File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: The design of environmental regimes: Social construction, contextuality, and improvisation

TitleThe design of environmental regimes: Social construction, contextuality, and improvisation
Authors
KeywordsEnvironmental regimes
Transboundary agreements
Issue Date2006
PublisherSpringer Verlag Dordrecht. The Journal's web site is located at http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=journal&issn=1567-9764
Citation
International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law And Economics, 2006, v. 6 n. 2, p. 187-207 How to Cite?
AbstractWhile much of the literature on environmental regimes has focused on effectiveness, this article takes a new look at a lesser-studied topic, the evolution of regime design. Understanding how regimes differ in design, and how various factors and processes shape such design, is important if we are to more carefully craft these regimes. We should also pay close attention to the formative role of social construction and context. Focusing on transboundary marine programs, we see that their designs basically follow a common template, namely that of the UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme) Regional Seas Programme. However, the action of context (i.e., local actors and political processes) can modify these designs away from the common template. The extent to which these programs begin to differentiate from each other may be an important sign of program maturity and responsiveness to context. In this article, we examine a set of transboundary marine programs to uncover what the important dimensions of differentiation are. Then, we focus on one specific program, the SSME (Sulu-Sulawesi Marine Ecoregion) and closely trace how its specific form and organization came about. The analysis is informed by a model of institutional coherence that portrays institutions as the product of multiple generative mechanisms (e.g., social construction, ecological fit, and others). While it is premature to make definite judgments about the relative merits of competing regime designs, the work provides us with a new mode of analysis that can provide helpful directions for institutional assessment.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/167140
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.289
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.706
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLejano, RPen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2012-09-28T04:04:35Z-
dc.date.available2012-09-28T04:04:35Z-
dc.date.issued2006en_HK
dc.identifier.citationInternational Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law And Economics, 2006, v. 6 n. 2, p. 187-207en_HK
dc.identifier.issn1567-9764en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/167140-
dc.description.abstractWhile much of the literature on environmental regimes has focused on effectiveness, this article takes a new look at a lesser-studied topic, the evolution of regime design. Understanding how regimes differ in design, and how various factors and processes shape such design, is important if we are to more carefully craft these regimes. We should also pay close attention to the formative role of social construction and context. Focusing on transboundary marine programs, we see that their designs basically follow a common template, namely that of the UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme) Regional Seas Programme. However, the action of context (i.e., local actors and political processes) can modify these designs away from the common template. The extent to which these programs begin to differentiate from each other may be an important sign of program maturity and responsiveness to context. In this article, we examine a set of transboundary marine programs to uncover what the important dimensions of differentiation are. Then, we focus on one specific program, the SSME (Sulu-Sulawesi Marine Ecoregion) and closely trace how its specific form and organization came about. The analysis is informed by a model of institutional coherence that portrays institutions as the product of multiple generative mechanisms (e.g., social construction, ecological fit, and others). While it is premature to make definite judgments about the relative merits of competing regime designs, the work provides us with a new mode of analysis that can provide helpful directions for institutional assessment.en_HK
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Verlag Dordrecht. The Journal's web site is located at http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=journal&issn=1567-9764en_HK
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economicsen_HK
dc.subjectEnvironmental regimesen_HK
dc.subjectTransboundary agreementsen_HK
dc.titleThe design of environmental regimes: Social construction, contextuality, and improvisationen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.emailLejano, RP: lejano@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLejano, RP=rp01666en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10784-006-9005-3en_HK
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-33746217507en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-33746217507&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume6en_HK
dc.identifier.issue2en_HK
dc.identifier.spage187en_HK
dc.identifier.epage207en_HK
dc.publisher.placeNetherlandsen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLejano, RP=6602298801en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats