The promise of new institutionalism: explaining the absence of a World or United Nations Environment Organisation

Abstract

In the past forty years, numerous proposals to improve the fragmented international environmental governance (IEG) system have been developed, many of which call for the establishment of an international environment organisation. Although governments and scholars agree that the system needs improvement, no such substantial reform has yet been undertaken. Based on the literature study and more than twenty interviews, this article explains the absence of an international environment organisation, using three theories of new institutionalism: historical, rational choice and discursive institutionalism. Through the notion of path dependency, historical institutionalism explains how the self-reinforcing cycle of a rather diffused development of the IEG system, characterised by incremental changes, has made the system more complicated and prevented substantial institutional change. Historical institutionalism also highlights power inequalities and lack of trust between nation-states, as well as turf wars between international organisations, as key explanatory factors hampering IEG reform. Rational choice institutionalism complements such explanations by showing how incremental institutional changes that do not add up to substantial reform are the result of the fact that neither nation-states nor international organisations are interested in establishing a powerful environment organisation that might encroach upon their sovereignty. Finally, discursive institutionalism suggests that the norm to do at least something to improve the IEG system has prompted nation-states to create ''symbolic'' institutions. The concept of socialisation helps to explain why incremental institutional developments within the UN system are more likely than substantial reform. The article shows that new institutionalism theories complement rather than contradict one another, resulting in a more holistic explanation of lack of IEG reform.

The politics of multilateral environmental agreements lessons from 20 years of INEA

“…We know, of course, that both the creation and the implementation of MEAs feature political processes. In most cases, regime formation (Krasner, 1983 ) involves institutional bargaining in which multiple actors with overlapping but far from identical interests engage in efforts to hammer out the terms of mutually acceptable agreements (Young, 1994 ). The contents of the resultant agreements generally reflect compromises needed to arrive at assemblages of provisions that are acceptable to all major participants or negotiating blocs.…”

Extending the Work of Cowen and Fowles: A Historical Analysis of Kentucky Teacher Contracts

“…Wang (2016) noted that “New Institutionalism in organizational analysis has become one of the most widely accepted theoretical approaches in sociology over the past three decades” (p. 348). It has been applied to studies examining a wide array of phenomena, including British lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) policies over time (Monro, 2007); international environmental governance (Vijge, 2013); global comparative education research (Wiseman, Astiz, & Baker, 2014); and educational bureaucracies (Howell, 2014).…”

The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development: Forty Years in the Making

“…Even these debates, however, are politically contentious, as some national interests have changed over the past forty years while others have remained largely the same. Much of the coordination debate at the UNCED focused on unobtrusive ways to better capture management synergies across institutions, as there can be both considerable overlaps and gaps between different structures and forums (Biermann and Bauer, 2005;Vijge, 2013). This includes trying to find ways to better link the goals and activities of major UN organizations addressing sustainable development issues in various ways.…”