Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-r5d9c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-06T19:26:08.289Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Architectures of Earth System Governance

Setting the Stage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 April 2020

By
Frank Biermann  and
Rakhyun E. Kim
Edited by
Frank Biermann  and
Rakhyun E. Kim
Frank Biermann
Affiliation:
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
Rakhyun E. Kim
Affiliation:
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
Get access

Summary

Over the past decades, international institutions, such as treaties and regimes, have proliferated in global governance, and we have seen a tremendous amount of studies on their emergence, maintenance and effectiveness. Increasingly it has become evident, however, that such institutions do not operate in a void but within complex webs of larger governance settings. These large web-like structures, or ‘governance architectures’, are important to understand because they shape, enable and at times hinder the functioning of single international institutions and are crucial variables in determining the overall effectiveness of global governance. In recent years, this concept of governance architecture has effectively shifted the debate to situations in which an area is regulated by multiple institutions and norms in complex settings. This introductory chapter offers conceptual clarity about global governance architectures and their structural features as well as an overview of key insights gained through the last decade of research. We also identify key methodological approaches, challenges, and advances in this field of study.

Keywords

Governance architectureperformancefundamental normsmulti-level governancearchitectural voidsarchitectural interaction

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Architectures of Earth System Governance
Institutional Complexity and Structural Transformation
 , pp. 1 - 34
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abbott, K. W. (2012). The transnational regime complex for climate change. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 30, 571–90.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W. (2014). Strengthening the transnational regime complex for climate change. Transnational Environmental Law, 3, 57–88.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W., & Bernstein, S. (2015). The High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development: Orchestration by default and design. Global Policy, 6, 222–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahlström, H., & Cornell, S. E. (2018). Governance, polycentricity and the global nitrogen and phosphorus cycles. Environmental Science and Policy, 79, 54–65.Google Scholar
Aldy, J. E., Barrett, S., & Stavins, R. N. (2003). Thirteen plus one: A comparison of global climate policy architectures. Climate Policy, 3, 373–97.Google Scholar
Alter, K. J., & Meunier, S. (2009). The politics of international regime complexity. Perspectives on Politics, 7, 13–24.Google Scholar
Balsiger, J., & Prys, M. (2016). Regional agreements in international environmental politics. International Environmental Agreements, 16, 239–60.Google Scholar
Balsiger, J., & VanDeveer, S. D. (2012). Navigating regional environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 12, 1–17.Google Scholar
Betsill, M. M., Benney, T. M., & Gerlak, A. K. (eds.) (2019). Agency in earth system governance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Betsill, M. M., Dubash, N., Paterson, M., van Asselt, H., Vihma, A., & Winkler, H. (2015). Building productive links between the UNFCCC and the broader global climate governance landscape. Global Environmental Politics, 15 (2), 1–10.Google Scholar
Benvenisti, E., & Downs, G. W. (2007). The Empire’s new clothes: Political economy and the fragmentation of international law. Stanford Law Review, 60, 595–631.Google Scholar
Biermann, F. (2007). ‘Earth system governance’ as a crosscutting theme of global change research. Global Environmental Change, 17, 326–37.Google Scholar
Biermann, F. (2010). Beyond the intergovernmental regime: Recent trends in global carbon governance. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2, 284–8.Google Scholar
Biermann, F. (2012). Planetary boundaries and earth system governance: Exploring the links. Ecological Economics, 81, 4–9.Google Scholar
Biermann, F. (2014). Earth system governance: World politics in the Anthropocene. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biermann, F., Abbott, K. W., Andresen, S. et al. (2012). Navigating the Anthropocene: Improving earth system governance. Science, 335, 1306–7.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., Bai, X., Bondre, N. et al. (2016). Down to earth: Contextualizing the Anthropocene. Global Environmental Change, 39, 341–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biermann, F., Betsill, M. M., Gupta, J. et al. (2009a). Earth system governance: People, places and the planet. Science and implementation plan of the Earth System Governance Project. Bonn: Earth System Governance Project.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., Betsill, M. M., Gupta, J. et al. (2010). Earth system governance: A research framework. International Environmental Agreements, 10, 277–98.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., & Gupta, A. (2011). Accountability and legitimacy in earth system governance: A research framework. Ecological Economics, 70, 1856–64.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., Kanie, N., & Kim, R. E. (2017). Global governance by goal-setting: The novel approach of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26–27, 26–31.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., & Pattberg, P. (2008). Global environmental governance: Taking stock, moving forward. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 33, 277–94.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., Pattberg, P., van Asselt, H., & Zelli, F. (2009b). The fragmentation of global governance architectures: A framework for analysis. Global Environmental Politics, 9, 14–40.Google Scholar
Billé, R., Kelly, R., Biastoch, A. et al. (2013). Taking action against ocean acidification: A review of management and policy options. Environmental Management, 52, 761–79.Google Scholar
Boas, I., Biermann, F., & Kanie, N. (2016). Cross-sectoral strategies in global sustainability governance: Towards a nexus approach. International Environmental Agreements, 16, 449–64.Google Scholar
Böhmelt, T., & Spilker, G. (2016). The interaction of international institutions from a social network perspective. International Environmental Agreements, 16, 67–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, E., & Folke, C. (eds.) (2012). Adapting institutions: Governance, complexity and social-ecological resilience. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Boyle, A. (2007). Relationship between international environmental law and other branches of international law. In Bodansky, D, Brunnée, J, & Hey, E (eds.), The Oxford handbook of international environmental law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Breitmeier, H., Underdal, A., & Young, O. R. (2011). The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Comparing and contrasting findings from quantitative research. International Studies Review, 13, 579–605.Google Scholar
Bridgewater, P., Kim, R. E., & Bosselmann, K. (2014). Ecological integrity: A relevant concept for international environmental law in the Anthropocene? Yearbook of International Environmental Law, 25, 61–78.Google Scholar
Brown Weiss, E. (1993). International environmental law: Contemporary issues and the emergence of a new world order. Georgetown Law Journal, 81, 675–710.Google Scholar
Brown Weiss, E., & Jacobson, H. K. (eds.) (1998). Engaging countries: Strengthening compliance with international environmental accords. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bulkeley, H., Andonova, L., Bäckstrand, K. et al. (2012). Governing climate change transnationally: Assessing the evidence from a database of sixty initiatives. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 30, 591–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, L. M., Gray, N. J., Fairbanks, L. et al. (2016). Global oceans governance: New and emerging issues. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41, 517–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlarne, C. (2008). Good climate governance: Only a fragmented system of international law away? Law and Policy, 30, 450–80.Google Scholar
Cash, D. W., Adger, W. N., Berkes, F. et al. (2006). Scale and cross-scale dynamics: Governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecology and Society, 11.Google Scholar
Chambers, W. B. (2008). Interlinkages and the effectiveness of multilateral environmental agreements. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
Chan, S., van Asselt, H., Hale, T. et al. (2015). Reinvigorating international climate policy: A comprehensive framework for effective nonstate action. Global Policy, 6, 466–73.Google Scholar
Compagnon, D., Chan, S., & Mert, A. (2012). The changing role of the state. In Biermann, F, & Pattberg, P (eds.), Global environmental governance reconsidered (pp. 237–63). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Conca, K. (2000). The WTO and the undermining of global environmental governance. Review of International Political Economy, 7, 484–94.Google Scholar
Conca, K. (2006). Governing water: Contentious transnational politics and global institution building. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Costanza, R., McGlade, J., Lovins, H., & Kubiszewski, I. (2015). An overarching goal for the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Solutions, 5, 13–16.Google Scholar
Craik, N., Jefferies, C. S. G., Seck, S. L., & Stephens, T. (eds.) (2018). Global environmental change and innovation in international law. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dauvergne, P. (2018). Why is the global governance of plastic failing the oceans? Global Environmental Change, 51, 22–31.Google Scholar
Dimitrov, R. S. (2005). Hostage to norms: States, institutions and global forest politics. Global Environmental Politics, 5 (4), 1–24.Google Scholar
Dimitrov, R. S., Sprinz, D. F., & DiGiusto, G. M. (2007). International nonregimes: A research agenda. International Studies Review, 9, 230–58.Google Scholar
Dorsch, M. J., & Flachsland, C. (2017). A polycentric approach to global climate governance. Global Environmental Politics, 17, 45–64.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. S. (2014). Institutions for the Anthropocene: Governance in a changing earth system. British Journal of Political Science, 46, 937–56.Google Scholar
Dür, A., Baccini, L., & Elsig, M. (2014). The design of international trade agreements: Introducing a new dataset. Review of International Organizations, 9, 353–75.Google Scholar
Ebbesson, J. (2014). Planetary boundaries and the matching of international treaty regimes. Scandinavian Studies in Law, 59, 259–84.Google Scholar
Eichner, T., & Pethig, R. (2011). Carbon leakage, the green paradox, and perfect future markets. International Economic Review, 52, 767–805.Google Scholar
Ekstrom, J. A., & Crona, B. I. (2017). Institutional misfit and environmental change: A systems approach to address ocean acidification. Science of the Total Environment, 576, 599–608.Google Scholar
Ekstrom, J. A., & Young, O. R. (2009). Evaluating functional fit between a set of institutions and an ecosystem. Ecology and Society, 14.Google Scholar
Fernández, E. F., Malwé, C. (2018). The emergence of the ‘planetary boundaries’ concept in international environmental law: A proposal for a framework convention. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 28, 48–56Google Scholar
Fidelman, P., & Ekstrom, J. A. (2012). Mapping seascapes of international environmental arrangements in the coral triangle. Marine Policy, 36, 993–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folke, C., Pritchard, Jr., L., Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Svedin, U. (2007). The problem of fit between ecosystems and institutions: Ten years later. Ecology and Society, 12.Google Scholar
Fuhr, H., Hickmann, T., & Kern, K. (2018). The role of cities in multi-level climate governance: Local climate policies and the 1.5 oC target. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 30, 1–6.Google Scholar
Galaz, V. (2011). Double complexity: Information technology and reconfigurations in adaptive governance. In Boyd, E, & Folke, C (eds.), Adapting institutions: Governance, complexity and social-ecological resilience (pp. 193–215). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Galaz, V., Crona, B., Österblom, H., Olsson, P., & Folke, C. (2012). Polycentric systems and interacting planetary boundaries: Emerging governance of climate change–ocean acidification–marine biodiversity. Ecological Economics, 81, 21–32.Google Scholar
Galaz, V., Olsson, P., Hahn, T., Folke, C., & Svedin, U. (2008). The problem of fit between governance systems and environmental regimes. In Young, O. R., King, L. A., & Schroeder, H (eds.), Institutions and environmental change: Principal findings, applications and research frontiers (pp. 147–86). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gehring, T., & Faude, B. (2014). A theory of emerging order within institutional complexes: How competition among regulatory international institutions leads to institutional adaptation and division of labor. Review of International Organizations, 9, 471–98.Google Scholar
Gehring, T., & Oberthür, S. (2006). Comparative empirical analysis and ideal types of institutional interaction. In Oberthür, S, & Gehring, T (eds.), Institutional interaction in global environmental governance: Synergy and conflict among international and EU policies (pp. 307–71). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gehring, T., & Oberthür, S. (2009). The causal mechanisms of interaction between international institutions. European Journal of International Relations, 15, 125–56.Google Scholar
Gibson, C., Ostrom, E., & Ahn, T.-K. (2000). The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: A survey. Ecological Economics, 32, 217–39.Google Scholar
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1–22.Google Scholar
Green, J. F. (2010). Private authority on the rise: A century of delegation in multilateral environmental agreements. In Tallberg, J, & Jönsson, C (eds.), Transnational actors in global governance (pp. 155–76). Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Green, J. F. (2013). Order out of chaos: Public and private rules for managing carbon. Global Environmental Politics, 13, 1–25.Google Scholar
Greenhill, B., & Lupu, Y. (2017). Clubs of clubs: Fragmentation in the network of intergovernmental organizations. International Studies Quarterly, 61, 181–95.Google Scholar
Griggs, D., Stafford-Smith, M., Gaffney, O. et al. (2013). Sustainable development goals for people and planet. Nature, 495, 305–7.Google Scholar
Guerra, F. (2018). Mapping offshore renewable energy governance. Marine Policy, 89, 21–33.Google Scholar
Gupta, A., & Möller, I. (2018). De facto governance: How authoritative assessments construct climate engineering as an object of governance. Environmental Politics, 28, 480–501.Google Scholar
Gupta, A., Pistorius, T., & Vijge, M. J. (2016). Managing fragmentation in global environmental governance: The REDD+ partnership as bridge organization. International Environmental Agreements, 16, 355–74.Google Scholar
Gupta, J., & Lebel, L. (2010). Access and allocation in earth system governance: Water and climate change compared. International Environmental Agreements, 10, 377–95.Google Scholar
Gupta, A., & Mason, M. (eds.) (2014). Transparency in global environmental governance: Critical perspectives. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gupta, J., Pahl-Wostl, C., & Zondervan, R. (2013). ‘Glocal’ water governance: A multi-level challenge in the Anthropocene. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5, 573–580.Google Scholar
Hackmann, B. (2012). Analysis of the governance architecture to regulate GHG emissions from international shipping. International Environmental Agreements, 12, 85–103.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, E. M., Kahler, M., & Montgomery, A. H. (2009). Network analysis for international relations. International Organization, 63, 559–92.Google Scholar
Hare, W., Stockwell, C., Flachsland, C., & Oberthür, S. (2010). The architecture of the global climate regime: A top-down perspective. Climate Policy, 10, 600–14.Google Scholar
Hickmann, T. (2017). The reconfiguration of authority in global climate governance. International Studies Review, 19, 430–51.Google Scholar
Hickmann, T., Widerberg, O., Lederer, M., & Pattberg, P. (2019). The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat as an orchestrator in global climate policymaking. International Review of Administrative Sciences, in press.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, M. J. (2011). Climate governance at the crossroads: Experimenting with a global response after Kyoto. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hollway, J., & Koskinen, J. (2016). Multilevel embeddedness: The case of the global fisheries governance complex. Social Networks, 44, 281–94.Google Scholar
Holzscheiter, A. (2017). Coping with institutional fragmentation? Competition and convergence between boundary organizations in the global response to polio. Review of Policy Research, 34, 767–89.Google Scholar
Holzscheiter, A., Bahr, T., & Pantzerhielm, L. (2016). Emerging governance architectures in global health: Do metagovernance norms explain inter-organisational convergence? Politics and Governance, 4, 5–19.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2014). Post-treaty politics: Secretariat influence in global environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2018). Why govern climate engineering? A preliminary framework for demand-based governance. International Studies Review, 20, 272–82.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S., & Morgera, E. (2013). Environmental provisions in American and EU free trade agreements: A preliminary comparison and research agenda. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 22, 324–39.Google Scholar
Johnson, T., & Urpelainen, J. (2012). A strategic theory of regime integration and separation. International Organization, 66, 645–77.Google Scholar
Jordan, A., Huitema, D., Schoenefeld, J., van Asselt, H., & Forster, J. (2018a). Governing climate change polycentrically: Setting the scene. In Jordan, A, Huitema, D, van Asselt, H, & Forster, J (eds.), Governing climate change: Polycentricity in action? (pp. 3–26). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jordan, A., Huitema, D., van Asselt, H., & Forster, J. (eds.) (2018b). Governing climate change: Polycentricity in action? Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jordan, A., & Lenschow, A. (2010). Environmental policy integration: A state of the art review. Environmental Policy and Governance, 20, 147–58.Google Scholar
Kanie, N. (2007). Governance with multilateral environmental agreements: A healthy or ill-equipped fragmentation? In Swart, L, & Perry, E (eds.), Global environmental governance: Perspectives on the current debate (pp. 67–86). New York: Center for UN Reform Education.Google Scholar
Kanie, N., Andresen, S., & Haas, P. M. (eds.) (2013). Improving global environmental governance: Best practices for architecture and agency. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kanie, N., & Biermann, F. (eds.) (2017). Governing through goals: Sustainable Development Goals as governance innovation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kanie, N., Nishimoto, H., Hijioka, Y., & Kameyama, Y. (2010). Allocation and architecture in climate governance beyond Kyoto: lessons from interdisciplinary research on target setting. International Environmental Agreements, 10, 299–315.Google Scholar
Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. I., & McGee, J. (2013). Legitimacy in an era of fragmentation: The case of global climate governance. Global Environmental Politics, 13, 56–78.Google Scholar
Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S., Kok, M. T. J., Visseren-Hamakers, I. J., & Termeer, C. J. A. M. (2017). Mainstreaming biodiversity in economic sectors: An analytical framework. Biological Conservation, 210, 145–56.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O., & Victor, D. G. (2011). The regime complex for climate change. Perspectives on Politics, 9, 7–23.Google Scholar
Kim, J. A. (2004). Regime interplay: The case of biodiversity and climate change. Global Environmental Change, 14, 315–24.Google Scholar
Kim, R. E. (2012). Is a new multilateral environmental agreement on ocean acidification necessary? Review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law, 21, 243–58.Google Scholar
Kim, R. E. (2013). The emergent network structure of the ultilateral environmental agreement system. Global Environmental Change, 23, 980–91.Google Scholar
Kim, R. E. (2016). The nexus between international law and the Sustainable Development Goals. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 25, 15–26.Google Scholar
Kim, R. E. (2017). Should deep seabed mining be allowed? Marine Policy, 82, 134–7.Google Scholar
Kim, R. E. (2019). Is global governance fragmented, polycentric, or complex: The state of the art of the network approach. International Studies Review.Google Scholar
Kim, R. E., & Bosselmann, K. (2013). International environmental law in the Anthropocene: Towards a purposive system of multilateral environmental agreements. Transnational Environmental Law, 2, 285–309.Google Scholar
Kim, R. E., & Bosselmann, K. (2015). Operationalizing sustainable development: Ecological integrity as a Grundnorm of international law. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 24, 194–208.Google Scholar
Kim, R. E., & Mackey, B. (2014). International environmental law as a complex adaptive system. International Environmental Agreements, 14, 5–24.Google Scholar
Kim, R. E., & van Asselt, H. (2016). Global governance: Problem shifting in the Anthropocene and the limits of international law. In Morgera, E, & Kulovesi, K (eds.), Research handbook on international law and natural resources (pp. 473–95). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Kolleck, N., Well, M., Sperzel, S., & Jörgens, H. (2017). The power of social networks: How the UNFCCC Secretariat creates momentum for climate education. Global Environmental Politics, 17, 106–26.Google Scholar
Kotzé, L. J. (2016). Global environmental constitutionalism in the Anthropocene. Portland: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Kotzé, L. J., & French, D. (2018). A critique of the global pact for the environment: A stillborn initiative or the foundation for Lex Anthropocenae? International Environmental Agreements, 18, 811–38.Google Scholar
Kotzé, L. J, & Kim, R. E. (2019). Earth system law: The juridical dimensions of earth system governance. Earth System Governance, 1.Google Scholar
Lazer, D. (2011). Networks in political science: Back to the future. Political Science and Politics, 44, 61–8.Google Scholar
Lazer, D., Pentland, A., Adamic, L. et al. (2009). Computational social science. Science, 323, 721–3.Google Scholar
Le Blanc, D. (2015). Towards integration at last? The Sustainable Development Goals as a network of targets. Sustainable Development, 23, 176–87.Google Scholar
Lima, M. G. B., & Gupta, J. (2013). The policy context of biofuels: A case of non-governance at the global level? Global Environmental Politics, 13, 46–64.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. B. (2003). International environmental agreements: A survey of their features, formation, and effects. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 28, 429–61.Google Scholar
Morin, J. F. (2018). Concentration despite competition: The organizational ecology of technical assistance providers. Review of International Organizations, 70, 1–33.Google Scholar
Morin, J. F., & Bialais, C. (2018). Strengthening multilateral environmental governance through bilateral trade deals. Policy Brief No. 123. Waterloo, ON Canada: Centre for International Governance Innovation.Google Scholar
Morin, J. F., Dür, A., & Lechner, L. (2018). Mapping the trade and environment nexus: Insights from a new data set. Global Environmental Politics, 18, 122–39.Google Scholar
Morin, J. F., & Jinnah, S. (2018). The untapped potential of preferential trade agreements for climate governance. Environmental Politics, 27, 541–65.Google Scholar
Morin, J. F., Louafi, S., Orsini, A., & Oubenal, M. (2017). Boundary organizations in regime complexes: A social network profile of IPBES. Journal of International Relations and Development, 20, 543–77.Google Scholar
Morin, J. F., Pauwelyn, J., & Hollway, J. (2017). The trade regime as a complex adaptive system: Exploration and exploitation of environmental norms in trade agreements. Journal of International Economic Law, 20 (2), 365–90.Google Scholar
Morseletto, P. (2019). Confronting the nitrogen challenge: Options for governance and target setting. Global Environmental Change, 54, 40–9.Google Scholar
Murdie, A. (2013). The ties that bind: A network analysis of human rights international nongovernmental organizations. British Journal of Political Science, 44, 1–27.Google Scholar
Murphy, H., & Kellow, A. (2013). Forum shopping in global governance: Understanding states, business and NGOs in multiple arenas. Global Policy, 4, 139–49.Google Scholar
Nicholson, S., Jinnah, S., & Gillespie, A. (2017). Solar radiation management: A proposal for immediate polycentric governance. Climate Policy, 18, 322–34.Google Scholar
Nielsen, T. D., Holmberg, K., & Stripple, J. (2019). Need a bag? A review of public policies on plastic carrier bags – Where, how and to what effect? Waste Management, 87, 428–40.Google Scholar
Nilsson, M., Griggs, D., & Visbeck, M. (2016). Map the interactions between Sustainable Development Goals. Nature, 534, 320–2.Google Scholar
Nunan, F., Campbell, A., & Foster, E. (2012). Environmental mainstreaming: The organisational challenges of policy integration. Public Administration and Development, 32, 262–77.Google Scholar
Oberthür, S., & Gehring, T. (eds.) (2006). Institutional interaction in global environmental governance: Synergy and conflict among international and EU policies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Oberthür, S., & Pożarowska, J. (2013). Managing institutional complexity and fragmentation: The Nagoya Protocol and the global governance of genetic resources. Global Environmental Politics, 13, 100–18.Google Scholar
Oberthür, S., & Stokke, O. S. (eds.) (2011). Managing institutional complexity: Regime interplay and global environmental change. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
O’Neill, K., Weinthal, E., Marion Suiseeya, K. R., Bernstein, S., Cohn, A., Stone, M. W., & Cashore, B. (2013). Methods and global environmental governance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 38, 441–71.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2010a). Nested externalities and polycentric institutions: Must we wait for global solutions to climate change before taking actions at other scales? Economic Theory, 49, 353–69.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2010b). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 20, 550–7.Google Scholar
Park, S., & Kramarz, T. (2019). Global environmental governance and the accountability trap. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pasztor, J., Scharf, C., & Schmidt, K. U. (2017). How to govern geoengineering? Science, 357, 231.Google Scholar
Pattberg, P. (2010). Public–private partnerships in global climate governance. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1, 279–87.Google Scholar
Pattberg, P., Chan, S., Sanderink, L., & Widerberg, O. (2018). Linkages: Understanding their role in polycentric governance. In Jordan, A, Huitema, D, van Asselt, H, & Forster, J (eds.), Governing climate change: Polycentricity in action? (pp. 169–87). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pattberg, P., & Zelli, F. (eds.) (2016). Environmental politics and governance in the Anthropocene: Institutions and legitimacy in a complex world. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. (2007). Conflict of norms in public international law: How WTO law relates to other rules of international law. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. (2014). At the edge of chaos? Foreign investment law as a complex adaptive system, how it emerged and how it can be reformed. ICSID Review, 29, 372–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peel, J., Godden, L., & Keenan, R. J. (2012). Climate change law in an era of multi-level governance. Transnational Environmental Law, 1, 245–80.Google Scholar
Persson, Å., Runhaar, H., Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S., Mullally, G., Russel, D., & Widmer, A. (2018). Environmental policy integration: Taking stock of policy practice in different contexts. Environmental Science and Policy, 85, 113–15.Google Scholar
Pickering, J. (2018). Ecological reflexivity: Characterising an elusive virtue for governance in the Anthropocene. Environmental Politics, in press.Google Scholar
Pittock, J. (2010). Better management of hydropower in an era of climate change. Water Alternatives, 3, 444–52.Google Scholar
Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut economics: Seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist. White River Junction: Chelsea Green Publishing.Google Scholar
Reid, W. V., Chen, D., Goldfarb, L. et al. (2010). Earth system science for global sustainability: Grand challenges. Science, 12, 916–17.Google Scholar
Reus-Smit, C. (2013). Constructivism. In Burchill, S, & Linklater, A (eds.), Theories of international relations (pp. 217–40). New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Robinson, N. A. (2014). Fundamental principles of law for the Anthropocene? Environmental Policy and Law, 44, 13–27.Google Scholar
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K. et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472–5.Google Scholar
Runhaar, H., Driessen, P., & Uittenbroek, C. (2014). Towards a systematic framework for the analysis of environmental policy integration. Environmental Policy and Governance, 24, 233–46.Google Scholar
Runhaar, H., Wilk, B., Persson, Å., Uittenbroek, C., & Wamsler, C. (2018). Mainstreaming climate adaptation: Taking stock about ‘What Works’ from empirical research worldwide. Regional Environmental Change, 18, 1–10.Google Scholar
Sand, P. H. (2017). The discourse on ‘protection of the atmosphere’ in the International Law Commission. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 26, 201–9.Google Scholar
Scharpf, F. W. (1999). Governing in Europe: Effective and democratic? Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schellnhuber, H. J., Crutzen, P. J., Clark, W. C., Claussen, M., & Held, H. (2004). Earth system analysis for sustainability. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Scobie, M. (2019). Global environmental governance and small states: Architectures and agency in the Caribbean. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Scott, D., Hitchner, S., Maclin, E. M., & Dammert, B, J. L. (2014). Fuel for the fire: Biofuels and the problem of translation at the tenth conference of the parties to the convention on biological diversity. Global Environmental Politics, 14, 84–101.Google Scholar
Scott, K. N. (2013). International law in the Anthropocene: Responding to the geoengineering challenge. Michigan Journal of International Law, 34, 309–58.Google Scholar
Shelton, D. (2006). Normative hierarchy in international law. American Journal of International Law, 100, 291–323.Google Scholar
Sovacool, B. K., & Brown, M. A. (2009). Scaling the policy response to climate change. Policy and Society, 27, 317–28.Google Scholar
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J. et al. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347, 1259855.Google Scholar
Steffen, W., Rockström, J., Richardson, K. et al. (2018). Trajectories of the earth system in the Anthropocene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2, 201810141–8.Google Scholar
Steffen, W., Sanderson, A., Tyson, P. et al. (2004). Global change and the earth system: A planet under pressure. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Steffen, W., & Stafford-Smith, M. (2013). Planetary boundaries, equity and global sustainability: Why wealthy countries could benefit from more equity. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5, 1–6.Google Scholar
Stevens, C. (2018). Scales of integration for sustainable development governance. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 25, 1–8.Google Scholar
Truelove, H. B., Carrico, A. R., Weber, E. U., Raimi, K. T., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2014). Positive and negative spillover of pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and theoretical framework. Global Environmental Change, 29, 127–38.Google Scholar
Underdal, A., & Kim, R. E. (2017). The Sustainable Development Goals and multilateral agreements. In Kanie, N, & Biermann, F (eds.), Governing through goals: Sustainable Development Goals as governance innovation (pp. 241–9). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
UNEP (2007). Global environment outlook 4: Environment for development. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme.Google Scholar
UNEP (2012). Global environment outlook 5: Environment for the future we want. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme.Google Scholar
UNEP (2019). Global environment outlook 6: Healthy planet, healthy people. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme.Google Scholar
van Asselt, H. (2014). The fragmentation of global climate governance: Consequences and management of regime interactions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Van de Graaf, T. (2013). Fragmentation in global energy governance: Explaining the creation of IRENA. Global Environmental Politics, 13, 14–33.Google Scholar
Van den Bergh, J., Folke, C., Polasky, S., Scheffer, M., & Steffen, W. (2015). What if solar energy becomes really cheap? A thought experiment on environmental problem shifting. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 170–9.Google Scholar
Van Doren, D., Driessen, P. P., Runhaar, H., & Giezen, M. (2018). Scaling-up low-carbon urban initiatives: Towards a better understanding. Urban Studies, 55, 175–94.Google Scholar
Van Doren, D., Giezen, M., Driessen, P. P. J., & Runhaar, H. (2016). Scaling-up energy conservation initiatives: Barriers and local strategies. Sustainable Cities and Society, 26, 227–39.Google Scholar
Vidas, D. (2011). The Anthropocene and the international law of the sea. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 369, 909–25.Google Scholar
Vidas, D., Fauchald, O. K., Jensen, Ø., & Tvedt, M. W. (2015). International law for the Anthropocene? Shifting perspectives in regulation of the oceans, environment and genetic resources. Anthropocene, 9, 1–13.Google Scholar
Vijge, M. J. (2013). The promise of new institutionalism: Explaining the absence of a world or united nations environment organisation. International Environmental Agreements, 13, 153–76.Google Scholar
Voigt, C. (2009). Sustainable development as a principle of international law: Resolving conflicts between climate measures and WTO law. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
Vordermayer, M. (2014). ‘Gardening the great transformation’: The Anthropocene concept’s impact on international environmental law doctrine. Yearbook of International Environmental Law, 25 (1), 79–112.Google Scholar
Watts, D. J. (2017). Should social science be more solution-oriented? Nature Human Behaviour, 1, 5–15.Google Scholar
Widerberg, O. (2016). Mapping institutional complexity in the Anthropocene: A network approach. In Pattberg, P, & Zelli, F (eds.), Environmental politics and governance in the Anthropocene: Institutions and legitimacy in a complex world (pp. 81–102). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wilson, M., Davis, D. R., & Murdie, A. (2016). The view from the bottom: Networks of conflict resolution organizations and international peace. Journal of Peace Research, 53, 442–58.Google Scholar
Yang, Y., Bae, J., Kim, J., & Suh, S. (2012). Replacing gasoline with corn ethanol results in significant environmental problem-shifting. Environmental Science and Technology, 46, 3671–8.Google Scholar
Young, M. A. (2012). Regime interaction in international law: Facing fragmentation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (1996). Institutional linkages in international society: Polar perspectives. Global Governance, 2, 1–23.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (ed.) (1999). The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Causal connections and behavioural mechanisms. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2002). The institutional dimensions of environmental change: Fit, interplay, and scale. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2008). The architecture of global environmental governance: Bringing science to bear on policy. Global Environmental Politics, 8, 14–32.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2011a). Effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Existing knowledge, cutting-edge themes, and research strategies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108, 19853–60.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2011b). If an arctic ocean treaty is not the solution, what is the alternative? Polar Record, 47, 327–34.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2012). Arctic tipping points: Governance in turbulent times. AMBIO, 41, 75–84.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2013). Sugaring off: Enduring insights from long-term research on environmental governance. International Environmental Agreements, 13, 87–105.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2017). Governing complex systems: Social capital for the Anthropocene. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2018). Research strategies to assess the effectiveness of international environmental regimes. Nature Sustainability, 1, 461–5.Google Scholar
Young, O. R., Underdal, A., Kanie, N., & Kim, R. E. (2017). Goal setting in the Anthropocene: The ultimate challenge of Planetary Stewardship. In Kanie, N, & Biermann, F (eds.), Governing through goals: Sustainable Development Goals as governance innovation (pp. 53–74). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2019). Constructing diagnostic trees: A stepwise approach to institutional design. Earth System Governance, 1.Google Scholar
Zelli, F. (2011). The fragmentation of the global climate governance architecture. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2, 255–70.Google Scholar
Zelli, F., & van Asselt, H. (2013). The institutional fragmentation of global environmental governance: Causes, consequences, and responses. Global Environmental Politics, 13, 1–13.Google Scholar
Ziervogel, G., & Ericksen, P. J. (2010). Adapting to climate change to sustain food security. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1, 525–40.Google Scholar
Zürn, M. (2012). Global governance as multi-level governance. In Levi-Faur, D (ed.), The Oxford handbook of governance (pp. 730–44). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zürn, M., & Faude, B. (2013). On fragmentation, differentiation, and coordination. Global Environmental Politics, 13, 119–30.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×