IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v15y2021i3p686-708.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experimentalist interactions: Joining up the transnational timber legality regime

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan Zeitlin
  • Christine Overdevest

Abstract

This paper analyzes the interactions between the separate components of the emerging transnational timber legality regime, both public and private. It examines how far, and through what institutional mechanisms, these interactions are producing a joined‐up transnational regime, based on a shared normative commitment to combat illegal logging and cooperative efforts to implement and enforce it. The paper argues that the experimentalist architecture of the EU FLEGT initiative has fostered productive, mutually reinforcing interactions both with public timber legality regulation in other consumer countries and with private certification schemes. But this emerging regime remains highly polyarchic, with broad scope for autonomous initiatives by NGOs and private service providers, along with national governments, international organizations, and multi‐donor partnerships. Hence horizontal integration and coordination within it depend on a series of institutional mechanisms, some of which are distinctively experimentalist, while others can also be found in more conventional regimes. These mechanisms include cross‐referencing and reciprocal endorsement of rules and standards; recursive learning through information pooling and peer review of implementation experience; public oversight and joint assessment of private certification and legality verification schemes; and the “penalty default” effect of public legality regulation in consumer countries, which have pushed both exporting countries and transnational firms to comply with the norms and procedures of the emerging transnational regime. The paper's findings thus provide robust new evidence for the claim advanced in previous work that a joined‐up transnational regime can be assembled piece by piece under polyarchic conditions through coordinated learning from decentralized experimentation, without a hegemonic power to impose common global rules.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan Zeitlin & Christine Overdevest, 2021. "Experimentalist interactions: Joining up the transnational timber legality regime," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 686-708, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:15:y:2021:i:3:p:686-708
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12350
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12350
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12350?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 641-672, June.
    2. Hansen, Christian P. & Rutt, Rebecca & Acheampong, Emmanuel, 2018. "‘Experimental’ or business as usual? Implementing the European Union Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Voluntary Partnership Agreement in Ghana," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 75-82.
    3. Finnemore, Martha & Sikkink, Kathryn, 1998. "International Norm Dynamics and Political Change," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(4), pages 887-917, October.
    4. Nathan, Iben & Chen, Jie & Hansen, Christian Pilegaard & Xu, Bin & Li, Yan, 2018. "Facing the complexities of the global timber trade regime: How do Chinese wood enterprises respond to international legality verification requirements, and what are the implications for regime effecti," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 169-180.
    5. De Búrca, Gráinne & Keohane, Robert O. & Sabel, Charles, 2014. "Global Experimentalist Governance," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(03), pages 477-486, July.
    6. Benjamin Cashore & Michael W. Stone, 2014. "Does California need Delaware? Explaining Indonesian, Chinese, and United States support for legality compliance of internationally traded products," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 49-73, March.
    7. Joana Carlos Bezerra & Jan Sindt & Lukas Giessen, 2018. "The rational design of regional regimes: contrasting Amazonian, Central African and Pan-European Forest Governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 635-656, October.
    8. Hoffmann, Matthew J., 2011. "Climate Governance at the Crossroads: Experimenting with a Global Response after Kyoto," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195390087, Decembrie.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Apeti, Ablam Estel & N’Doua, Bossoma Doriane, 2023. "The impact of timber regulations on timber and timber product trade," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frans Sengers & Bruno Turnheim & Frans Berkhout, 2021. "Beyond experiments: Embedding outcomes in climate governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(6), pages 1148-1171, September.
    2. Steven Bernstein & Matthew Hoffmann, 2018. "The politics of decarbonization and the catalytic impact of subnational climate experiments," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(2), pages 189-211, June.
    3. Teresa Kramarz & Susan Park, 2016. "Accountability in Global Environmental Governance: A Meaningful Tool for Action?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(2), pages 1-21, May.
    4. Geng Qin & Hanzhi Yu, 2023. "Rescuing the Paris Agreement: Improving the Global Experimentalist Governance by Reclassifying Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.
    5. Ansell, Christopher K. & Bartenberger, Martin, 2016. "Varieties of experimentalism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 64-73.
    6. Marcel T. J. Kok & Kathrin Ludwig, 2022. "Understanding international non-state and subnational actors for biodiversity and their possible contributions to the post-2020 CBD global biodiversity framework: insights from six international coope," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-25, March.
    7. Clarissa Caimol, 2022. "The policies, the actions, and the political-administrative organization of Emilia-Romagna region to combat the climate change: a social network approach," SEEDS Working Papers 0922, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Sep 2022.
    8. Charles F. Sabel & David G. Victor, 2017. "Governing global problems under uncertainty: making bottom-up climate policy work," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 15-27, September.
    9. Robert Falkner, 2015. "A minilateral solution for global climate change? On bargaining efficiency, club benefits and international legitimacy," GRI Working Papers 197, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    10. Gautier, Lara & Tosun, Jale & De Allegri, Manuela & Ridde, Valéry, 2018. "How do diffusion entrepreneurs spread policies? Insights from performance-based financing in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 160-175.
    11. Chaewoon Oh & Shunji Matsuoka, 2015. "The position of the Low Carbon Growth Partnership (LCGP): at the end of Japan’s navigation between the Kyoto Protocol and the APP," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 125-140, May.
    12. Bernhard Reinsberg & Oliver Westerwinter, 2021. "The global governance of international development: Documenting the rise of multi-stakeholder partnerships and identifying underlying theoretical explanations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 59-94, January.
    13. Vlad Tarko, 2015. "The role of ideas in political economy," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 28(1), pages 17-39, March.
    14. Florent Frasson-Quenoz y otros., 2020. "Pensar, debatir y aportar a las Relaciones Internacionales," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Finanzas, Gobierno y Relaciones Internacionales, number 143, April.
    15. Dryzek, John S. & Pickering, Jonathan, 2017. "Deliberation as a catalyst for reflexive environmental governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 353-360.
    16. Lukas Hermwille, 2018. "Making initiatives resonate: how can non-state initiatives advance national contributions under the UNFCCC?," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 447-466, June.
    17. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    18. Marco Grasso & J. David Tàbara, 2019. "Towards a Moral Compass to Guide Sustainability Transformations in a High-End Climate Change World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, May.
    19. Andy Gouldson & Rory Sullivan, 2014. "Understanding the Governance of Corporations: An Examination of the Factors Shaping UK Supermarket Strategies on Climate Change," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(12), pages 2972-2990, December.
    20. David Klenert & Franziska Funke & Linus Mattauch & Brian O’Callaghan, 2020. "Five Lessons from COVID-19 for Advancing Climate Change Mitigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 751-778, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:15:y:2021:i:3:p:686-708. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.