Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Taking Institutions Seriously: How Regime Analysis can be Relevant to Multilevel Environmental Governance

Taking Institutions Seriously: How Regime Analysis can be Relevant to Multilevel Environmental... This article starts with the observation that in the study and practice of global environmental governance (GEG) institutions and organizations are often conflated. For regime theorists they are not the same thing and the argument is advanced that, despite its failings, the regime/institutional approach continues to have significant analytical advantages. However, the benefits of regime analysis can only be realized if it avoids becoming an arena for inter-governmental rational choice theorizing and takes institutions seriously. One way of doing this is to utilize John Searle's “general theory of institutional facts.” Searle's work provides the inspiration for a re-consideration of the bases, components, domain and explanation of global environmental regimes. It is argued that it could yield a new institutional approach which overcomes some of the problems of existing regime analyses in ways appropriate to the study of multilevel environmental governance. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Global Environmental Politics MIT Press

Taking Institutions Seriously: How Regime Analysis can be Relevant to Multilevel Environmental Governance

Global Environmental Politics , Volume 3 (2): 15 – May 1, 2003

Loading next page...
 
/lp/mit-press/taking-institutions-seriously-how-regime-analysis-can-be-relevant-to-CNzktj7OIV

References (27)

Publisher
MIT Press
Copyright
© 2003 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
ISSN
1526-3800
eISSN
1536-0091
DOI
10.1162/152638003322068191
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This article starts with the observation that in the study and practice of global environmental governance (GEG) institutions and organizations are often conflated. For regime theorists they are not the same thing and the argument is advanced that, despite its failings, the regime/institutional approach continues to have significant analytical advantages. However, the benefits of regime analysis can only be realized if it avoids becoming an arena for inter-governmental rational choice theorizing and takes institutions seriously. One way of doing this is to utilize John Searle's “general theory of institutional facts.” Searle's work provides the inspiration for a re-consideration of the bases, components, domain and explanation of global environmental regimes. It is argued that it could yield a new institutional approach which overcomes some of the problems of existing regime analyses in ways appropriate to the study of multilevel environmental governance.

Journal

Global Environmental PoliticsMIT Press

Published: May 1, 2003

There are no references for this article.