Search

In the last several years political scientists and environmental economists have started to investigate the cross-national differences in environmental policy performance and its political causes. To date, the most sustained attention in empirical studies has concentrated on differences in environmental policy between democracies and non-democracies. These studies are subject to three criticisms. First, these studies do an inadequate job of conceptualizing and measuring “environmental policy performance.” For example, almost all existing studies focus on only one or two environmental problemsâ€"sulfur dioxide pollution deforestation, access to safe drinking water, lead content on gasolineâ€"and fail to ask whether such pollutants are “representative” of environmental performance more broadly. Second, the empirical results of many of these papers raise a number of basic methodological problems that seems to impugn their empirical results. Finally, these studies tell us little about whether different types of democratic institutionsâ€"electoral laws, constitutional separation of powers, and so forthâ€"affect environmental performance differently between countries and over time. Our paper, which develops a cross-national dataset of developed and developing countries, provides advances on all three of these fronts. First, we provide a systematic evaluation of national performance measures. We critically evaluate previous work and develop a multi-dimensional measure that should provide a more accurate indication of national environmental performance. Second, we evaluate the statistical robustness of previous findings and their substantive significance. Finally, we take evaluate recent theoretical findings (e.g., Perrson and Tabelini’s work) which suggest that different democratic rules tend to produce very different environmental policy performance. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper addresses the process of issue framing surrounding climate change in the Netherlands. The primary purpose is to identify and discuss the norms that constitute the climate change meanings held by the Dutch which in turn construct their identity, interests, and subsequent actions in a recursive process. This chapter asks two broad questions. What norms have influenced the Dutch definition of, and response to, climate change? Recursively, how have the Dutch come to redefine and promote these norms domestically and internationally over time? More specifically, this study seeks to uncover the processes of norm definition, adoption, and diffusion, employed by the principal norm entrepreneurs who have framed the social construction of climate change in the Dutch context. Several norms are apparent in Dutch climate change policy. The primary norm addressed is sustainable development with several embedded norms that embody the unique Dutch definition of sustainable development vis-à-vis their understanding of climate change and environmental degradation. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The debate about international environmental governance - or international governance for sustainable development for that matter - has occupied much attention. Several new proposals have been floated, ranging from the creation of a new World Environmental Organization to a radical reform of the WTO. Yet UNEP continues to exist, with a broad mandate to develop international environmental governance. There is widespread agreement that UNEP does not meet the needs of the international society, but there is little agreement on what to do about it. UNEP itseld has recently created the Global Ministerial Environmental Forum and proposed the creation of an Intergovernmental Panel on Global Change. This paer will discuss various proposals to strengthen UNEP within the broader discussion of international environmental governance and discuss which alternatives have the greatest chance of being realized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]