“Treaty congestion” in contemporary international environmental law

Anton, Don

doi:10.4324/9780203093474.ch36

Cited by 11 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fragmentation of international law has generated a rich literature that attempts to conceptualize and/or bridge such fragmentation (see Brown Weiss 1993;Wolfrum and Matz 2003;Doelle 2004;van Asselt et al 2008;Carlarne 2008;Biermann et al 2009;Scott 2011;Anton 2012). One example is the conceptualization of Transnational Environmental Law, which adopts a broad understanding of contemporary legal systems that includes not only state-based legal frameworks, but also other state and non-state, and binding and nonbinding, institutional arrangements (Etty et al 2013).…”

Section: Theoretical Framework and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporating international biodiversity law principles and rights perspective into the European Union Timber Regulation

Ituarte-Lima

Dupraz-Ardiot

McDermott

2019

Int Environ Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article assesses the synergies and conflicts between the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the European Union Timber Regulation (EUTR), and the potential role of the CBD principles and rights perspective in improving coherence across these diverse forest-related agreements. We find that both the EUTR, which aims to eliminate illegal wood from EU supply chains, and the CBD, with its core focus on biodiversity and healthy ecosystems, share the stated goals of safeguarding biodiversity and local livelihoods. However, the principle of inclusive governance and sustainable use embedded in the CBD conflicts with the EUTR. The EUTR focus on law enforcement asserts the primacy of state laws independently of their sustainability content and alignment with international human rights law. We find that the EUTR risks reinforcing legal frameworks that preference large-scale export production over local forest access, use and benefits. Better aligning the EUTR with CBD safeguards firstly requires opening-up the EUTR rule-making process to broader engagement with affected groups. Secondly, our analysis of both the procedural and substantive dimensions of the EUTR and the CBD safeguards, suggests that opportunities for better alignment lie in the nexus between procedural rights, of which law enforcement forms part of a broader vision of rule of law and conflict resolution, and the strengthening of substantive rights that benefit local forest use and conservation.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Framework and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporating international biodiversity law principles and rights perspective into the European Union Timber Regulation

Ituarte-Lima

Dupraz-Ardiot

McDermott

2019

Int Environ Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Historically, decentralised regimes have presented cost and participation concerns. Hundreds of related and sometimes overlapping international environmental agreements can create ‘treaty congestion’ (Anton, 2012). This complicates participation and implementation for both developed and developing nations (Esty and Ivanova, 2002).…”

Section: Centralisation Criteria: a History Of Governance Trade‐offsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fragmentation and the Future: Investigating Architectures for International AI Governance

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The international governance of artificial intelligence (AI) is at a crossroads: should it remain fragmented or be centralised? We draw on the history of environment, trade, and security regimes to identify advantages and disadvantages in centralising AI governance. Some considerations, such as efficiency and political power, speak for centralisation. The risk of creating a slow and brittle institution, and the difficulty of pairing deep rules with adequate participation, speak against it. Other considerations depend on the specific design. A centralised body may be able to deter forum shopping and ensure policy coordination. However, forum shopping can be beneficial, and fragmented institutions could self-organise. In sum, these trade-offs should inform development of the AI governance architecture, which is only now emerging. We apply the tradeoffs to the case of the potential development of high-level machine intelligence. We conclude with two recommendations. First, the outcome will depend on the exact design of a central institution. A well-designed centralised regime covering a set of coherent issues could be beneficial. But locking-in an inadequate structure may pose a fate worse than fragmentation. Second, fragmentation will likely persist for now. The developing landscape should be monitored to see if it is self-organising or simply inadequate. Policy Implications • Secretariats of emerging AI initiatives, for example, the OECD AI Policy Observatory, Global Partnership on AI, the UN High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation, and the UN System Chief Executives Board (CEB) should coordinate to halt and reduce further regime fragmentation. • There is an important role for academia to play in providing objective monitoring and assessment of the emerging AI regime complex to assess its conflict, coordination, and catalysts to address governance gaps without vested interests. Secretariats of emerging AI initiatives should be similarly empowered to monitor the emerging regime. The CEB appears particularly well placed and mandated to address this challenge, but other options exist. • What AI issues and applications need to be tackled in tandem is an open question on which the centralisation debate sensitively turns. We encourage scholars across AI issues from privacy to military applications to organise venues to more closely consider this vital question. • Non-state actors, especially those with technical expertise, will have a potent influence in either a fragmented or centralised regime. These contributions need to be used, but there also need to be safeguards in place against regulatory capture. • The AI regime complex is at an embryonic stage, where informed interventions may be expected to have an outsized impact. The effect of academics as norm entrepreneurs should not be underestimated at this point.

show abstract

“…Institutional fragmentation has received significant scholarly attention as a macroscopic feature of international environmental law and governance (e.g., Doelle, 2004;Stephens, 2007;Carlarne, 2008;van Asselt et al, 2008;Biermann et al, 2009;Boyd, 2010;Scott, 2011;van Asselt, 2012;Zelli and van Asselt, 2013). Although there is no consensus on its meaning and implications (Biermann et al, 2009;Zelli and van Asselt, 2013), the underlying idea can be traced to the notion of treaty congestion (Brown Weiss, 1993; see also Hicks, 1999;Anton, 2012), that institutional proliferation has led to chaos and anarchy.…”

Section: Fragmentation Polycentricity and Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The emergent network structure of the multilateral environmental agreement system

Kim

2013

Global Environmental Change

145

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conventional piecemeal approach to environmental treaty-making has resulted in a 'maze' of international agreements. However, little is known empirically about its overall structure and evolutionary dynamics. This study reveals and characterizes the evolving structure of the web of international environmental treaty law. The structure was approximated using 1001 cross-references among 747 multilateral environmental agreements concluded from 1857 to 2012. Known network analysis measures were used to answer the following questions: has a complex system of international environmental treaty law emerged? If so when, and what does it look like? What are its topological properties? To what extent is the institutional complex fragmented? The network analysis suggested that multilateral environmental agreements have self-organized into an interlocking system with a complex network structure. Furthermore, the system has defragmented as it coevolved with the increasing complexity and interconnectivity of global environmental challenges. This study demonstrates the need to approach multilateral environmental agreements in the context of a complex networked system, and recommends against assuming the overall institutional structure is fragmented. Proposals for global environmental governance reform should pay attention to this network's emergent polycentric order and complexity and to the implications of these features for the functioning of the multilateral environmental agreement system.

show abstract

“Treaty congestion” in contemporary international environmental law

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Incorporating international biodiversity law principles and rights perspective into the European Union Timber Regulation

Incorporating international biodiversity law principles and rights perspective into the European Union Timber Regulation

Fragmentation and the Future: Investigating Architectures for International AI Governance

The emergent network structure of the multilateral environmental agreement system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About