| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
169408
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
169413
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In an era defined by forum shopping, institutional proliferation, and regime complexity, why do global governance arrangements remain relatively stable? This article combines the insights of regime complexity scholarship with historical institutionalism to address this question. It argues that the establishment of international regimes creates winners and losers. States dissatisfied with these arrangements push for institutional change. Regimes nonetheless tend to develop in a path-dependent manner because institutions are resistant to change and the winners under the status quo seek to protect it. Thus, existing governance arrangements exert a centripetal pull, even when states engage in forum shopping and institutional proliferation to generate regime complexity. An examination of path-dependent institutional development in the global climate regime supports the argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
169407
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
169409
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
169411
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
A number of the studies on international intergovernmental organizations (IO s) rule out that they are autonomous or capable of self-directing their processes of change. The case of the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG) makes it possible to see precisely to what degree an IO is autonomous. Through documentary analysis and interviews with the leadership of CICIG, this article shows that the organization adjusted and reinterpreted its mandate as a result of a process of internal and autonomous decisions. This evidence contributes to the debate about the IO s as self-directed actors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
169412
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Over the past three decades, policy integration has become a key objective for guiding and harmonizing policies for sustainable development. Most recently, the 2015 Sustainable Development Goals have added new impetus to efforts of integrating competing objectives of environmental sustainability, social development, and economic growth, as well as of integrating issue-specific environmental policies on climate change and terrestrial and marine biodiversity. While multilateral environmental agreements are important international instruments for achieving sustainable development, there has been little focus so far on their contribution to policy integration. Covering the years from 2007 to 2016, this article presents an empirical analysis of sustainability policy integration (i.e., how multilateral environmental agreements integrate environmental, social, and economic issues in their decisions) and environmental policy integration (i.e., the outreach of multilateral environmental agreements to different environmental issue areas beyond their mandate). The analysis finds that multilateral environmental agreements have not moved toward further policy integration over the studied period. If policy and institutional coherence is a key global governance target in the post-2015 era, a concerted effort will be required to improve the extent of policy integration by multilateral environmental agreements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
169410
|
|
|