Exploring the nature of inter-country interactions in the process of ratifying international environmental agreements: the case of the Kyoto Protocol

Abstract

International environmental agreements require negotiation and cooperation among countries. This paper attempts to analyze the presence and nature of inter-country interactions in the process of ratifying such agreements. We develop a theoretical argument based on the notions of strategic substitutability and strategic complementarity and study the interactions among three different peer types: geographic neighbors, trading partners and green investment projects partners (in our case, clean development mechanism projects partners). We test for the presence of interactions by taking into account a temporal dimension, which constitutes a methodological contribution. To this end, we introduce spatially lagged endogenous variables into a parametric survival model and apply the proposed framework to the Kyoto Protocol ratification process. Our data sample covers 164 countries for the period 1998 to 2009. We find evidence that, while countries’ ratification decisions are basically strategic substitutes, they become strategic complements once we focus on the ratification decisions of specific peers

Do international factors influence the passage of climate change legislation?

“…In particular, Townshend et al (2011) International policy diffusion takes place "when government policy decisions in a given country are systematically conditioned by prior policy choices made in other countries" (Simmons et al 2006). In the context of climate policy, econometric studies of diffusion include Bernauer et al (2010) and Sauquet (2014), who analyses countries' ratification behaviour of environmental treaties. Sauquet (2014) identifies two counteracting effects.…”

“…In the context of climate policy, econometric studies of diffusion include Bernauer et al (2010) and Sauquet (2014), who analyses countries' ratification behaviour of environmental treaties. Sauquet (2014) identifies two counteracting effects.…”

“…Krause (2011) studies the adoption of climate policies among US cities, while Matisoff and Edwards (2014) analyse the diffusion of clean energy policies across US states. Bernauer et al (2010), Fredriksson and Gaston (2000), Sauquet (2014) and von Stein (2008) …”

Climate Policy in the Innovation Economy: National and International Aspects

“…(Горюнова и Огунлана, 2017;Kolmas, 2017). Низкая заинтересованность последних обусловлена потенциальными экономическими потерями в случае ратификации международных нормативно-правовых актов в сфере управления климатическими изменениями (Rahman and Kirkman, 2015;Rosen, 2015;Sauquet, 2014), а также прямая поддержка конкурентов в лице развивающихся стран. В то же время потенциальные риски развивающихся стран связаны с низкой скоростью обновления основного капитала, необходимого для снижения энергоемкости экономик и уменьшения объемов выбросов ПГ в атмосферу.…”

A kereskedelmi megállapodások szerepe a klímaváltozásban. Szakirodalmi áttekintés

“…ezenkívül a tárgyalási küldöttségek feladatainak független tudományos szakértőkre történő átruházása a Wto szabályait is megváltoztathatja (De Melo-Solleder [2020]). a kereskedelmi megállapodásokból kimaradó országok a nem vám jellegű szankciók által teremthetnek éghajlatvédelmi szövetségeket a károsanyag-kibocsátás jelentős csökkentésével (Nordhaus [2015]). a differenciált, de egyértelmű kötelezettségeket meghatározó nemzetközi megállapodások kínálják a legjobb megoldást a Co 2 -csökkentésre (Low-Murina [2010]).…”