IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ieaple/v25y2025i3d10.1007_s10784-025-09673-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Democratizing environmental treaty development: the Escazú experience

Author

Listed:
  • Jingjing Zhao

    (Nankai University)

  • Uzuazo Etemire

    (University of Port Harcourt)

Abstract

For long, binding environmental treaties have provided a basis for unified state action aimed at addressing transnational environmental issues. Traditionally, these treaties were developed by officials of sovereign states, largely to the exclusion of civil society. However, the last few decades have witnessed what appears to be the gradual democratization of environmental treaty development with the increasing emergence in this process of the voice and presence of civil society. This phenomenon is strongly exemplified by the activities surrounding the development of the 2018 Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean (the ‘Escazú Agreement’) which came into force in 2021. Thus, this article engages with the theoretical underpinnings, and broadly maps the practical progress of civil society participation in environmental treaty development in general. Against this backdrop and through the experiences surrounding the Escazú Agreement, this article mainly reflects on the scope, impact, challenges and implications of the growing involvement of civil society in what was exclusively the turf of state actors.

Suggested Citation

  • Jingjing Zhao & Uzuazo Etemire, 2025. "Democratizing environmental treaty development: the Escazú experience," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 403-423, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:25:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s10784-025-09673-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-025-09673-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-025-09673-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10784-025-09673-1?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy in earth system governance: A research framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1856-1864, September.
    2. Beierle, Thomas C., 1998. "Public Participation in Environmental Decisions: An Evaluation Framework Using Social Goals," Discussion Papers 10497, Resources for the Future.
    3. Beierle, Thomas, 1998. "Public Participation in Environmental Decisions: An Evaluation Framework Using Social Goals," RFF Working Paper Series dp-99-06, Resources for the Future.
    4. Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy: An analytical challenge for earth system governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1854-1855, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Duncan Weaver, 2018. "The Aarhus convention and process cosmopolitanism," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 199-213, April.
    2. Nasiritousi, Naghmeh & Hjerpe, Mattias & Buhr, Katarina, 2014. "Pluralising climate change solutions? Views held and voiced by participants at the international climate change negotiations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 177-184.
    3. Schouten, Greetje & Leroy, Pieter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2012. "On the deliberative capacity of private multi-stakeholder governance: The Roundtables on Responsible Soy and Sustainable Palm Oil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 42-50.
    4. 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.
    5. Cathrin Zengerling, 2019. "Governing the City of Flows: How Urban Metabolism Approaches May Strengthen Accountability in Strategic Planning," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 187-199.
    6. Cathrin Zengerling, 2019. "Governing the City of Flows: How Urban Metabolism Approaches May Strengthen Accountability in Strategic Planning," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 187-199.
    7. Joseph Earsom, 2024. "Fit for purpose? Just Energy Transition Partnerships and accountability in international climate governance," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(1), pages 135-141, February.
    8. Klusáček, Petr & Alexandrescu, Filip & Osman, Robert & Malý, Jiří & Kunc, Josef & Dvořák, Petr & Frantál, Bohumil & Havlíček, Marek & Krejčí, Tomáš & Martinát, Stanislav & Skokanová, Hana & Trojan, Ja, 2018. "Good governance as a strategic choice in brownfield regeneration: Regional dynamics from the Czech Republic," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 29-39.
    9. Adelaide Glover & Heike Schroeder, 2017. "Legitimacy in REDD+ governance in Indonesia," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 695-708, October.
    10. Karlijn Muiderman & Aarti Gupta & Joost Vervoort & Frank Biermann, 2020. "Four approaches to anticipatory climate governance: Different conceptions of the future and implications for the present," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    11. Nuno Videira & Paula Antunes & Rui Santos & Sofia Gamito, 2003. "Participatory Modelling in Environmental Decision-Making: The Ria Formosa Natural Park Case Study," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 421-447.
    12. S. Franceschini & G. Marletto, 2017. "The dynamics of social capital during public participation: new knowledge from an on-going monitoring," Working Paper CRENoS 201706, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    13. Rosendal, G. Kristin & Schei, Peter Johan, 2014. "How may REDD+ affect the practical, legal and institutional framework for ‘Payment for ecosystem services’ in Costa Rica?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 75-82.
    14. Axel Marx & Jan Wouters, 2011. "Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation: Conclusions and Implications," Chapters, in: David Vogel & Johan Swinnen (ed.), Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation, chapter 12, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Jan Fagerberg & Staffan Laestadius & Ben R. Martin, 2016. "The Triple Challenge for Europe: The Economy, Climate Change, and Governance," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(3), pages 178-204, May.
    16. Lia T. Vasconcelos & Flávia Z. Silva & Filipa G. Ferreira & Graça Martinho & Ana Pires & José Carlos Ferreira, 2022. "Collaborative process design for waste management: co-constructing strategies with stakeholders," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(7), pages 9243-9259, July.
    17. Philipp Pattberg & Cille Kaiser & Oscar Widerberg & Johannes Stripple, 2022. "20 Years of global climate change governance research: taking stock and moving forward," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 295-315, June.
    18. van den Hove, Sybille, 2000. "Participatory approaches to environmental policy-making: the European Commission Climate Policy Process as a case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 457-472, June.
    19. Neli Aparecida de Mello-Théry & Eduardo de Lima Caldas & Beatriz M. Funatsu & Damien Arvor & Vincent Dubreuil, 2020. "Climate Change and Public Policies in the Brazilian Amazon State of Mato Grosso: Perceptions and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-20, June.
    20. Manjana Milkoreit & Kate Haapala, 2019. "The global stocktake: design lessons for a new review and ambition mechanism in the international climate regime," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 89-106, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:spr:ieaple:v:25:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s10784-025-09673-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.