南极条约体系的合法性:现在是改革的时候了吗?

IF 0.8 Q2 AREA STUDIES Polar Journal Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI:10.1080/2154896X.2021.1977048
Yelena Yermakova
{"title":"南极条约体系的合法性:现在是改革的时候了吗?","authors":"Yelena Yermakova","doi":"10.1080/2154896X.2021.1977048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) has governed the Antarctic for the last six decades ensuring it to be a place of peace and scientific cooperation. Like any institution, the ATS exists in order to solve collective action problems through coordination and the creation of norms. But how do we know if a particular institution is the right one to solve a specific problem or address issues regarding the governance of a region? And when is it time to replace or reform such an institution? To answer these questions, we need an account of institutional legitimacy. An assessment of the legitimacy of the ATS is necessary in order to determine whether it is worthy of being empowered through support, or if it is time to reform some aspects of it. Building on the account of legitimacy of global governance institutions proposed by Buchanan and Keohane, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS and argues that it is time to reform some components of it. Specifically, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS based on the following criteria: minimal moral acceptability; comparative benefit; institutional integrity; and accountability. The paper highlights the ATS’ shortcomings based on these criteria and suggests reforms that will strengthen the legitimacy of the ATS","PeriodicalId":52117,"journal":{"name":"Polar Journal","volume":"11 1","pages":"342 - 359"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legitimacy of the Antarctic Treaty System: is it time for a reform?\",\"authors\":\"Yelena Yermakova\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2154896X.2021.1977048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) has governed the Antarctic for the last six decades ensuring it to be a place of peace and scientific cooperation. Like any institution, the ATS exists in order to solve collective action problems through coordination and the creation of norms. But how do we know if a particular institution is the right one to solve a specific problem or address issues regarding the governance of a region? And when is it time to replace or reform such an institution? To answer these questions, we need an account of institutional legitimacy. An assessment of the legitimacy of the ATS is necessary in order to determine whether it is worthy of being empowered through support, or if it is time to reform some aspects of it. Building on the account of legitimacy of global governance institutions proposed by Buchanan and Keohane, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS and argues that it is time to reform some components of it. Specifically, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS based on the following criteria: minimal moral acceptability; comparative benefit; institutional integrity; and accountability. The paper highlights the ATS’ shortcomings based on these criteria and suggests reforms that will strengthen the legitimacy of the ATS\",\"PeriodicalId\":52117,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Polar Journal\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"342 - 359\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Polar Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2154896X.2021.1977048\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polar Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2154896X.2021.1977048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要南极条约体系(ATS)在过去的60年里一直统治着南极,确保了它成为一个和平与科学合作的地方。与任何机构一样,ATS的存在是为了通过协调和制定规范来解决集体行动问题。但是,我们如何知道一个特定的机构是否是解决特定问题或解决与地区治理有关问题的正确机构?什么时候该取代或改革这样一个机构?为了回答这些问题,我们需要对制度合法性进行说明。对ATS的合法性进行评估是必要的,以确定它是否值得通过支持获得授权,或者是否是时候改革它的某些方面了。在Buchanan和Keohane提出的全球治理机构合法性的基础上,本文对ATS的正当性进行了评估,并认为是时候改革其某些组成部分了。具体而言,本文根据以下标准评估ATS的合法性:最低道德可接受性;比较效益;制度完整性;以及问责制。该文件基于这些标准强调了ATS的缺点,并建议进行改革,以加强ATS的合法性
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
Legitimacy of the Antarctic Treaty System: is it time for a reform?
ABSTRACT The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) has governed the Antarctic for the last six decades ensuring it to be a place of peace and scientific cooperation. Like any institution, the ATS exists in order to solve collective action problems through coordination and the creation of norms. But how do we know if a particular institution is the right one to solve a specific problem or address issues regarding the governance of a region? And when is it time to replace or reform such an institution? To answer these questions, we need an account of institutional legitimacy. An assessment of the legitimacy of the ATS is necessary in order to determine whether it is worthy of being empowered through support, or if it is time to reform some aspects of it. Building on the account of legitimacy of global governance institutions proposed by Buchanan and Keohane, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS and argues that it is time to reform some components of it. Specifically, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS based on the following criteria: minimal moral acceptability; comparative benefit; institutional integrity; and accountability. The paper highlights the ATS’ shortcomings based on these criteria and suggests reforms that will strengthen the legitimacy of the ATS
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
Polar Journal
Polar Journal Arts and Humanities-Arts and Humanities (all)
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: Antarctica and the Arctic are of crucial importance to global security. Their governance and the patterns of human interactions there are increasingly contentious; mining, tourism, bioprospecting, and fishing are but a few of the many issues of contention, while environmental concerns such as melting ice sheets have a global impact. The Polar Journal is a forum for the scholarly discussion of polar issues from a social science and humanities perspective and brings together the considerable number of specialists and policy makers working on these crucial regions across multiple disciplines. The journal welcomes papers on polar affairs from all fields of the social sciences and the humanities and is especially interested in publishing policy-relevant research. Each issue of the journal either features articles from different disciplines on polar affairs or is a topical theme from a range of scholarly approaches. Topics include: • Polar governance and policy • Polar history, heritage, and culture • Polar economics • Polar politics • Music, art, and literature of the polar regions • Polar tourism • Polar geography and geopolitics • Polar psychology • Polar archaeology Manuscript types accepted: • Regular articles • Research reports • Opinion pieces • Book Reviews • Conference Reports.
期刊最新文献
Perspectives on the economic and political history of the Ross Sea Globalised imaginaries, Arctification and resistance in Arctic tourism – an Arctification perspective on tourism actors’ views on seasonality and growth in Ylläs tourism destination Experiencing Svalbard sustainably? Reflecting on what we can learn about polar cruise tourism from the SEES expedition The Antarctic Peninsula: Argentina and Chile in the era of global change Committing to the Antarctic: values, ecological beliefs, and social identity in national perception
×
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