supplement), 179–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Young, O. R. (1975a). The analysis of bargaining: Problems and prospects. In O. R. Young (Ed.), Bargaining : Formal theories of negotiation (pp. 391–408). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  51. Young, O. R. (1975b). Bargaining : Formal theories of negotiation. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  52. Young, O. R. (1977). Resource management at the international level : The case of the North Pacific. New York: Pinter and Nichols.Google Scholar
  53. Young, O. R. (1978a). Anarchy and social choice: Reflections on the international polity. World Politics, 30(2), 241–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Young, O. R. (1978b). On the performance of the international polity. British Journal of International Studies, 4(3), 191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Young, O. R. (1979). Compliance and public authority : A theory with international applications. Baltimore: Published for Resources for the Future by the Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Young, O. R. (1980). International regimes: Problems of concept formation. World Politics, 32(3), 331–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Young, O. R. (1981). Natural resources and the state : The political economy of resource management (Studies in international political economy). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  58. Young, O. R. (1982a). Regime dynamics: The rise and fall of international regimes. International Organization, 36(2), 277–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Young, O. R. (1982b). Resource regimes : Natural resources and social institutions. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  60. Young, O. R. (1985/86). The age of the Arctic. Foreign Policy, 61, 160–179.Google Scholar
  61. Young, O. R. (1986). International regimes: Toward a new theory of institutions (review of After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy by Robert O. Keohane; International Regimes by Stephen D. Krasner; and The Antinomies of Interdependence by John G. Ruggie). World Politics, 39(1), 104–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Young, O. R. (1989a). International cooperation : Building regimes for natural resources and the environment. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Young, O. R. (1989b). International cooperation: Building regimes for natural resources and the environment. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Young, O. R. (1989c). The politics of international regime formation: Managing natural resources and the environment. International Organization, 43(3), 349–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Young, O. R. (1989d). The power of institutions: why international regimes matter. In O. R. Young (Ed.), International cooperation: Building regimes for natural resources and the environment (pp. 58–80). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Young, O. R. (1991). Political leadership and regime formation: On the development of institutions in international society. International Organization, 45(3), 281–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Young, O. R. (1992a). Arctic politics : Conflict and cooperation in the circumpolar North. Hanover: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
  68. Young, O. R. (1992b). The effectiveness of international institutions: hard cases and critical variables. In J. N. Rosenau & E.-O. Czempiel (Eds.), Governance without government: Change and order in world politics (pp. 160–194). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Young, O. R. (1993). International organizations and international institutions: Lessons learned from environmental regimes. In S. Kamieniecki (Ed.), Environmental politics in the international arena (pp. 145–164). Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  70. Young, O. R. (1994a). International governance: Protecting the environment in a stateless society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Young, O. R. (1994b). The problem of scale in human/environment relationships. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 6(4), 429–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Young, O. R. (1996). Institutional linkages in international society: Polar perspectives. Global Governance, 2(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  73. Young, O. R. (Ed.). (1997). Global governance: Drawing insights from the environmental experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  74. Young, O. R. (1998). Creating regimes : Arctic accords and international governance. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Young, O. R. (Ed.). (1999a). The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Causal connections and behavioral mechanisms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  76. Young, O. R. (1999b). Governance in world affairs. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Young, O. R. (2001). The behavioral effects of environmental regimes: Collective-action vs. social-practice models. International Environmental Agreements, 1(1), 9–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Young, O. R. (2002). The institutional dimensions of environmental change: Fit, interplay, and scale. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  79. Young, O. R. (2003). Determining regime effectiveness: A commentary on the Oslo-Potsdam solution. Global Environmental Politics, 3(3), 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Young, O. R. (2006). Vertical interplay among scale-dependent environmental and resource regimes. Ecology and Society, 11(1), Article 27.Google Scholar
  81. Young, O. R. (2008a). Building regimes for socioecological systems: Institutional diagnostics. In O. R. Young, L. A. King, & H. Schroeder (Eds.), Institutions and environmental change: Principal findings, applications, and research frontiers (pp. 115–143). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  82. Young, O. R. (2008b). Institutional interplay : Biosafety and trade. Tokyo, Japan: United Nations University.Google Scholar
  83. Young, O. R. (2010). Institutional dynamics : Emergent patterns in international environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  84. Young, O. R. (2012). On environmental governance : Sustainability, efficiency, and equity (On politics). Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
  85. Young, O. R. (2013). Sugaring off: enduring insights from long-term research on environmental governance. International Environmental Agreements, this issue.Google Scholar
  86. Young, O. R., Demko, G. J., & Ramakrishna, K. (1996). Global environmental change and international governance. Hanover: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
  87. Young, O. R., King, L. A., & Schroeder, H. (Eds.). (2008). Institutions and environmental change: Principal findings, applications, and research frontiers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  88. Young, O. R., & Levy, M. A. (1999). The effectiveness of international environmental regimes. In O. R. Young (Ed.), The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Causal connections and behavioral mechanisms (pp. 1–32). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  89. Young, O. R., & Osherenko, G. (Eds.). (1993a). Polar politics: Creating international environmental regimes. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Young, O. R., & Osherenko, G. (1993b). Testing theories of regime formation: Findings from a large collaborative research project. In V. Rittberger (Ed.), Regime theory and international relations (pp. 223–251). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Young, O. R., & Zürn, M. (2006). The international regimes database: Designing and using a sophisticated tool for institutional analysis. Global Environmental Politics, 6(3), 121–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political Science and Program in Environmental StudiesUniversity of OregonEugeneUSA

Personalised recommendations