IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ieaple/v24y2024i2d10.1007_s10784-024-09641-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The forest policy outputs of regional regimes: a qualitative comparative analysis on the effects of formalization, hegemony and issue-focus around the globe

Author

Listed:
  • Pradip Kumar Sarker

    (Thünen Institute of International Forestry and Forest Economics
    Georg-August University
    Technical University Dresden)

  • Lukas Giessen

    (Technical University Dresden)

  • Max Göhrs

    (Georg-August University)

  • Sohui Jeon

    (University of New South Wales)

  • Minette Nago

    (Georg-August University)

  • Fredy David Polo-Villanueva

    (Technical University Dresden)

  • Sarah Lilian Burns

    (Technical University Dresden
    Universidad Nacional de La Plata
    National Scientific and Technical Research Council of Argentina (CONICET))

Abstract

International regimes, defined as sets of norms and rules around which members’ expectations converge, are providing structures for facilitating cooperation in a given issue area. Two main lines of environmental regime scholarship prevailed thus far: one on structural design aspects of international institutions and one on their effects and effectiveness. However, questions on how such effects are achieved in detail largely remain unanswered. Against this background, this study aims to analyze the institutional design conditions under which regional regimes produce strong or weak policies. We do so by qualitatively comparing, using a fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA), nine regional regimes across the world towards their ability of producing regime forest policies as an illustrative issue area. Three structural conditions were identified as being influential on regime policy: (i) The degree of formalization (ii) The existence of hegemonic/powerful member state(s) and (iii) Scope or issue specificity bearing the identity of a regime. Our results showed that no one condition on its own was necessary to produce either strong or weak regime forest policy. However, all three conditions, through three different configurations, created a robust pathway for producing strong regime policy. In addition, the combination that showed the presence of all three conditions was related to weak regime policy. These results open several prospects for future research on the relationship between regimes´ structures and regime policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Pradip Kumar Sarker & Lukas Giessen & Max Göhrs & Sohui Jeon & Minette Nago & Fredy David Polo-Villanueva & Sarah Lilian Burns, 2024. "The forest policy outputs of regional regimes: a qualitative comparative analysis on the effects of formalization, hegemony and issue-focus around the globe," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 449-467, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:24:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10784-024-09641-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-024-09641-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-024-09641-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10784-024-09641-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mitchell, Ronald B. & Keilbach, Patricia M., 2001. "Situation Structure and Institutional Design: Reciprocity, Coercion, and Exchange," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 891-917, October.
    2. Tamar Gutner & Alexander Thompson, 2010. "The politics of IO performance: A framework," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 227-248, September.
    3. Joana Carlos Bezerra & Jan Sindt & Lukas Giessen, 2018. "Correction to: The rational design of regional regimes: contrasting Amazonian, Central African and Pan-European Forest Governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 657-657, October.
    4. Felicity Vabulas & Duncan Snidal, 2021. "Cooperation under autonomy: Building and analyzing the Informal Intergovernmental Organizations 2.0 dataset," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(4), pages 859-869, July.
    5. Young, Oran R., 1991. "Political leadership and regime formation: on the development of institutions in international society," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(3), pages 281-308, July.
    6. Joana Carlos Bezerra & Jan Sindt & Lukas Giessen, 2018. "The rational design of regional regimes: contrasting Amazonian, Central African and Pan-European Forest Governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 635-656, October.
    7. Snidal, Duncan, 1985. "The limits of hegemonic stability theory," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(4), pages 579-614, October.
    8. Oliver Westerwinter & Kenneth W. Abbott & Thomas Biersteker, 2021. "Informal governance in world politics," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-27, January.
    9. Tobias Ide & Miguel Rodriguez Lopez & Christiane Fröhlich & Jürgen Scheffran, 2021. "Pathways to water conflict during drought in the MENA region," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(3), pages 568-582, May.
    10. Lall, Ranjit, 2017. "Beyond Institutional Design: Explaining the Performance of International Organizations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(2), pages 245-280, April.
    11. Arts, Bas & de Koning, Jessica, 2017. "Community Forest Management: An Assessment and Explanation of its Performance Through QCA," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 315-325.
    12. Koremenos, Barbara & Lipson, Charles & Snidal, Duncan, 2001. "Rational Design: Looking Back to Move Forward," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 1051-1082, October.
    13. Abbott, Kenneth W. & Snidal, Duncan, 2000. "Hard and Soft Law in International Governance," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(3), pages 421-456, July.
    14. Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Rahman, Md Saifur & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Regional governance by the South Asia Cooperative Environment Program (SACEP)? Institutional design and customizable regime policy offering flexible political options," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 454-470.
    15. Koremenos, Barbara & Lipson, Charles & Snidal, Duncan, 2001. "The Rational Design of International Institutions," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 761-799, October.
    16. Carmen Rodríguez Fernández-Blanco & Sarah L. Burns & Lukas Giessen, 2019. "Mapping the fragmentation of the international forest regime complex: institutional elements, conflicts and synergies," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 187-205, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pradip Kumar Sarker & Md Saifur Rahman & Lukas Giessen, 2019. "Regional economic regimes and the environment: stronger institutional design is weakening environmental policy capacity of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 19-52, February.
    2. Andrew Lugg, 2024. "Re-contracting intergovernmental organizations: Membership change and the creation of linked intergovernmental organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 545-577, September.
    3. Bernhard Reinsberg & Oliver Westerwinter, 2023. "Institutional Overlap in Global Governance and the Design of Intergovernmental Organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 693-724, October.
    4. Michael Zürn & Alexandros Tokhi & Martin Binder, 2021. "The International Authority Database," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(4), pages 430-442, September.
    5. Arts, Bas & Brockhaus, Maria & Giessen, Lukas & McDermott, Constance L., 2024. "The performance of global forest governance: Three contrasting perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    6. Arild Underdal, 2013. "Meeting common environmental challenges: the co-evolution of policies and practices," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 15-30, March.
    7. Thomas Bernauer & Anna Kalbhenn & Vally Koubi & Gabriele Spilker, 2013. "Is there a “Depth versus Participation” dilemma in international cooperation?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 477-497, December.
    8. Heimann, Gadi & Paikowsky, Deganit & Rabinowitz, Or, 2024. "Sneaking through raising walls: The dynamics of institutionalizing security technology clubs," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    9. Coen, David & Kreienkamp, Julia & Tokhi, Alexandros & Pegram, Tom, 2022. "Making global public policy work: A survey of international organization effectiveness," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(5), pages 656-668.
    10. Inken Borzyskowski & Felicity Vabulas, 2019. "Hello, goodbye: When do states withdraw from international organizations?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 335-366, June.
    11. Matilda Petersson & Peter Stoett, 2022. "Lessons learnt in global biodiversity governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 333-352, June.
    12. Magnus Lundgren & Theresa Squatrito & Jonas Tallberg, 2018. "Stability and change in international policy-making: A punctuated equilibrium approach," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 547-572, December.
    13. Francisco Santos-Carrillo & Luis A. Fernández-Portillo & Antonio Sianes, 2020. "Rethinking the Governance of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in the COVID-19 Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-24, September.
    14. David Coen & Julia Kreienkamp & Alexandros Tokhi & Tom Pegram, 2022. "Making global public policy work: A survey of international organization effectiveness," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(5), pages 656-668, November.
    15. Azusa Uji, 2019. "Institutional diffusion for the Minamata Convention on Mercury," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 169-185, April.
    16. Christopher Marcoux, 2009. "Institutional Flexibility in the Design of Multilateral Environmental Agreements," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(2), pages 209-228, April.
    17. Adela Toscano-Valle & Antonio Sianes & Francisco Santos-Carrillo & Luis A. Fernández-Portillo, 2022. "Can the Rational Design of International Institutions Solve Cooperation Problems? Insights from a Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-22, June.
    18. Thomas Sommerer & Theresa Squatrito & Jonas Tallberg & Magnus Lundgren, 2022. "Decision-making in international organizations: institutional design and performance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 815-845, October.
    19. Jillienne Haglund, 2016. "Leslie Johns. 2015. Strengthening international courts: The hidden costs of legalization. (Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press)," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 151-154, March.
    20. Randall Stone, 2013. "Informal governance in international organizations: Introduction to the special issue," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 121-136, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:24:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10784-024-09641-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.