The institutionalisation of trust in the international climate regime
In the extensive literature on international environmental co-operation, trust is usually treated in terms of compliance and verification mechanisms, on the assumption that there will always be incentives for parties to international agreements to cheat or to 'free ride'. Indeed the establishment of adequate assurances that such behaviour will be detected and punished is frequently the sine qua non of agreement in the first place. Technical and legal compliance mechanisms have developed rapidly in environmental treaty-making over the last two decades. The climate regime is no exception and its provisions in this regard are briefly described and analysed. However, it will be argued that the development of trust amongst the parties goes well beyond formal compliance and depends upon the institutionalised relationships, often amongst officials and technical experts that have grown up, since the negotiations for a climate treaty commenced in the late 1980s.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Checkel, Jeffrey T., 2001. "Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(03), pages 553-588, June.
- John Vogler, 2003. "Taking Institutions Seriously: How Regime Analysis can be Relevant to Multilevel Environmental Governance," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 3(2), pages 25-39, 05.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:6:p:2681-2687. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.