重叠的国际机构的相对效力:欧洲联盟与联合国的空气污染条例

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE International Political Science Review Pub Date : 2023-04-02 DOI:10.1177/01925121221145496
Andreas Kokkvoll Tveit, Vegard H. Tørstad
{"title":"重叠的国际机构的相对效力:欧洲联盟与联合国的空气污染条例","authors":"Andreas Kokkvoll Tveit, Vegard H. Tørstad","doi":"10.1177/01925121221145496","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Which types of international institutions display higher ability to change states’ behaviour? This article assesses the relative environmental effectiveness of a management-based (‘soft’) and an enforcement-based (‘hard’) international agreement: the United Nations Sofia Protocol and a European Union directive. Using difference-in-differences analysis, we find that the European Union directive is more effective in inducing emissions reductions than the United Nation’s Sofia Protocol. We propose that the European Union’s enforcement capacity is a likely driver of the directive’s effectiveness. The article makes two contributions to existing literature. First, we provide causal evidence on the relative importance of overlapping international institutions in regulating environmental policy outcomes, elucidating how an apparent emissions-reducing effect of a ‘soft’ United Nations Protocol is in fact driven by the existence of overlapping ‘hard’ European Union regulation. Second, we demonstrate how states’ enthusiasm for emissions regulations can explain the relative effectiveness of soft and hard law institutions.","PeriodicalId":47785,"journal":{"name":"International Political Science Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The relative effectiveness of overlapping international institutions: European Union versus United Nations regulations of air pollution\",\"authors\":\"Andreas Kokkvoll Tveit, Vegard H. Tørstad\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01925121221145496\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Which types of international institutions display higher ability to change states’ behaviour? This article assesses the relative environmental effectiveness of a management-based (‘soft’) and an enforcement-based (‘hard’) international agreement: the United Nations Sofia Protocol and a European Union directive. Using difference-in-differences analysis, we find that the European Union directive is more effective in inducing emissions reductions than the United Nation’s Sofia Protocol. We propose that the European Union’s enforcement capacity is a likely driver of the directive’s effectiveness. The article makes two contributions to existing literature. First, we provide causal evidence on the relative importance of overlapping international institutions in regulating environmental policy outcomes, elucidating how an apparent emissions-reducing effect of a ‘soft’ United Nations Protocol is in fact driven by the existence of overlapping ‘hard’ European Union regulation. Second, we demonstrate how states’ enthusiasm for emissions regulations can explain the relative effectiveness of soft and hard law institutions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47785,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Political Science Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Political Science Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01925121221145496\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Political Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01925121221145496","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

哪些类型的国际机构表现出更强的改变国家行为的能力?本文评估了基于管理(“软”)和基于执行(“硬”)的国际协议:联合国索非亚议定书和欧盟指令的相对环境有效性。通过差异中差异分析,我们发现欧盟指令在诱导减排方面比联合国的《索非亚议定书》更有效。我们认为,欧盟的执法能力可能是该指令有效性的驱动因素。这篇文章对现有文献有两个贡献。首先,我们提供了重叠的国际机构在调节环境政策结果方面的相对重要性的因果证据,阐明了“软”联合国议定书的表面减排效果实际上是由重叠的“硬”欧盟法规驱动的。其次,我们展示了各州对排放法规的热情如何解释软性和硬性法律制度的相对有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The relative effectiveness of overlapping international institutions: European Union versus United Nations regulations of air pollution
Which types of international institutions display higher ability to change states’ behaviour? This article assesses the relative environmental effectiveness of a management-based (‘soft’) and an enforcement-based (‘hard’) international agreement: the United Nations Sofia Protocol and a European Union directive. Using difference-in-differences analysis, we find that the European Union directive is more effective in inducing emissions reductions than the United Nation’s Sofia Protocol. We propose that the European Union’s enforcement capacity is a likely driver of the directive’s effectiveness. The article makes two contributions to existing literature. First, we provide causal evidence on the relative importance of overlapping international institutions in regulating environmental policy outcomes, elucidating how an apparent emissions-reducing effect of a ‘soft’ United Nations Protocol is in fact driven by the existence of overlapping ‘hard’ European Union regulation. Second, we demonstrate how states’ enthusiasm for emissions regulations can explain the relative effectiveness of soft and hard law institutions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: IPSR is committed to publishing material that makes a significant contribution to international political science. It seeks to meet the needs of political scientists throughout the world who are interested in studying political phenomena in the contemporary context of increasing international interdependence and global change. IPSR reflects the aims and intellectual tradition of its parent body, the International Political Science Association: to foster the creation and dissemination of rigorous political inquiry free of subdisciplinary or other orthodoxy.
期刊最新文献
Does municipal amalgamation affect trust in local politicians? The case of Norway The revenge of ‘democratic peace’ Behind the technocratic challenge: Old and new alternatives to party government in Italy The deepest foundation of our democratic crisis Don’t put a ring on it: Gender stereotypes in citizens’ preferences for executive positions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1