Liberal Environmentalism and Global Environmental Governance

2002 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Bernstein

Global environmental governance rests on a set of norms best characterized by the label “liberal environmentalism.” The 1992 Earth Summit catalyzed the process of institutionalizing these norms, which predicate environmental pro tection on the promotion and maintenance of a liberal economic order. To support this claim, this article identifies the specific norms institutionalized since Rio that undergird international environmental treaties, policies and programs. It also explains why a shift toward liberal environmentalism occurred from earlier, very different, bases of environmental governance. The implications of this shift are then outlined, with examples drawn from responses to climate change, forest protection and use, and biosafety. The article is not an endorsement of liberal environmentalism. Rather, it shows that institutions that have developed in response to global environmental problems support particular kinds of values and goals, with important implications for the constraints and opportunities to combat the world's most serious environmental problems.

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 133-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
David G. Victor

Arild Underdal has been at the center of an important community of scholars studying global environmental governance. Since the 1990s that community, along with many other scholars globally, has offered important insights into the design and management of international institutions that can lead to more effective management of environmental problems. At the same time, diplomats have made multiple attempts to create institutions to manage the dangers of climate change. This essay looks at what has been learned by both communities—scholars and practitioners—as their efforts co-evolved. It appears that despite a wealth of possible insights into making cooperation effective very few of the lessons offered by scholars had much impact during the first two decades of climate change diplomacy. Indeed, basic concepts from cooperation theory and evidence from case studies—many developed in Arild’s orbit—can explain why those two decades achieved very little real cooperation. The new Paris agreement may be changing all that and much better reflects insights from scholars about how to build effective international institutions. Success in the Paris process is far from assured and scholars can contribute a lot more with a more strategic view of when and how they have an impact.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-11
Author(s):  
Dolly Priatna ◽  
Kathryn A. Monk

With this issue, the Indonesia Journal of Applied Environmental Studies (InJAST) enters its second year, having been first published in April 2020 just as the Covid-19 pandemic was spreading globally. In the first two issues, InJAST published 13 articles, which were the results of research and ideas from academia, researchers from the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) and members of conservation NGOs. Within its first year, the InJAST website has been visited by around 1,500 visitors from 50+ countries.  Although the majority were from Indonesia, 30% were from across Europe, Asia, the Americas, and Africa, and included the USA, UK, Australia, and India.One of InJAST's missions is to provide a vehicle for academia (students and lecturers), members of environmental NGOs, and young researchers, particularly from Indonesia, who are just starting to publish their ideas, literature reviews and research findings or articles in scientific journals. InJAST was also developed to accommodate scientific papers related to broader environmental topics, but as yet, most articles have focused on plant/wildlife ecology, nature conservation, and forest restoration (61%). Others were the result of the studies on environmental education (8%) and on the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and other environmental issues (31%).As we start the third decade of the 21st century, the environmental challenges we face are ever more complex and demanding. The UN’s global action plan for the next 10 years set out in the "UN's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development", puts forward special measures to achieve a world that is fairer, more prosperous, and more respectful of the environment. The main global environmental challenges that, according to the UN, must be resolved in this decade, are climate change mitigation and adaptation, pollution problems and their effects on health, protecting oceans, the energy transitions and renewables, a sustainable food model, protecting biodiversity, sustainable urban development and mobility, hydric stress and water scarcity, extreme meteorological phenomena, and overpopulation and waste management. As academics, environmental researchers, and members of environmental NGOs, we can and should support the UN agenda by seeking the solutions to these major global environmental problems that affect all of us. We do this by carrying out relevant research and, just as importantly, publishing them in scientific journals so that we can disseminate our findings as widely as possible and suggested interventions can be trialed and then implemented on the ground.This new issue of InJAST contains several papers focusing on plant ecology, endangered species conservation, and forest restoration, all of which are closely related to one of the main global problems identified by the UN, namely protecting biodiversity. Another paper analyses determinants and typology of hydrometeorological disasters that may relate to the problem of extreme meteorological phenomena. Strong pro-environmental legislation and government regulations are very important in implementing existing environmental policies, and environmental awareness and responsibility are also important to assess whether people are willing to participate in addressing global environmental problems at the local level. This is explored in two other papers in this issue of InJAST.We reflect further that we are in a hugely different place from where we were at the start of 2020. The Covid pandemic, obviously a global tragedy, has changed many people’s behavioral patterns and our subsequent impact of nature and the environment. It seems to have in many ways heightened people's awareness of nature and environmental issues, and the relationships between unsustainable production and consumption and the nature and climate change crises. A plethora of new research is emerging on these interdisciplinary questions and we look forward to submissions tackling these questions in future editions of InJAST.Finally, as Editors-in-Chief, we have been working hard to improve and expand our peer review community, as well as the processes of online submission, reviewing and publishing.  We are delighted to be presenting Volume 2 No 1 of InJAST and we encourage our colleagues from all sectors to submit their papers for the next issue.


2010 ◽  
Vol 53 (spe) ◽  
pp. 73-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Flávia Barros-Platiau

Due to its recent economic success, Brazil is considered an emerging country, but is it an emerging power concerning global environmental governance? This article argues that although Brazil has a sui generis profile, it can only be considered an emerging power in some environmental regimes, such as global climate change. Thus, international relations theory needs more analytical instruments to assess the impact of emerging powers in global environmental governance


Climate Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-93
Author(s):  
Paul A. Barresi

The disparate fates of the polluter pays principle (ppp) as an instrument of municipal environmental governance in the environmental law of China, India, and the United States illustrate how institutions and culture can shape its use. In China, essential elements of the Chinese legal tradition and an institutionalized devolution of power from the central government to local governments essentially neutralized the Chinese variant of the ppp in one important context by mobilizing certain culturally defined behavioural norms at the local level. In India, the Supreme Court has behaved in accordance with the socially revolutionary role intended for it by the framers of India’s Constitution by recognizing a maximalist conception of the ppp as part of Indian law, although other features of India’s unique legal culture and institutions have reduced the impact of this development. In the United States, the institutionalized fragmentation of the law-making process within the Federal Government has undermined even the implicit implementation of the ppp, to which US environmental statutes do not refer. The implications of these developments for the ppp as an instrument of municipal but also global environmental governance in climate change mitigation law flow less from the nominal status of the ppp in the laws of China, India, and the United States than from the unique institutional and cultural conditions that prevail there. The result is a case study in how institutions and culture can transform the implementation of a principle of environmental governance that at first glance might seem to be a simple exercise in economic rationality into a different exercise that is not simple at all.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document