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-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:33:03.402Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part I - The Building Blocks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 April 2020

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

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Architectures of Earth System Governance
Institutional Complexity and Structural Transformation
 , pp. 35 - 116
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.)

References

References

Aakvik, A., & Sigve, T. (2011). Do collective actions clear common air? The effect of international environmental protocols on sulphur emissions. European Journal of Political Economy, 27 (2), 343–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, K. W., & Bernstein, S. (2015). The High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development: Orchestration by default and design. Global Policy, 6 (3), 222–33.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2013). Taking responsive regulation transnational: Strategies for international organizations. Regulation and Governance, 7 (1), 95–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allan, J. I., & Hadden, J. (2017). Exploring the framing power of NGOs in global climate politics. Environmental Politics, 26 (4), 600–20.Google Scholar
Andonova, L. B., & Mitchell, R. B. (2010). The rescaling of global environmental politics. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 35 (1), 255–82.Google Scholar
Andresen, S. (2013). International regime effectiveness. In Falkner, R (ed.), The handbook of global climate and environment policy (pp. 304–19). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Andresen, S., & Hey, E. (2005). The effectiveness and legitimacy of international environmental institutions. International Environmental Agreements, 5 (3), 211–26.Google Scholar
Andresen, S., & Rosendal, K. (2009). The role of the United Nations Environment Programme in the coordination of multilateral environmental agreements. In Biermann, F, Siebenhüner, B, & Schreyögg, A (eds.), International organizations in global environmental governance (pp. 133–50). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Auld, G. (2014). Constructing private governance: The rise and evolution of forest, coffee and fisheries certification. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Baccini, L., & Urpelainen, J. (2012). Strategic side payments: Preferential trading agreements, economic reform, and foreign aid. Journal of Politics, 74 (4), 932–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baccini, L., & Urpelainen, J. (2014). Before ratification: Understanding the timing of international treaty effects on domestic policies. International Studies Quarterly, 58 (1), 29–43.Google Scholar
Barrett, S. (2003). Environment and statecraft: The strategy of environmental treaty-making. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barrett, S. (2007). Why cooperate? The incentives to supply global public goods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Berardo, R., & Gerlak, A. (2012). Conflict and cooperation along international rivers. Global Environmental Politics, 12 (1), 101–20.Google Scholar
Bernauer, T. (2002). Explaining success and failure in international river management. Aquatic Sciences, 64 (1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernauer, T., and Böhmelt, T. (2013). National climate policies in international comparison: The climate change cooperation index. Environmental Science and Policy, 25, 196–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernauer, T., and Böhmelt, T. (2014). Basins at risk: Predicting international river basin conflict and cooperation. Global Environmental Politics, 14 (4), 116–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernauer, T., Kalbhenn, A., Koubi, V., & Spilker, G. (2013). Is there a ‘depth versus participation’ dilemma in international cooperation? Review of International Organizations, 8 (4), 477–97.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., & Corell, E. (2008). NGO diplomacy: The influence of nongovernmental organizations in international environmental negotiations. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Betzold, C., Bernauer, T., & Koubi, V. (2016). Press briefings in international climate change negotiations. Environmental Communication, 10 (5), 575–92.Google Scholar
Beunen, R., & Patterson, J. J. (2016). Analysing institutional change in environmental governance: Exploring the concept of ‘institutional work’. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 62 (1), 12–29.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., & Pattberg, P. (eds.) (2012). Global environmental governance reconsidered. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodansky, D. (2010). The art and craft of international environmental law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bodansky, D. (2015). Legally-binding vs. non-legally-binding instruments. In Barrett, S, Carraro, C, & de Melo, J (eds.), Towards a workable and effective climate regime (pp. 155–65). London: VoxEU.Google Scholar
Bodin, Ö., & Österblom, H. (2013). International fisheries regime effectiveness: Activities and resources of key actors in the southern ocean. Global Environmental Change, 23 (5), 948–56.Google Scholar
Böhmelt, T., & Betzold, C. (2013). The impact of environmental interest groups in international negotiations: Do ENGOs induce stronger environmental commitments? International Environmental Agreements, 13 (2), 127–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Böhmelt, T., & Pilster, U. H. (2010). International environmental regimes: Legalisation, flexibility and effectiveness. Australian Journal of Political Science, 45 (2), 245–60.Google Scholar
Breitmeier, H. (2008). The legitimacy of international regimes. Aldershot: Ashgate.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 (4), 579–605.Google Scholar
Breitmeier, H., Young, O. R., & Zürn, M. (2006). Analyzing international environmental regimes: From case study to database. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brochmann, M., & Hensel, P. R. (2011). The effectiveness of negotiations over international river claims. International Studies Quarterly, 55 (3), 859–82.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
Brun, A. (2016). Conference diplomacy: The making of the Paris Agreement. Politics and Governance, 4 (3), 115–23.Google Scholar
Brunnée, J., Bodansky, D., & Hey, E. (eds.) (2007). Oxford handbook of international environmental law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brunnée, J., & Toope, S. J. (2010). Legitimacy and legality in international law: An interactional account. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, A. (2015). The 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution: Assessing its effectiveness as a multilateral environmental regime after 35 years. Transnational Environmental Law, 4 (1), 37–67.Google Scholar
Carpenter, R. C. (2007). Setting the advocacy agenda: Theorizing issue emergence and nonemergence in transnational advocacy networks. International Studies Quarterly, 51 (1), 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cashore, B., Auld, G., Bernstein, S., & McDermott, C. (2007). Can non‐state governance ‘ratchet up’ global environmental standards? Lessons from the forest sector. Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, 16 (2), 158–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cirone, A. E., & Urpelainen, J. (2013). Trade sanctions in international environmental policy: Deterring or encouraging free riding? Conflict Management and Peace Science, 30 (4), 309–34.Google Scholar
Corneloup, I. de Agueda, & Mol, A. P. J. (2014). Small island developing states and international climate change negotiations: The power of moral ‘leadership’. International Environmental Agreements, 14 (3), 281–97.Google Scholar
Cullis-Suzuki, S., & Pauly, D. (2010). Failing the high seas: A global evaluation of regional fisheries management organizations. Marine Policy, 34 (5), 1036–42.Google Scholar
Curlier, M., & Andresen, S. (2002). International trade in endangered species: The cites regime. In Miles, E. L., Underdal, A, Andresen, S, Wettestad, J, Skjærseth, J. B., & Charlin, E. M. (eds.), Environmental regime effectiveness: Confronting theory with evidence (pp. 357–78). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dimitrov, R. S. (2016). The Paris Agreement on climate change: Behind closed doors. Global Environmental Politics, 16 (3), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dombrowsky, I. (2007). Conflict, cooperation and institutions in international water management: An economic analysis. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Dombrowsky, I. (2008). Institutional design and regime effectiveness in transboundary river management: The elbe water quality regime. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 12, 223–38.Google Scholar
Downs, G. W., Rocke, D. M., & Barsoom, P. N. (1996). Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation? International Organization, 50 (3), 379–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryzek, J. S. (2013). The politics of the earth: Environmental discourses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, C. (2008). The power of words in international relations: Birth of an anti-whaling discourse. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Falkner, R. (2016). The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics. International Affairs, 92 (5), 1107–25.Google Scholar
Gerst, M. D., Wang, P., Roventini, A., Fagiolo, G., Dosi, G., Howarth, R. B., & Borsuk, M. E. (2013). Agent-based modeling of climate policy: An introduction to the engage multi-level framework. Environmental Modelling and Software, 44, 62–75.Google Scholar
Gulbrandsen, L. H. (2014). Dynamic governance interactions: Evolutionary effects of state responses to non-state certificate programs. Regulation and Governance, 8 (1), 74–92.Google Scholar
Gulbrandsen, L. H., & Andresen, S. (2004). NGO influence in the implementation of the kyoto protocol: Compliance, flexibility mechanisms, and sinks. Global Environmental Politics, 4 (4), 54–75.Google Scholar
Gupta, A. (2008). Transparency under scrutiny: Information disclosure in global environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 8 (2), 1–7.Google Scholar
Gupta, J. (2010). A history of international climate change policy. WIRE Climate Change, 1 (5), 636–53.Google Scholar
Haas, P. M., Keohane, R. O., & Levy, M. A (eds.) (1993). Institutions for the earth: Sources of effective international environmental protection. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hale, T. (2016). ‘All hands on deck’: The Paris Agreement and nonstate climate action. Global Environmental Politics, 16 (3), 12–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haufler, V. (2010). Disclosure as governance: The extractive industries transparency initiative and resource management in the developing world. Global Environmental Politics, 10 (3), 53–73.Google Scholar
Helm, C., & Sprinz, D. F. (2000). Measuring the effectiveness of international environmental regimes. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 44 (5), 630–52.Google Scholar
Hønneland, G., & Stokke, O. S. (2007). International cooperation and arctic governance: Regime effectiveness and northern region building. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Houghton, K. A., & Naughton, H. T. (2014). International environmental agreement effectiveness: A review of empirical studies. In Eisenberg, T, & Ramello, G. B. (eds.), Comparative law and economics (pp. 442–55). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hovi, J., Sprinz, D. F., Sælen, H., & Underdal, A. (2017). The club approach: A gateway to effective climate co-operation? British Journal of Political Science, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hovi, J., Sprinz, D. F., & Underdal, A. (2003). The Oslo-Potsdam solution to measuring regime effectiveness: Critique, response, and the road ahead. Global Environmental Politics, 3 (3), 74–96.Google Scholar
IEA Database (2019). International Environmental Agreements Database Project (Version 2018.1). Available at: http://iea.uoregon.edu. Accessed: 4 March 2019.Google Scholar
Ivanova, M. H. (2010). UNEP in global environmental governance: Design, leadership, location. Global Environmental Politics, 10 (1), 30–59.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2011). Marketing linkages: Secretariat governance of the climate-biodiversity interface. Global Environmental Politics, 11 (3), 23–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2014). Post-treaty politics: Secretariat influence in global environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kellenberg, D., & Levinson, A. (2014). Waste of effort? International environmental agreements. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 1 (1–2), 135–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R. O., & Oppenheimer, M. (2016). Paris: Beyond the climate dead end through pledge and review? Politics and Governance, 49 (3), 142–51.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O., & Victor, D. G. (2011). The regime complex for climate change. Perspectives on Politics, 9 (1), 7–23.Google Scholar
Khoo, S., & Rau, H. (2009). Movements, mobilities and the politics of hazardous waste. Environmental Politics, 18 (6), 960–80.Google Scholar
Kim, Y., Tanaka, K., & Matsuoka, S. (2017). Institutional mechanisms and the consequences of international environmental agreements. Global Environmental Politics, 17 (1), 77–98.Google Scholar
Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., & Snidal, D. (2001). The rational design of international institutions. International Organization, 55 (4), 761–99.Google Scholar
Krasner, S. D. (ed.) (1983). International regimes. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Lempert, R., Scheffran, J., & Sprinz., D. F. (2009). Methods for long-term environmental policy challenges. Global Environmental Politics, 9 (3), 106–33.Google Scholar
Lucier, C. A., & Gareau, B. J. (2015). From waste to resources?: Interrogating ‘race to the bottom’ in the global environmental governance of the hazardous waste trade. Journal of World-Systems Research, 21 (2), 495–520.Google Scholar
Mason, M. (2008). Transparency for whom? Information disclosure and power in global environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 8 (2), 8–13.Google Scholar
Miles, E. L., Underdal, A., Andresen, S., Wettestad, J., Skjærseth, J. B., & Carlin, E. M. (eds.) (2002). Environmental regime effectiveness: Confronting theory with evidence. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Milkoreit, M. (2015). Hot deontology and cold consequentialism: An empirical exploration of ethical reasoning among climate change negotiators. Climatic Change, 130 (3), 397–409.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. B. (2006). Problem structure, institutional design, and the relative effectiveness of international environmental agreements. Global Environmental Politics, 6 (3), 72–89.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. B. (2009). The influence of international institutions: Institutional design, compliance, effectiveness, and endogeneity. In Milner, H. V. (ed.), Power, interdependence and non-state actors in world politics: Research frontiers (pp. 66–83). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. B. (2010). International politics and the environment. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. B., Clark, W. C., Cash, D. W., & Dickson, N. (eds.) (2006). Global environmental assessments: information and influence. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, S. M. L., & Zawahri, N. A. (2015). The effectiveness of treaty design in addressing water disputes. Journal of Peace Research, 52 (2), 187–200.Google Scholar
Myint, T. (2012). Governing international rivers: Polycentric politics in the Mekong and the Rhine. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Nagtzaam, G. J. (2009). The international tropical timber organization and conservationist forestry norms: A bridge too far. Melbourne: Monash University.Google Scholar
Newell, P., Bulkeley, H., Turner, K., Shaw, C., Caney, S., Shove, E., & Pidgeon, N. (2015). Governance traps in climate change politics: Re-framing the debate in terms of responsibilities and rights. WIRE Climate Change, 6 (6), 535–40.Google Scholar
Nordhaus, W. D. (2015). Climate clubs: Overcoming free-riding in international climate policy. American Economic Review, 105 (4), 1339–70.Google Scholar
Oberthür, S., & Stokke, O. S. (2011). Managing institutional complexity: Regime interplay and global environmental change. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. New York: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
Parson, E. A. (2003). Protecting the ozone layer: Science and strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Perrin, S., & Bernauer, T. (2010). International regime formation revisited: Explaining ratification behavior with respect to long range transboundary air pollution agreements in Europe. European Union Politics, 11 (3), 405–26.Google Scholar
Pettenger, M. E. (ed.) (2007). The social construction of climate change: Power, knowledge, norms, discourses. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ringquist, E., & Kostadinova, T. (2005). Assessing the effectiveness of international environmental agreements: The case of the 1985 Helsinki protocol. American Journal of Political Science, 49 (1), 86–102.Google Scholar
Saleh, P., & Abene, N. M. (2016). Africa and the problem of transboundary movement of hazardous waste: An assessment of the Bamako convention of 1991. Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization, 48, 47–53.Google Scholar
Sand, P. H. (2013). Enforcing cites: The rise and fall of trade sanctions. Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, 22 (3), 251–63.Google Scholar
Schroeder, H., & Lovell, H. (2012). The role of non-nation-state actors and side events in the international climate negotiations. Climate Policy, 12 (1), 23–37.Google Scholar
Seelarbokus, C. B. (2014a). Assessing the effectiveness of international environmental agreements (IEAs): Demystifying the issue of data unavailability. SAGE Open, 4 (1), 1–18.Google Scholar
Seelarbokus, C. B. (2014b). The influence of treaty design on the participation of developing and developed nations in international environmental agreements (IEAs). African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 8 (8), 288–301.Google Scholar
Seto, K. C., Davis, S. J., Mitchell, R. B., Stokes, E. C., Unruh, G., & Ürge-Vorsatz, D. (2016). Carbon lock-in: Types, causes, and policy implications. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41, 425–52.Google Scholar
Shi, L. (1999). Successful use of the tacit acceptance procedure to effectuate progress in international maritime law. University of San Francisco Maritime Law Journal, 11 (2), 299–332.Google Scholar
Siebenhüner, B. (2008). Learning in international organizations in global environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 8 (4), 92–116.Google Scholar
Spilker, G., & Koubi, V. (2016). The effects of treaty legality and domestic institutional hurdles on environmental treaty ratification. International Environmental Agreements, 16 (2), 223–38.Google Scholar
Sprinz, D. F., & Vaahtoranta, T. (1994). The interest-based explanation of international environmental policy. International Organization, 48 (1), 77–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stokke, O. S. (2012). Disaggregating international regimes: A new approach to evaluation and comparison. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Stokke, O. S. (2013). Regime interplay in Arctic shipping governance: Explaining regional niche selection. International Environmental Agreements, 13 (1), 65–85.Google Scholar
Strange, S. (1983). Cave! Hic dragones: A critique of regime analysis. In Krasner, S. D. (ed.), International regimes (pp. 337–54). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Underdal, A., & Hanf, K. (eds.) (2000). International environmental agreements and domestic politics: The case of acid rain. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Underdal, A., & Young, O. R. (eds.) (2004). Regime consequences: Methodological challenges and research strategies. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Urpelainen, J. (2013). A model of dynamic climate governance: Dream big, win small. International Environmental Agreements, 13 (2), 107–25.Google Scholar
Vabulas, F., & Snidal, D. (2013). Organization without delegation: Informal intergovernmental organizations and the spectrum of intergovernmental arrangements. Review of International Organizations, 8 (2), 193–220.Google Scholar
Van der Ven, H., Bernstein, S., & Hoffmann, M. (2017). Valuing the contributions of nonstate and subnational actors to climate governance. Global Environmental Politics, 17 (1), 1–20.Google Scholar
Vanhala, L., & Hestbaek, C. (2016). Framing climate change loss and damage in UNFCCC negotiations. Global Environmental Politics, 16 (4), 111–29.Google Scholar
Victor, D. G. (2011). Global warming gridlock: Creating more effective strategies for protecting the planet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Victor, D. G., Raustiala, K., & Skolnikoff, E. B. (eds.) (1998). The implementation and effectiveness of international environmental commitments: Theory and practice. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vollenweider, J. (2013). The effectiveness of international environmental agreements. International Environmental Agreements, 13 (3), 343–367.Google Scholar
Von Stein, J. (2008). The international law and politics of climate change: Ratification of the United Nations Framework Convention and the Kyoto protocol. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52 (2), 243–68.Google Scholar
Wettestad, J. (2011). The improving effectiveness of CLRTAP: Due to a clever design? In Lidskog, R, & Sundqvist, G (eds.), Governing the air: The dynamics of science, policy, and citizen interaction (pp. 39–60). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (1999). Governance in world affairs. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2001). Inferences and indices: Evaluating the effectiveness of international environmental regimes. Global Environmental Politics, 1 (1), 99–121.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. (2003). Determining regime effectiveness: A commentary on the Oslo-Potsdam solution. Global Environmental Politics, 3 (3), 97–104.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. (2010). Institutional dynamics: Emergent patterns in international environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2011). 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 (50), 19853–60.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2017). Governing complex systems: Social capital for the Anthropocene. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.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

References

Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D., & Zangl, B. (eds.) (2015). International organizations as orchestrators. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D., & Zangl, B. (2016). Two logics of indirect governance: Delegation and orchestration. British Journal of Political Science, 46 (4), 719–29.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2010). International regulation without international government: Improving IO performance through orchestration. Review of International Organizations, 5 (3), 315–44.Google Scholar
Allan, J. I., & Hadden, J. (2017). Exploring the framing power of NGOs in global climate politics. Global Environmental Politics, 26 (4), 600–20.Google Scholar
Andonova, L. B., Betsill, M. M., & Bulkeley, H. (2009). Transnational climate governance. Global Environmental Politics, 9 (2), 52–73.Google Scholar
Andresen, S., & Rosendal, K. (2009). The role of the United Nations Environment Programme in the coordination of multilateral environmental agreements. In Biermann, F, Siebenhüner, B, & Schreyögg, A (eds.), International organisations in global environmental governance (pp. 133–50). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. N., & Finnemore, M. (1999). The politics, power, and pathologies of international organizations. International Studies Quarterly, 53 (4), 699–732.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. N., & Finnemore, M. (2004). Rules for the world: International organizations in global politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, M. W., & Ege, J. (2017). A matter of will and action: The bureaucratic autonomy of international public administrations. In Bauer, M. W., Knill, C, & Eckhard, S (eds.), International bureaucracy: Challenges and lessons for public administration research (pp. 13–41). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bauer, S., Andresen, S., & Biermann, F. (2012). International bureaucracies. In Biermann, F, & Pattberg, P (eds.), Global environmental governance reconsidered (pp. 27–44). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, S., Busch, P. O., & Siebenhüner, B. (2009). Treaty secretariats in global environmental governance. In Biermann, F, Siebenhüner, B, & Schreyögg, A (eds.), International organisations in global environmental governance (pp. 174–91). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bauer, S. (2009). The secretariat of the United Nations Environment Programme: Tangled up in blue. In Biermann, F, & Siebenhüner, B (eds.), Managers of global change: The influence of international environmental bureaucracies (pp. 169–202). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, S. (2006). Does bureaucracy really matter? The authority of intergovernmental treaty secretariats in global environmental politics. Global Environmental Politics, 6 (1), 23–49.Google Scholar
Bauer, S., & Weinlich, S. (2011). International bureaucracies: Organizing world politics. In Reinalda, B (ed.), The Ashgate research companion to non-state actors (pp. 251–62). Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Betsill, M. M., & Corell, E. (2008). NGO diplomacy: The influence of nongovernmental organizations in international environmental negotiations. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Beetham, D. (1987). Bureaucracy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., & Siebenhüner, B. (2009). Managers of global change: The influence of international environmental bureaucracies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., Betsill, M. M., Gupta, J. et al. (2009). 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. (2014). Earth system governance: World politics in the Anthropocene. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bulkeley, H., Andonova, L. B., Betsill, M. M. et al. (2014). Transnational climate change governance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burch, S., Gupta, A., Inoue, C. Y. A. et al. (2019). New directions in earth system governance research. Earth System Governance, 1.Google Scholar
Busch, P. O. (2009). The climate secretariat: Making a living in a straitjacket. In Biermann, F, & Siebenhüner, B (eds.), Managers of global change: The influence of international environmental bureaucracies (pp. 75–99). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Busch, P. O. (2014). Independent influence of international public administrations: Contours and future directions of an emerging research strand. In Kim, S, Ashley, S, & Lambright, W. H. (eds.), Public administration in the context of global governance (pp. 45–62). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Chan, S., Brandi, C., & Bauer, S. (2016). Aligning transnational climate action with international climate governance: The road from Paris. Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, 25 (2), 238–47.Google Scholar
Cutler, C., Haufler, V., & Porter, T. (1999). Private authority in international affairs. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Depledge, J. (2005). The organization of global negotiations: Constructing the climate change regime. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Depledge, J. (2007). A special relationship: Chairpersons and the secretariat in the climate change negotiations. Global Environmental Politics, 7 (1), 45–68.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, K., & Pattberg, P. (2009). Actors, arenas, and issues in global governance. In Whitman, J (ed.), Palgrave advances in global governance (pp. 41–65). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. S. (2017). The meanings of life for non-state actors in climate politics. Environmental Politics, 26 (4), 789–99.Google Scholar
Earth System Governance Project (2018). Earth system governance: Science and implementation plan of the Earth System Governance Project. Utrecht: Earth System Governance Project.Google Scholar
Eckhard, S., & Ege, J. (2016). International bureaucracies and their influence on policy-making: A review of empirical evidence. Journal of European Public Policy, 23 (7), 960–78.Google Scholar
Ege, J. (2017). Comparing the autonomy of international public administrations: An ideal-type approach. Public Administration, 95 (3), 555–70.Google Scholar
Elsig, M. (2010). The World Trade Organization at work: Performance in a member-driven milieu. Review of International Organizations, 5 (3), 345–63.Google Scholar
Gehring, T. (2011). The institutional complex of trade and environment: Toward an interlocking governance structure and a division of labor. In Oberthür, S & Schram Stokke, O (eds.), Managing institutional complexity: Regime interplay and global environmental change (pp. 227–54). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gordon, D. J., & Johnson, C. A. (2017). The orchestration of global urban climate governance: Conducting power in the post-Paris climate regime. Environmental Politics, 26 (4), 694–714.Google Scholar
Green, J. F. (2013). Rethinking private authority: Agents and entrepreneurs in global environmental governance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gruber, J. E. (1987). Controlling bureaucracies. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hadden, J. (2015). Networks in contention. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hale, T. (2016). All hands on deck: The Paris Agreement and non-state climate action. Global Environmental Politics, 16 (3), 12–21.Google Scholar
Hale, T., & Roger, C. (2014). Orchestration and transnational governance. Review of International Organization, 9 (1), 59–82.Google Scholar
Hall, N. (2016). Displacement, development, and climate change: International organizations moving beyond their mandates. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.) (2006). Delegation under anarchy: States, international organizations and principal-agent theory. In Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.), Delegation and agency in international organizations (pp. 3–38). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, D. G., & Jacoby, W. (2006). How agents matter. In Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.), Delegation and agency in international organizations (pp. 199–228). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hickmann, T. (2015). Rethinking authority in global climate governance: How transnational climate initiatives relate to the international climate regime. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hickmann, T., & Elsässer, J. (2018). New alliances in global environmental governance: Intergovernmental treaty secretariats and sub- and non-state actors. Paper presented at the General Conference of the European Consortium for Political Research, Hamburg.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
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2015). Delegation and pooling in international organizations. Review of International Organizations, 10 (3), 305–28.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S., & Morin, J. F. (Forthcoming 2020). Greening through trade: How American trade policy has promoted environmental protection abroad. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S., & Lindsay, A. (2015). Secretariat influence on trade-environment politics: NAFTA’s Commission on Environmental Cooperation. Review of Policy Research, 32 (1), 124–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2010). Overlap management in the World Trade Organization: Secretariat influence on trade-environment politics. Global Environmental Politics, 11 (2), 54–79.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2011). Marketing linkages: Secretariat governance of the climate-biodiversity interface. Global Environmental Politics, 11 (3), 23–43.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2014). Post-treaty politics: Secretariat influence in global environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, T. (2013). Looking beyond states: Openings for international bureaucrats to enter the institutional design process. Review of International Organizations, 8, 499–519.Google Scholar
Johnson, T., & Urpelainen, J. (2014). International bureaucrats and the formation of intergovernmental organizations: Institutional design discretion sweetens the pot. International Organization 68, 177–209.Google Scholar
Jönsson, C. (2017). IR paradigms and inter-organizational theory: Situating the research program within the discipline. In Koops, J, & Biermann, R (eds.), Palgrave handbook of inter-organizational relations in world politics (pp. 49–62). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Jordan, A. J., Huitema, D., Hildén, M. et al. (2015). Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects. Nature Climate Change, 5, 977–82.Google Scholar
Jörgens, H., Kolleck, N., & Saerbeck, B. (2016).Exploring the hidden influence of international treaty secretariats: Using social network analysis to analyse the Twitter debate on the ‘Lima Work Programme on Gender’. Journal of European Public Policy, 23 (7), 979–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jörgens, H., Kolleck, N., Saerbeck, B., & Well, M. (2016). Orchestrating (bio-)diversity: The secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity as an attention-seeking bureaucracy. In Bauer, M, Knill, C, & Eckhard, S (eds.), International Bureaucracy (pp. 73–95). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Knill, C., Eckhard, S., & Grohs, S. (2016). Administrative styles in the European Commission and the OSCE secretariat: Striking similarities despite different organizational settings. Journal of European Public Policy, 23 (7), 1–20.Google Scholar
Littoz-Monnet, A. (2017). Expert knowledge as a strategic resource: International bureaucrats and the shaping of bioethical standards. International Studies Quarterly, 0, 1–12.Google Scholar
Morin, J. F., & Jinnah, S. (2018). The untapped potential of preferential trade agreements for climate governance. Environmental Politics, 27 (3), 541–65.Google Scholar
Nicholson, S., Jinnah, S., & Gillespie, A. (2018). Solar radiation management: A proposal for immediate polycentric governance. Climate Policy, 18 (3), 322–34.Google Scholar
Pattberg, P. H. (2007). Private Institutions and Global Governance: The New Politics of Environmental Sustainability. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Prideaux, M. (2015). Wildlife NGOs: From adversaries to collaborators. Global Policy, 6 (4), 379–88.Google Scholar
Raustiala, K., & Victor, D. G. (2004). The regime complex for plant genetic resources. International Organization, 58 (2), 277–309.Google Scholar
Reinalda, B., & Verbeek, B. (eds.) (2003). Autonomous policy making by international organizations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reinalda, B. (2011). The Ashgate research companion to non-state actors. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Roger, C., Hale, T., & Andonova, L. B. (2017). The comparative politics of transnational climate governance. International Interactions, 43 (1), 1–25.Google Scholar
Siebenhüner, B. (2009). The biodiversity secretariat: Lean shark in troubled waters. In Biermann, F, & Siebenhüner, B (eds.), Managers of global change: The influence of international environmental bureaucracies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Stone, D., & Ladi, S. (2015). Global policy and transnational administration. Public Administration, 93 (4), 839–55.Google Scholar
Weinlich, S. (2014). The UN secretariat’s influence on the evolution of peacekeeping. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2017). Governing complex systems: Social capital for the Anthropocene. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, O. R., Underdal, A., Kanie, N., & Kim, R. E. (2017). Goal setting in the Anthropocene: The ultimate challenge for 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
Zelli, F., & van Asselt, H. (2013). The institutional fragmentation of global environmental governance: Causes, consequences, and responses. Global Environmental Politics, 13 (3), 1–13.Google Scholar
Zürn, M. (1998). The rise of international environmental politics: A review of current research. World Politics 50 (4), 617–49.Google Scholar

References

Abbott, K. W. (2014). Strengthening the transnational regime complex for climate change. Transnational Environmental Law, 3 (1), 57–88.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W., Green, J. F., & Keohane, R. O. (2016). Organizational ecology and institutional change in Global Governance. International Organization, 70 (2), 247–77.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2009). Strengthening international regulation through transnational new governance: Overcoming the orchestration deficit. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 42 (2), 501–78.Google Scholar
Andonova, L. B., & Hoffmann, M. J. (2012). From Rio to Rio and beyond: Innovation in global environmental governance. The Journal of Environment and Development, 21 (1), 57–61.Google Scholar
Andonova, L. B., & Levy, M. A. (2003). Franchising global governance: Making sense of the Johannesburg Type Two partnerships. In Stokke, O. S., & Thommessen, Ø. B. (eds.), Yearbook of international cooperation on environment and development (pp. 19–31). London: Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
Auld, G., & Gulbrandsen, L. (2010). Transparency in nonstate certification: Consequences for accountability and legitimacy. Global Environmental Politics, 10 (3), 97–119.Google Scholar
Auld, G., Renckens, S., & Cashore, B. (2015). Transnational private governance between the logics of empowerment and control. Regulation and Governance, 9 (2), 108–24.Google Scholar
Bansard, J., Pattberg, P., & Widerberg, O. (2017). Cities to the rescue? Assessing the performance of transnational municipal networks in global climate governance. International Environmental Agreements, 17 (2), 229–46.Google Scholar
Bäckstrand, K. (2008). Accountability of networked climate governance: The rise of transnational climate partnerships. Global Environmental Politics, 8 (3), 74–102.Google Scholar
Bartley, T. (2007). Institutional emergence in an era of globalization: The rise of transnational private regulation of labor and environmental conditions. American Journal of Sociology, 113 (2), 297.Google Scholar
Bartley, T. (2018). Rules without rights: Land, labor, and private authority in the global economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bernstein, S., & Cashore, B. (2012). Complex global governance and domestic policies: Four pathways of influence. International Affairs, 88 (3), 585–604.Google Scholar
Betsill, M. M., & Corell, E. (eds.) (2008). NGO diplomacy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT 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
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., & Gupta, A. (2011). Accountability and legitimacy in earth system governance: A research framework. Ecological Economics, 70, 1856–64.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., Betsill, M. M., Gupta, J. et al. (2010). Earth system governance: A research framework. International Environmental Agreements, 10 (4), 277–98.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., Pattberg, P., van Asselt, H., & Zelli, F. (2009). The fragmentation of global governance architectures: A framework for analysis. Global Environmental Politics, 9 (4), 14–40.Google Scholar
Bingen, J., & Busch, L. (eds.) (2006). Agricultural standards: The shape of the global food and fiber system. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Blok, K., Höhne, N., van der Leun, K., & Harrison, N. (2012). Bridging the greenhouse-gas emissions gap. Nature Climate Change, 2 (7), 471–4.Google Scholar
Börzel, T., & Risse, T. (2005). Public–private partnerships: Effective and legitimate tools of transnational governance? In Grande, E, & Pauly, L. W. (eds.), Complex sovereignty: Reconstituting political authority in the twenty-first century (pp. 195–206). Toronto: University of Toronto 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 (4), 579–605.Google Scholar
Bulkeley, H. A., & Betsill, M. M. (2013). Revisiting the urban politics of climate change. Environmental Politics, 22 (1), 136–54.Google Scholar
Bulkeley, H. A., & Betsill, M. M. (2004). Transnational networks and global environmental governance: The cities for climate protection program. International Studies Quarterly, 48 (2), 471–93.Google Scholar
Bulkeley, H., Andonova, L. B., Betsill, M. M. et al. (2014). Transnational climate change governance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burch, S., Gupta, A., Inoue, C. Y. A. et al. (2019). New directions in earth system governance research. Earth System Governance, 1.Google Scholar
Cashore, B. W. (2016). Cross-sector partnerships for NSMD global governance: Change pathways and strategic implications. Annual Review of Social Partnerships, 11, 88–92.Google Scholar
Cashore, B. W., Auld, G., & Newsom., D. (2004). Governing through markets: Forest certification and the emergence of non-state authority. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Chan, S., Falkner, R., Goldberg, M., & van Asselt, H. (2016). Effective and geographically balanced? An output-based assessment of non-state climate actions. Climate Policy, 18 (1), 24–35.Google Scholar
Chan, S., & Pattberg, P. (2008). Private rule-making and the politics of accountability: Analyzing global forest governance. Global Environmental Politics, 8 (3), 103–21.Google Scholar
Chan, S., van Asselt, H., Hale, T. N. et al. (2015). Reinvigorating international climate policy: A comprehensive framework for effective nonstate action. Global Policy, 6 (4), 466–73.Google Scholar
Cole, N. H. (2015). Advantages of a polycentric approach to climate change policy. Nature Climate Change, 5, 114–18.Google Scholar
Davies, T., & Chandler, R. (2012). Online deliberation design: Choices, criteria, and evidence. In Nabatchi, T, Weiksner, M, Gastil, J, & Leighninger, M (eds.), Democracy in motion: Evaluating the practice and impact of deliberative civic engagement (pp. 103–34). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, K. (2007). The new transnationalism: Transnational governance and democratic legitimacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, K., & Eichinger, M. (2010). Tamed transparency: How information disclosure under the global reporting initiative fails to empower. Global Environmental Politics, 10 (3), 74–96.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, K., & Pattberg, P. (2009). World politics and organizational fields: The Case of transnational sustainability governance. European Journal of International Relations, 15 (4), 707–43.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. S. (2012). Global civil society: The progress of post-Westphalian politics. Annual Review Political Science, 15, 101–19.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. S., & Pickering, J. (2017). Deliberation as a catalyst for reflexive environmental governance. Ecological Economics, 131, 353–60.Google Scholar
Earth System Governance (2018). Earth system governance: Science and implementation plan of the Earth System Governance Project. Utrecht: Earth System Governance Project.Google Scholar
Easton, D. (1957). An approach to the analysis of political systems. World Politics, 9 (3), 383–400.Google Scholar
Eberlein, B., Abbott, K. W., Black, J., Meidinger, E., & Wood, S. (2014). Transnational business governance interactions: Conceptualization and framework for analysis. Regulation and Governance, 8 (1), 1–21.Google Scholar
Falkner, R. (2003). Private environmental governance and international relations: Exploring the links. Global Environmental Politics, 3 (2), 72–87.Google Scholar
Fuchs, D. (2007). Business power in global governance. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
Fuchs, D., & Kalfagianni, A. (2010). The causes and consequences of private food governance. Business and Politics, 12 (3), 145–81.Google Scholar
Fuchs, D., Kalfagianni, A., & Havinga, T. (2011). Actors in private food governance: The legitimacy of retail standards and multistakeholder initiatives with civil society participation. Agriculture and Human Values, 28 (3), 353–67.Google Scholar
Gellers, C. J. (2016). Crowdsourcing global governance: Sustainable Development Goals, civil society and the pursuit of democratic legitimacy. International Environmental Agreements, 16, 415–32.Google Scholar
Green, J. F. (2013). Rethinking private authority: Agents and entrepreneurs in global environmental governance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Green, J. F., & Auld, G. (2017). Unbudling the regime complex: The effects of private authority. Transnational Environmental Law, 6 (2), 259–84.Google Scholar
Greven, T. (2004). Private, Staatliche und Uberstaatliche Interventionen zur Verankerung von Arbeitnehmerrechten. In Bass, H, & Melchers, S (eds.), Neue Instrumente zur Sozialen und Ökologischen Gestaltung der Globalisierung: Codes of Conduct, Sozialklauseln, nachhaltige Investmentfonds (pp. 139–371). Münster: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
Gulbrandsen, L. H. (2014). Dynamic governance interactions: Evolutionary effects of state responses to non-state certification programs. Regulation and Governance, 8 (1), 74–92.Google Scholar
Gupta, A. (2008). Transparency under scrutiny: Information disclosure in global environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 8 (2), 1–7.Google Scholar
Gupta, A. (2010). Transparency as contested political terrain: Who knows what about the global GMO trade and why does it matter? Global Environmental Politics, 10 (3), 32–52.Google Scholar
Hachez, N., & Wouters, J. (2011). A glimpse at the democratic legitimacy of private standards: Assessing the public accountability of global G. A. P. Journal of International Economic Law, 14 (3), 677–710.Google Scholar
Haufler, V. (2003). Globalization and industry self regulation. In Kahler, M, & Lake, D. A. (eds.), Governance in a global economy: Political authority in transition (pp. 226–52). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Haufler, V. (2010). Disclosure as governance: The extractive industries transparency initiative and resource management in the developing world. Global Environmental Politics, 10 (3), 53–73.Google Scholar
Hale, T. N. (2016). ‘All hands on deck’: The Paris Agreement and nonstate climate action. Global Environmental Politics, 16 (3), 12–22.Google Scholar
Hale, T. N., & Held, D. (2011). Handbook of transnational governance. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hickmann, T. (2017a). The reconfiguration of authority in global climate governance. International Studies Review, 19 (3), 430–51.Google Scholar
Hickmann, T. (2017b). Voluntary global business initiatives and the international climate negotiations: A case study of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol. Journal of Cleaner Production, 169, 94–104.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
Hilson, G. (2014). ‘Constructing’ ethical mineral supply chains in Sub-Saharan Africa: The case of Malawian fair trade rubies. Development and Change, 45 (1), 53–78.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, M. J. (2011). Climate governance at the crossroads: Experimenting with a global response after Kyoto. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Holzinger, K., & Sommerer, T. (2011). ‘Race to the bottom’ or ‘race to Brussels’? Environmental competition in Europe. Journal of Common Market Studies, 49 (2), 315–39.Google Scholar
Hsu, A., Cheng, Y., Weinfurter, A., Xu, K., & Yick, C. (2016). Track climate pledges of cities and companies. Nature, 532 (7599), 303.Google Scholar
Jordan, A. J., & Huitema, D. (2014). Innovations in climate policy: The politics of invention, diffusion, and evaluation. Environmental Politics, 23 (5), 715–34.Google Scholar
Jordan, A. J., Huitema, D., Hildén, M. et al. (2015). Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects. Nature Climate Change, (5), 977–82.Google Scholar
Kalfagianni, A. (2015). ‘Just Food’: The normative obligations of private agrifood governance. Global Environmental Change, 31, 174–86.Google Scholar
Kalfagianni, A., & Pattberg, P. (2013). Fishing in muddy waters: Exploring the conditions for effective governance of fisheries and aquaculture. Marine Policy, 38, 124–32.Google Scholar
Kalfagianni, A., & Roche, T. (2017). Domestic policy responses to transnational private governance: The Marine Stewardship Council in Alaska, Australia and Ecuador. In Havinga, T, & Verbruggen, P (eds.), The hybridisation of food governance (pp. 240–71). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Kanie, N., & Biermann, F. (eds.) (2017). Governing through goals: Sustainable Development Goals as governance innovation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kaan, C., & Liese, A. (2011). Public private partnerships in global food governance: Business engagement and legitimacy in the global fight against hunger and malnutrition. Agriculture and Human Values, 28 (3), 385–99.Google Scholar
Kaul, I. (2006). Exploring the policy space between markets and states: Global public private partnerships. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Kleinschmit, D. (2015). Internationale Waldpolitik – Prinzip Freiwilligkeit. In Leitschuh, H, Michelsen, G, Simonis, U. E., Sommer, J, & Von Weizsäcker, E. U. (eds.), Jahrbuch Ökologie 2016 (pp. 82–7). Stuttgart: Hirzel.Google Scholar
Kleinschmit, D., Secco, L., Sergent, A., Wallin, I., & Pülzl, H. (2018). Orchestrating forest policy making: Involvement of scientists and stakeholders in political processes. Forest Policy and Economics, 89, 1–106.Google Scholar
Koenig-Archibugi, M., & Macdonald, K. (2013). Accountability‐by‐proxy in transnational non‐state governance. Governance, 23 (3), 499–522.Google Scholar
Kramarz, T. (2016). World Bank partnerships and the promise of democratic governance. Environmental Policy and Governance, 26, 3–15.Google Scholar
Kramarz, T., & Park, S. (2016). Accountability in global environmental governance: A meaningful tool for action? Global Environmental Politics, 16 (2), 1–21.Google Scholar
Kronsell, A. (2013). Legitimacy for climate policy: Politics and participation in the green city of Freiburg. Local Environment, 18 (8), 965–82.Google Scholar
Kuyper, J. W. (2014). Global democratization and international regime complexity. European Journal of International Relations, 20 (3), 620–46.Google Scholar
Kuyper, J. W., Linnér, B. O., & Schroeder, H. (2018). Non‐state actors in hybrid global climate governance: Justice, Legitimacy, and Effectiveness in a Post‐Paris Era. Climate Change, 9 (1), e497.Google Scholar
Mert, A. (2009). Partnerships for sustainable development as discursive practice: Shifts in discourses of environment and democracy. Forest Policy and Economics, 11 (5–6), 326–39.Google Scholar
McDermott, C. L., Irland, L. C., & Pacheco, P. (2015). Forest certification and legality initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon: Lessons for effective and equitable forest governance. Forest Policy and Economics, 50, 134–42.Google Scholar
Miles, E. L., Underdal, A., Andresen, S., Wettestad, J., Skjærseth, J. B., & Carlin, E. M. (2001). Environmental regime effectiveness: Confronting theory with evidence. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Nygren, A. (2015). Governance and images: Representations of certified southern producers in high-quality design markets. Environmental Values, 24 (3), 391–412.Google Scholar
Orsini, A., Morin, J. F., & Young, O. R. (2013). Regime complexes: A buzz, a boom, or a boost for global governance? Global Governance, 19 (1), 27–39.Google Scholar
O’Rourke, D. (2003). Outsourcing regulation: Analyzing nongovernmental systems of labor standards and monitoring. The Policy Studies Journal, 31 (1), 1–19.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2010). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 20 (4), 550–7.Google Scholar
Partzsch, L. (2007). Global Governance in Partnerschaft: Die EU-Initiative ‘Water for Life’. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Partzsch, L. (2014). Die neue Macht von Individuen in der globalen Politik: Wandel durch Prominente, Philanthropen und social entrepreneurs. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Partzsch, L. (2017). Powerful individuals in a globalized world. Global Policy, 8 (1), 5–13.Google Scholar
Partzsch, L. (2018). Take action now: The legitimacy of celebrity power in international relations. Global Governance, 24 (2), 229–48.Google Scholar
Pattberg, P. (2010). Public–private partnerships in global climate governance. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews, Climate Change, 1 (2), 279–87.Google Scholar
Pattberg, P., Betsill, M. M., & Dellas, E. (eds.) (2011). Agency in earth system governance. International Environmental Agreements, 11 (1), 85–98.Google Scholar
Pattberg, P., Biermann, F., Chan, S., & Mert, A. (2012). Public–private partnerships for sustainable development: Emergence, influence and legitimacy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Pattberg, P., & Widerberg, O. (2016). Transnational multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: Conditions for success. AMBIO, 45 (1), 42–51.Google Scholar
Ponte, S., & Daugbjerg, C. (2015). Biofuel sustainability and the formation of transnational hybrid governance. Environmental Politics, 24 (1), 96–114.Google Scholar
Porter, T., & Ronit, K. (eds.) (2010). The challenges of global business authority: Democratic renewal, stalemate or decay? New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Quark, A. (2013). Global rivalries: Standards wars and the transnational cotton trade. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Raustiala, K., & Victor, D. G. (2004). The regime complex for plant genetic resources. International Organization, 58 (2), 277–309.Google Scholar
Risse, T. (2002). Transnational actors and world politics. In Carlsnaes, W, Risse, T, & Simmons, B (eds.), Handbook of international relations (pp. 255–74). London: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Ruggie, J. (2013). Just business: Multinational corporations and human rights. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
Sarfaty, G. A. (2015). Shining light on global supply chains. Harvard International Law Journal, 56 (2), 419–63.Google Scholar
Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schlosberg, D., & Collins, L. B. (2014). From environmental to climate justice: climate change and the discourse of environmental justice. WIREs Climate Change, 5 (3), 359–74.Google Scholar
Scholte, J. A. (2008). Defining globalisation. The World Economy, 31 (11), 1471–1502.Google Scholar
Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Sénit, C. A., Biermann, F., & Kalfagianni, A. (2017). The representativeness of global deliberation: A critical assessment of civil society consultations in the shaping of Sustainable Development Goals. Global Policy, 8 (1), 62–72.Google Scholar
Sénit, C. A., Kalfagianni, A., & Biermann, F. (2016). Cyber-democracy? Information and communication technologies in civil society consultations for sustainable development. Global Governance, 22 (4), 533–54.Google Scholar
Stevenson, H. (2014). Representing green radicalism: The limits of state-based representation in global climate governance. Review of International Studies, 40, 177–201.Google Scholar
Szulecki, K., Pattberg, P., & Biermann, F. (2011). Explaining variation in the effectiveness of transnational energy partnerships. Governance, 24 (4), 713–36.Google Scholar
Tucker, K. (2014). Participation and subjectification in global governance: NGOs, acceptable subjectivities and the WTO. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 42 (2), 376–96.Google Scholar
UNEP (2012). Global environmental outlook 5: Summary for policy makers. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme.Google Scholar
UNEP (2015). The emissions gap report 2015: Executive Summary. 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 der Ven, H., Bernstein, S., & Hoffmann, M. (2016). Valuing the contributions of nonstate and subnational actors to climate governance. Global Environmental Politics, 17 (1), 1–20.Google Scholar
Washington, S., & Ababouch, L. (2011). Private standards and certification in fisheries and aquaculture: Current practice and emerging issues. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Google Scholar
Whitfield, D. (2001). Public services or corporate welfare: Rethinking the nation state in the global economy. London: Pluto Press.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
Widerberg, O. (2017). The ‘black box’ problem of orchestration: How to evaluate the performance of the Lima-Paris Action Agenda. Environmental Politics, 26 (4): 1–23.Google Scholar
Widerberg, O. and Pattberg, P. (2017). Accountability challenges in the transnational regime complex for climate change. Review of Policy Research, 34 (1), 68–87.Google Scholar
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2011). 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 (50), 19853–60.Google Scholar
Zelli, F., & van Asselt, H. (eds.) (2013). The institutional fragmentation of global environmental governance: Causes, consequences and responses. Global Environmental Politics, 13 (3), 1–13.Google Scholar

References

Berkman, P. A., Lang, M. A., Walton, D. W. H., & Young, O. R. (2011). Science diplomacy: Antarctica, science and the governance of international spaces. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., Betsill, M. M., Gupta, J. et al. (2009). 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., & Boas, I. (2008). Protecting climate refugees: The case for a global protocol. Environment, 50 (6): 8–16.Google Scholar
Brousseau, E., Marzouki, M., & Meadel, C. (eds.) (2015). Governance, regulations and powers on the internet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, S., Cornell, N. W., Fabian, L. L., & Brown Weiss, E. (1977). Regimes for the ocean, outer space and weather. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Cherry, T. L., Hovi, J., & McEvoy, D. M. (eds.) (2014). Toward a. new climate agreement: Conflict, resolution and governance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
DeNardis, L. (2014). The global war for internet governance. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. S., Norgaard, R. B., & Schlosberg, D. (eds.) (2013). The Oxford handbook of climate change and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. (1973). Rules and order: Law, legislation and liberty. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014). Climate change 2014: Synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Google Scholar
International Law Commission (2016). Third report on the protection of the atmosphere. UN Doc. A/CN.4/692.Google Scholar
Keith, D. (2013). A case for climate engineering. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O., & Victor, D. G. (2011). The regime complex for climate. Perspectives on Politics, 9, 7–23.Google Scholar
Kolbert, E. (2014). The sixth extinction: An unnatural history. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
National Research Council (2015). Climate intervention: Reflecting sunlight to cool earth. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.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
Oreskes, N. (2004). The scientific consensus on climate change. Science, 306, 1686.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E., & Turner, II, B. L. (eds.) (2007). A diagnostic approach to going beyond panaceas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 15181–7.Google Scholar
Oude Elferink, A. G. (ed.) (2005). Stability and change in the law of the sea: The role of the LOS convention. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Parson, E. A. (2003). Protecting the ozone layer: Science and strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rochette, J., Wright, G., Gjerde, K. M., Greiber, T., Unger, S., & Spadone, A. (2015). A new chapter for the high seas? Potsdam: Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies.Google Scholar
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K. et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472–5.Google Scholar
Rosenau, J. N., & Czempiel, E. O. (1992). Governance without government: Order and change in world politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Royal Society (2009). Geoengineering the climate: Science, governance and uncertainty. London: The Royal Society.Google Scholar
Steffen, W., Sanderson, A., Tyson, P. D. et al. (2004). Global change and the earth system: A planet under pressure. Heidelberg: Spring Verlag.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
Velders, G. J. M., Andersen, S. O., Daniel, J. S., Fahey, D. W., & McFarland, M. (2007). The importance of the Montreal Protocol in protecting climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 4814–19.Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. (2016). Half-Earth: Our planet’s fight for life. New York: Liveright.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2002). The institutional dimensions of climate change: Fit, interplay, and scale. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2008). Building regimes for socioecological systems: Institutional diagnostics. In Young, O. R., King, L. A., & Schroeder, H (eds.), Institutions and environmental change: Principal findings, applications and research frontiers (pp. 115–44). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2011). Governing international spaces: Antarctica and beyond. In Berkman, P. A., Lang, M. A., Walton, D. W. H., & Young, O. R. (eds.), Science diplomacy (pp. 287–94). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2016). International relations in the Anthropocene. In Booth, K, & Erskine, T (eds.), International relations theory today (pp. 231–49). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2017). Governing complex systems: Social capital for the Anthropocene. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R., Webster, D. G. et al. (2018). Moving beyond panaceas in fisheries governance. Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115, 9065–73.Google Scholar
Zacher, M. W., & Sutton, B. A. (1996). Governing global networks: International regimes for transportation and communications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] 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
×