Abstract
The surprisingly broad role of technical expertise in international environmental negotiation arises from the wide array of negotiation strategies that depend on expert analysis for their design and interpretation. These approaches include mechanisms for assessing and coping with risk and uncertainty, tactics to increase credibility and confidence, the promotion of provisional scientific consensus, issue linkage for cross-value trading, and assigning appropriate roles to different types of stakeholders, including extra-regional actors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Especially valid empirical evidence can be provided by a number of regional seas regimes that share several basic features with the Caspian case: i.e. large ecosystem, preservation of which requires concerted governance, multiplicity of actors some of whom are at odds (and even in armed conflict) with others or are for different reasons excluded from negotiations, complexity and interconnection of issues.
The theory of environmental diplomacy is a relatively new branch of international relations, which has emerged in the last decade in response to an avalanche of international environmental agreements in the 1990s. Several works are of particular interest: Sjöstedt, G., ed. (1993)International Environmental NegotiationSage Publications, Newbury Park (Calif.); Benedick, R. (1991)Ozone Diplomacy: New Directions in Safeguarding the PlanetHarvard University Press, Cambridge (MA.); Susskind, L. (1994)Environmental DiplomacyOxford University Press, New York, Oxford; Tolba, M. with I.Rummel-Bulska (1998)Global Environmental Diplomacy: Negotiating Environmental Agreements for the World,1973–1992The MIT Press, Cambridge (MA.).
See Sjöstedt, G. (1993) Special and typical attributes of international environmental negotiations. in: G. Sjöstedt, U. Svedin and B.H. Aniansson (eds.)International Environmental Negotiations: Process Issues and Contexts Utrikespolitiska Institutet and Forskiningsradsnamnden, Stockholm, pp. 26–33; and Rogers, K. (1999) Sowing the seeds of cooperation in environmentally induced conflicts, in Suliman, M. (ed.) Ecology Politics and Violent Conflict. Zed Books Ltd, London and New York, pp. 259–272.
Analysis of the role of argument and evidence in policymaking was provided by Majone. G. (1989)Evidence Argument and Persuasion in the Policy Process Yale University Press, New Haven and London. On the role of social learning see Sabatier, P. (1987) Knowledge, policy-oriented learning and policy change,Knowledge: Creation Diffusion Utilization 8 (4), pp. 649–692. The role of scientific perception in shaping policy agenda of Mediterranean countries has been analyzed by Haas, P. (1990)Saving the Mediterranean: The Politics of International Environmental Cooperation Columbia University Press, New York.
Young, O. (1989)International CooperationCornell University Press, Ithaca.
For an expanded description of the international policymaking process see Hempel, L. (1996)Environmental GovernanceIsland Press, Washington (DC).
Epistemic communities are networks of knowledge-based communities with an authoritative claim to policy relevant knowledge within their domain of expertise. Haas, P., ed. (1992) Knowledge, power and international policy coordination. Special issue ofInternational Organization 46 (1).
See Haas, P. (1990)Saving the Mediterranean: The Politics of International Environmental Cooperationop. cit.
For an excellent description of the negotiations on ozone regime see Benedick, R. (1991)Ozone Diplomacyop.cit.
We use here a typology of scientific uncertainty suggested by Charles Harper (1995)Environment and Society.Upper Saddle (NJ): Prentice-Hall, pp. 132–137.
Pielke Jr., Roger A. (1995) Usable information for policy: An appraisal of the U.S. Global Change Research ProgramPolicy Sciences.1995 v 28, 1 (February): p. 39.
Vernon, R. (1995) The World Trade Organization: a new stage in international trade and developmentHarvard International Law Journal36 (2) (Spring): p. 329.
The “law of the least ambitious program” has been first diagnosed by Arild Underdal in his analysis of the Northeast Atlantic fishery regime. See Underdal, A. (1980)The Politics of International Fisheries ManagementUniversitetsforlaget, Oslo.
Data of the study by the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) as cited by Sand, P. (1991) Lessons learned in global environmental governanceBoston College Environmental Affairs Law Reviewvol. 182pp. 236–237.
Ibid.
This argument is presented by M. Tolba inGlobal Environmental Diplomacyop. cit.
For a detailed overview of these concepts and practices see: Sand, P. (1991) Lessons learned in global environmental governanceBoston College Environmental Affairs Law Reviewvol. 18, 2, pp. 213–235; and also Tolba, M. (1998) Global Environmental Diplomacyop. cit.
See Sand, P. (1991) Lessons learned in global environmental governance, op. cit.
This conclusion coincides with one of the recommendations of the so-called Salzburg Initiative — an agenda for reforming the environmental treaty-making process that was elaborated by an international group of diplomats, scientists, negotiation experts and environmentalists. See Susskind, L. (1993)Environmental DiplomacyOxford University Press, Oxford, New York, pp. 122–149.
Haas, P. (1999) Prospects for effective marine governance in the North-West Pacific region, paper prepared for the Nautilus Institute ESENA Project.
Kronman, A. (1985) Contract law contracts in a state of nature, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization vol. 1, 1 (Fall): p. 5.
For a description of the “overachievement” approach in these regimes see: Sand, P. (1991), op. cit., pp. 232–236.
Ibid.
Dovland (1987) Monitoring European transboundary air pollutionEnvironmentDecember 1987, pp. 10–15, 27–28.
Levite, A. and E. Landau (1997) Confidence and security building measures in the Middle EastThe Journal of Strategic Studiesv. 20, 1 (March): p. 143.
The most thorough and insightful analysis of the Law of the Sea negotiations has been provided by James Sebenius, see: Sebenius, J. (1983) Negotiation arithmetic: adding and subtracting issues and partiesInternational Organization37, pp. 281–316; Sebenius, J. (1984) Negotiating the Law of the Sea: Lessons in the Art and Science of Reaching Agreement. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA).
Inflexibility of a package deal, once created, was a cause of a substantial delay in the LOS Cinvention’s entry into force. Economic realities of that time made the conditions of its Part IX (Deep Sea-Bed Mining) infeasible. However, all the attempts of the United States to unlock the “navigation-seabed” package failed, because most delegates considered the package deal irrevocable.
Sebenius, J. (1983) Negotiation arithmetic: adding and subtracting issues and parties, op. cit.
Burton, J. (1991)Conflict: Human Needs TheoryMacMillan, London.
Sebenius, J. (1981) The computer as mediator: Law of the sea and beyondJournal of Policy Analysis and Management1, pp. 77–95.
See Alcamo, J., R. Shaw, and L. Hordijk, eds. (1990)The RAINS Model of Acidification: Science and Strategies in EuropeKluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Healy, R. and W. Ascher (1995) Knowledge in the policy process: Incorporating new environmental information in natural resources policymakingPolicy SciencesFebruary 1995, pp. 1–19.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ascher, W., Mirovitskaya, N. (2000). Technodiplomacy and Environmental Cooperation: Lessons for the Caspian. In: Ascher, W., Mirovitskaya, N. (eds) The Caspian Sea: A Quest for Environmental Security. NATO Science Series, vol 67. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4032-4_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4032-4_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-6219-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-4032-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive