Ankur Garg FES829 Final Exam

7/31/2019 Ankur Garg FES829 Final Exam

1/11

Submitted by: Ankur Garg

F&ES 829b

INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GOVERNANCE

Spring 2012

INSTRUCTIONS &QUESTIONS FORFINAL EXAMINATION

Date & Time: 30 April, 2:30 to 5:00

Section I: The Practices of Environmental Governance

A.Which international relations theory best explains global efforts over one of thefollowing issue areas: extractive industries?

Ans: According to the international relations theorists, there are three IR theories that

may broadly define the global efforts over any of the existing environmental issues:

a) Realismb) Liberal institutionalismc) cognitivism

Followers of realism (realists) believe that anarchy in the international governance structure

is predominant and there are no incentives for states to co-operate with each other.

According to them, the past experiences of states are based on non-cooperation and hostility

rather than mutual co-operation. They believe that whatever co-operation exists between the


2/11


states is supremely driven by selfish motives (for their personal benefits) and predominantly

driven by economic and military interests (rather than environmental or social welfare).

Liberal institutionalists believe that there are enough incentives for states to indulge in

mutual co-operation for the overall welfare of everyone. For them, anarchy in international

governance is hindrance in the sense that it encourages individual states to freeride by

defying multi-state agreements. Every state expects others to follow the conditions laid out

in an agreement and enjoy the benefits so accrued, and self-defy the agreement. As a result,

no one complies by the terms of an agreement and this eventually results in the failure of co-

operative efforts. According to liberal institutionalists, non-state actors such as international

organization (like the United Nations), non-governmental organizations, civil societies,

corporates, advocacy groups etc are very important to rectify this anamoly by enhancing

transparency and affecting accountability between the state actors.

Cognitivists differ from the institutionalists and realists in that they do not believe in self-

utility centric approach of the states. They do not believe that the goals for a state are

predefined by internal actors. They believe that ideologies and pursuance of states may be

redefined as new ideas and thoughts are propounded. Hence, they give a very high weightage

to non-state actors and believe they have immense power by coming up with new ideas and

theories, which greatly influence the state of international co-operation.

The table below summarizes the different beliefs of each of these theorists.


3/11


Believe Anarchy

in international

governance

Believe in

Importance of

non-state actors

Believe that

military and

economic

factors are main

interests of

states

Realists Central to their

belief

No Strongly believe

Liberal

institutionalists

Yes but could

be tackled

Yes Dont believe

cognitivists Yes but could

be tackled

Strongly believe Dont Believe

In order to understand, which IR theory, best defines the global efforts over environmental

issues associated with extractive industries, we must first look at the ways in which extractive

industries operate and various efforts by state and non-state actors in mitigating the social-

environmental impacts from these industries.

Looking at their history, EIs seem to be classic examples of the realist theory. This could

easily be understood by looking at the way, oil markets have traditionally functioned and by

looking at the oil complex theory propounded by Watts. Evolution of oil industry could be

split into two epochsPreoil embargo of 1970s and post oil embargo. Before 1970s, the

oil industry operated by the nexus between Trans National Companies (TNCs) and petro

states. In 1930s, the cartel of Shell, Indo-Persian oil and standard oil controlled more than

70% petroleum resources of the world. Environmental and social interests were totally


4/11


overlooked and economic and military concerns (since oil was extremely important from

strategic point of view) were the main drivers of states and TNCs. One instance of inter-

state co-operation is the formulation of OPEC (Organization Of Petroleum Exporting

Countries). However, the Organization is classic example of Realists perspective as it was

driven by financial and military motives and had nothing to do with the social or

environmental welfare of humanity. Post 1970s, as OPEC became active, the cartel structure

of the oil markets was broken but the new structure was equally realist in its approach. The

new system was led by American companies as a result of American Hegemony and worked

as a strong nexus between the petro states, military (including the Central Intelligence

Agency), and TNCs. As the oil producing Gulf countries became rich and arms trade was

privatized, it led to intensive militarization of the Gulf countries and resulted in energy wars.

Hence, till this date, realists perspective of IR is predominantly visible in the operation of

EIs.

However, gradually, the states, intergovernmental bodies, non-governmental organizations,

TNCs, civil society and international organizations are becoming active in pushing for

greater transparency in the dealings between the states and the private companies. Pressure is

being built on the EIs to comply with the existing international standards pertaining to

human rights, security and environment. Corporate Social Responsibility has come a long

way since its inception and is actively pursued by the industry. New means and ways of

creating pressure on the industry are being employed by the advocacy groups to force them

to comply with the existing best practices. All this indicates that gradually liberal-

institutionalist perspective is gaining weight in being able to define the state of EIs. Some of

these efforts are being listed below.


5/11


United Nations Global Compact (UNGC)UNGC is a policy strategy initiative initiated by

the UN along with the corporates who emphasize on keeping their operations in compliance

with the 10 internationally agreed human rights principles. Though, not specific to EIs, the

initiative includes some members of the EI community.

Voluntary principles for security and human rights: US and UK governments, extractive

industries, civil society, NGOs etc came together to come up with voluntary principles to

enhance security and human rights best practices compliance by the EIs.

Mining Industries Assessment (MIA) MIA is an initiative by the mining industry, NGOs,

civil society and international groups to enhance compliance with internationally established

human rights, social and environment best practices in their operations. This may be defined

as EI specific UNGC.

Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative The objective of this initiative is to enhance

transparency in financial dealings associated with the EI transactions with states. It aims at

full disclosure and publishing the data pertaining to the payments made by the private

companies and financial gains obtained by the states.

Equator Protocol: This is a good example of financial institutions building pressure on EIs

to strengthen their efforts to comply with environmental and social international best

standards. The financial institutions abiding by the Equator Protocol do not fund projects,

which do not comply with human rights and environmental standards.


6/11


Transnational Advocacy Networks (TANs): These are the most recent phenomenon in

environmental advocacy. The objective is to build pressure on the chief body of executives

of a TNC to comply with environmental and human rights standards of their local

operations.

All the above mentioned initiatives prove that the latest efforts to deal with the social and

environmental problems associated with EIs can be explained best by liberal

institutionalists perspective.

Infact, some initiatives also indicate that the efforts may fall in the Cognitivist perspective.

For instance, The Dirty Gold campaign, hosted by the NGO earthworks, is targeted at

creating awareness amongst the consumers and retailers of gold regarding the environmental

and social impacts of Gold coming from EIs, not complying with international best practices.

It eventually might create enough awareness so that the states come up with strong

regulations abolish unclean gold in the way, s lavery was abolished. Kimberely process is

another such mechanism, which certified diamonds, which are sustainable, produced.

To conclude, the inception and evolution of EIs seem to be best defined by a realists

perspective but the recent advances in dealing with the environmental and social impacts

associated with these industries indicate that liberal institutionalism and to some extent

Cognitivism better define these efforts within the framework of IR.


7/11


Section II: The Future of Global Environmental Governance

B. Drawing on lessons from class, compare the prospects of reform of current institutions

of global environmental governance versus a major overhaul, such as the creation of a World

Environment Organization. In your answer, be sure to evaluate not only what you think

governance ought to do, but the prospects of new institutional arrangements succeeding

(and how success should be defined).

Ans: Various experts on international environmental governance including Young, Brunee,

Bernstein, and Itamov have pointed out several shortcomings in the existing Institutional

Framework for Sustainable Development (IFSD). Some of these include:

Fragmentation of IFSD Negligence of environmental and social pillars of sustainable development in overall

international governance

Lack of funding for United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Ineffective implementation of sustainable development tools due to lack of funding Weak capacity building on sustainable development of states Lack of interface between science and policy

As a result, various options to enhance IFSD were proposed in the Nairobi-Helsinki

outcome. The main ones are listed here:

1. Enhance UNEP


8/11


2. Establish new umbrella organization for sustainable development (something like aSustainable Development Council (SDC))

3. Establish new specialized agency such as World Environment Organization (WEO)or United Nations Environment Organization (UNEO)

4. Enhance United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECSOCO) and UNCommission on Sustainable Development (UN CSD)

Out of the 4, options 1 and 4 fall in the category of enhancing existing institutions of global

environmental governance and options 2 and 3, fall in the category of major overhaul of

existing institutions.

It is also important to point out that UNEPs main role is to take care of the environment

pillar of sustainable development whereas ECSOCO and CSD, interalia, have the

responsibility of broadly integrating the three pillars (environment, social and economic) of

sustainable development. Hence, proposals 2 and 4 complement proposals 1 and 3 and vice

versa.

In order to compare the two approaches (enhancing existing institutions or going for a

major overhaul), a basis of comparison must be established. The comparison could be made

on the following three basis:

1. Political will supporting each approach2. Legal obstacles in the way of implementing each approach3. Financial implications of each approach

Proposal 1Enhancing existing institutions (UNEP, ECSOCO and CSD)


9/11


The following reforms are proposed by the environmental governance experts for enhancing

the effectiveness of UNEP:

1. Universal membership2. Enhanced capacity for capacity building3. Establish policy-science interface or Global Information Network (GIN)4. Clustering of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs)5. Strengthening Environmental Management Group

Judging on the basis of Political will, UNEP already has 2 forums, which have universal

memberships. However, decision making body (the governing council) does not. Universal

membership would strengthen UNEP only if the decision making body has universal

membership. This may not be possible without a strong international political will.

In order to have universal membership, a resolution may have to be passed by the United

Nations General Assembly (UNGA)

In terms of finances, since UNEP already has universal representation in two forums,

universal membership of the governing council should not add much financial burden in

terms of documentation translation etc. However, enhancing UNEPs capacity to get actively

involved with states may have major financial implications. But this may be somewhat

compensated by improved efficiency as a result of the clustering of MEAs etc.

Hence enhancing UNEP does not seem to be daunting task in terms of political will,

financial implications and legal constraints.


10/11


Similarly, strengthening ECSOCO and CSD is also not very difficult since these agencies

have evolved as a process of various enhancements time to time.

Proposal 2Overhauling existing framework (creating UNEO or WEO or SDC)

Creating a specialized agency (such as World Environmental Organization) would require an

international agreement, which will have to be ratified by all the member states and accepted

by the UNGA. This would be a daunting task. Formation of WTO took more than 6 years

and that too after setting up an extensive background for over 35 years!

Setting up a subsidiary body (UNEO) to the UNGA would be less daunting in the sense that

it will not require a treaty approach. It would also not require ratification of all the member

states in order to have universal membership unlike WEO. However, it will have to be

accepted by majority resolution at UNGA.

Setting up SDC would have similar legal challenges and hence would be difficult to

implement. SDC would be dealing with multiple agencies and hence would have to be

ratified by these agencies. It would also be dealing with MEAs and hence will have to be

ratified by the various COPs.

In terms of financial implications, creating these new entities would not have much impact

since the working and responsibilities would almost be similar to enhancing existing agencies.


11/11


The creation of new agencies would more or less serve the same purpose as enhancing the

existing institutions. However, legal obstacles to create these new entities are massive and to

gather sufficient political will to overcome these obstacles will be daunting. Therefore,

prospects are high for the reform of current institutions of global environmental governance

rather than a major overhaul.

Documents

Ankur Garg FES829 Final Exam