Contested Regimes in the International Political Economy: Global Regulation of Genetic Resources and the Internationalization of the State

2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 101-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Görg ◽  
Ulrich Brand
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Raw Materials ◽  
State Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
Global Environmental Politics ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Trade Politics

This article analyses the complex interconnections between global environmental politics and trade politics against the background of biodiversity politics. Genetic resources are one of the most important inputs in post-Fordist economies: they are the raw materials of the new biotechnology companies. The system of global environmental governance that has emerged in recent years was established by a number of international institutions and organizations to serve as a political-institutional framework for emerging global markets. To date, this system has not proved to be an effective regulative framework. On the contrary, it is highly contradictory and contested. We develop theoretical and empirical arguments why and in which form the transforming national state remains crucial in global environmental politics. We call this transformation the “internationalization of the state.” It is argued that the emerging post-Fordist relationships with nature, as a highly contested process, are stabilized by a new kind of global political regulation and domination. This article is theoretically informed by the concept of “societal relationships with nature,” regulation and critical state theory as well as Gramsci's concept of hegemony.

scholarly journals The Governance of Transnational Environmental Harm: Addressing New Modes of Accountability/Responsibility

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 8-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Mason
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Degradation ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
Environmental Harm ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Global Environmental Politics ◽  
Private Authority ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Introductory Paper

Transboundary and global environmental harm present substantial challenges to state-centered (territorial) modalities of accountability and responsibility. The globalization of environmental degradation has triggered regulatory responses at various jurisdictional scales. These governance efforts, featuring various articulations of state and/or private authority, have struggled to address so-called “accountability deficits” in global environmental politics. Yet, it has also become clear that accountability and responsibility norms forged in domestic regulatory contexts cannot simply be transposed across borders. This special issue explores various conceptual perspectives on accountability and responsibility for transnational harm, and examines their application to different actor groups and environmental governance regimes. This introductory paper provides an overview of the major theoretical positions and examines some of the analytical challenges raised by the transnational (re)scaling of accountability and responsibility norms.

scholarly journals The Global Environmental Politics and Political Economy of Seafood Systems

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liam Campling ◽  
Elizabeth Havice
Keyword(s):  
Food Systems ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Food System ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Global Environmental Governance ◽  
Food Regimes ◽  
Global Environmental Politics ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
National Economic

This article situates seafood in the larger intersection between global environmental governance and the food system. Drawing inspiration from the food regimes approach, we trace the historical unfolding of the seafood system and its management between the 1930s and the 2010s. In doing so, we bridge global environmental politics research that has studied either the politics of fisheries management or seafood sustainability governance, and we bring seafood and the fisheries crisis into food regimes scholarship. Our findings reveal that the seafood system has remained firmly dependent on the historical institutions of national seafood production systems and, particularly, on the state-based regulatory regimes that they promulgated in support of national economic and geopolitical interests. As such, seafood systems contribute to a broader, historicized understanding of the hybrid global environmental governance of food systems in which nonstate actors depend heavily upon, and in fact call for the strengthening of, state-based institutions. Our findings reveal that the contemporary private ordering of seafood governance solidifies the centrality of state-based institutions in the struggle for “sustainable” seafood and enables the continued expansionary, volume-driven extractivist logics that produced the fisheries crisis in the first place.

scholarly journals Private Environmental Governance and International Relations: Exploring the Links

2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Falkner
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
Institutional Arrangements ◽  
International Negotiations ◽  
Global Environmental Governance ◽  
Global Level ◽  
Private Governance ◽  
Global Environmental Politics ◽  
Global Environmental

This article discusses private environmental governance at the global level. It is widely acknowledged that corporations play an increasing role in global environmental politics, not only as lobbyists in international negotiations or agents of implementation, but also as actors creating private institutional arrangements that perform environmental governance functions. The rise of such private forms of global governance raises a number of questions for the study of global environmental politics: How does private governance interact with state-centric governance? In what ways are the roles/capacities of states and nonstate actors affected by private governance? Does the rise of private governance signify a shift in the ideological underpinnings of global environmental governance? This article explores these questions, seeking a better understanding of the significance of private environmental governance for International Relations.

Climate Crisis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin R. Graham
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Climate Regime ◽  
Global Environmental Politics ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Climate Crisis

International relations scholarship on climate change exists primarily in the field of Global Environmental Politics (GEP) and outside the substantive purview of mainstream International Political Economy (IPE). This chapter argues that the climate crisis is fundamentally an IPE problem, and it requires attention from IPE scholars as a primary subject of interest. To facilitate engagement, the chapter reviews a diverse literature at the intersection of IPE and climate across three substantive areas: the global climate regime, trade, and renewable energy transitions. Each section offers avenues for research, and provides ideas on how to put concepts and ideas from IPE to work in climate crisis scholarship.

Transparency Under Scrutiny: Information Disclosure in Global Environmental Governance

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aarti Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Information Disclosure ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
Global Environmental Governance ◽  
Effective Governance ◽  
Global Environmental Politics ◽  
Global Environmental

Although transparency is a key concept of our times, it remains a relatively understudied phenomenon in global environmental politics. The link between transparency and accountable, legitimate and effective governance is assumed, yet the nature and workings of this link require further scrutiny. Transparency via information disclosure is increasingly at the heart of a number of global environmental governance initiatives, termed “governance-by-disclosure” here. The article identifies two assumptions that underpin such governance-by-disclosure initiatives, and calls for comparative analysis of the workings of such assumptions in practice, as a way to illuminate the nature and implications of a transparency turn in global environmental governance and its link to accountable, legitimate and effective governance.

scholarly journals Researching Global Environmental Politics in the 21st Century

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Dauvergne ◽  
Jennifer Clapp
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Research Trends ◽  
Levels Of Analysis ◽  
Global Environmental Governance ◽  
Major Research ◽  
Global Environmental Politics ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Private Actors

This forum article highlights three major research trends we have observed in the journal Global Environmental Politics since 2000. First, research has increasingly focused on specific and formal mechanisms of global environmental governance, contributing to more elaborate and refined methodologies that span more scales and levels of analysis. Second, research increasingly has concentrated on the rise of market-based governance mechanisms and the influence of private actors, reflecting a broader shift among policymakers toward liberal approaches to governance. Third, over this time empirical research has shifted significantly toward analyzing issues through a lens of climate change, providing valuable insights into environmental change, but narrowing the journal’s empirical focus. These trends, which overlap in complex ways, arise partly from shifts in real-world politics, partly from broader shifts in the overall field of global environmental politics (GEP), and partly from the advancing capacity of GEP theories and methodologies to investigate the full complexity of local to global governance. This maturing of GEP scholarship does present challenges for the field, however, including the ability of field-defining journals such as Global Environmental Politics to engage a diversity of critical scholarly voices and to influence policy and activism.

scholarly journals Global Environmental Governance and International Environmental Diplomacy

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 126-153
Author(s):  
E. Bliznetskaya
Keyword(s):  
Public Space ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Global Environmental Governance ◽  
Research Areas ◽  
Global Environmental Politics ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Environmental Diplomacy

Governance is so commonly used in academic literature and policy papers in the field of international environmental politics and as such has overtaken the words “policy”, “diplomacy” and “cooperation”. This phenomenon has empirical support – environmental policy is one of the most internalized areas of regulation, and states were no longer the sole subject of international rulemaking. The current state of the art in studying global environmental politics is quite paradoxical. Notwithstanding the increased recognition of the importance of non-state, transnational actors and mechanisms to solve global environmental problems, little attention is been paid to the study of the relationship between interstate and non-state forms of interaction. That raises the question of how multilateral environmental diplomacy and global environmental governance are connected with each other in the academic peer-reviewed journals. What kind of international interactions do they study and what links them? To answer these questions, the peer-reviewed articles from SCOPUS and Web of Science databases on multilateral environmental diplomacy and global environmental governance analyzed through a systematic literature review. To understand the nature of the two approaches in studying global environmental politics, I summarize the differences and then identify the links between them. In each of the research areas, sub-directions and the related content were identified, while the typology of the articles allowed to identify the relationships between them. In each of the research areas, sub-directions and the related content were identified, while the typology of the articles helped to highlight the relationships between them. The main finding includes the confirmation that environmental diplomacy and environmental governance studying mostly in isolation from each other. The main finding includes the confirmation that environmental diplomacy and environmental governance studying mostly in isolation especially regarding the interplay between interstate or non-state forms of cooperation as well as assessments of their significance. Two dimensions of the politics – formal negotiations on collective actions and weakly institutionalized public space that involves various stakeholders, movements and initiatives – exists in parallel to each other. At the same time, the study demonstrated the need to develop more responsive notions of international environmental diplomacy, since it is no longer specific only to the study of negotiations and other forms of interstate interaction.

8. Policy instruments and effectiveness

2020 ◽  
pp. 259-290
Author(s):  
Jean-Frédéric Morin ◽  
Amandine Orsini ◽  
Sikina Jinnah
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
International Commitments ◽  
Global Environmental Politics ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Political Effects ◽  
Public Policy Instruments ◽  
Choice Of Instruments ◽  
Policy Mechanisms

This chapter introduces several debates surrounding the effectiveness of global environmental governance. These debates are closely linked to the choice of policy instruments states make within international regimes. These public policy instruments include regulations, administrative standards, scientific indicators, financial targets, and accounting practices, among others. Whereas international institutions frame the general norms, principles, and rules for tackling environmental problems, instruments provide the toolbox of policy mechanisms that actors in global environmental politics use to implement those norms, principles, and rules. In some cases, the choice of instruments is made at the international level and applied in exactly the same way by a group of states. In other cases, the choice of policy instruments is left to the discretion of states, who can then choose among different alternatives to fulfil their international commitments. The chapter then explains the modalities, diffusion, and political effects of these policy instruments. Although the concept of policy instruments may appear technical and neutral, it shows how instruments can actually shape, modify, and even undermine global environmental politics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document