|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
131365
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Despite criticism, global biofuel production continues to rise, using primarily food crops. Between 2001 and 2012 it increased nearly six-fold, driven primarily by domestic policies, yet raising strong international concerns, eg over impacts on global food prices. Nevertheless, little international biofuel governance has emerged. This article examines the various extraterritorial dimensions of domestic biofuel policies and investigates why international biofuel governance has remained vague, despite its controversial nature. It uses the politics of scale to analyse why countries may wish to frame it as a global or domestic issue. Three extraterritorial dimensions are identified: global environmental impacts, global socioeconomic impacts, and attempts at extraterritorial control over biofuel production abroad. While major producers have successfully avoided liability for impacts by preventing the scaling up of much biofuel governance to the international level, major importers have tried to fill perceived governance gaps using policies aimed at extraterritorial control. We show that both the rise of nationally oriented development policies with extraterritorial impacts and of unilateral sustainability rule making primarily affect weaker countries, making global inequalities more pronounced. It is essential that adaptation governance take into account both environmental and global socioeconomic changes, such as higher agricultural commodity prices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
085325
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Public policy on water has long been approached in the context of a locality, a country, or a river basin. However, scientific evidence now provides compelling arguments for adopting a global perspective on water management. This article argues that water governance today needs a multilevel design, including a significant global dimension. The discussion defines global water governance, highlights the implications for multilevel governance, and examines global water governance through the lens of governance typologies. The analysis along the categories of globalization/regionalization, centralization/decentralization, formality/informality, and state/nonstate actors and processes reveals that current global water governance is a fragmented, mobius-web arrangement. The article concludes by considering possible future trajectories of global water governance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
141637
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Unlike the developed world, which is locked into its production-, consumption-, and infrastructure-intensive lifestyles, the developing countries still have multiple options.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
046421
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Zed Books, 2001.
|
| Description |
xiii, 178p.
|
| Standard Number |
1842770799
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 045367 | 333.7/GUP 045367 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
095325
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
085326
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
With increasing recognition of a global crisis in water resources, it becomes relevant to ask whether existing legal systems can make serious contributions to the management of the earth's water resources. This article examines the evolution of national water law and its key features, the coevolution of international water law, and a new focus in the twenty-first century to develop global water law against a backdrop of growing pluralism in water governance. In the past, national and international water law has generally reflected prevailing social beliefs and state practice rather than shaped them. However, contemporary developments in national and international water law suggest that an emergent global law is increasingly shaping practice instead of merely reflecting it. This global law seeks proactively to influence future water management, rather than being limited by past decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
147936
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The 2014 entry into force of the UN Watercourses Convention of 1997 could institutionalise water law globally, thereby countering hydro-hegemonic approaches. However, since the Convention is out of date; has been ratified by only 36, mostly downstream countries; does not require amendments of pre-existing treaties; and has no Conference of the Parties to ensure that it becomes a living treaty, its actual influence in addressing the evolving problems in transboundary river basins remains minimal. Nevertheless, it is not unimaginable that with an appropriate follow-up to this Convention, it could be converted into a living and relevant framework convention in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|