The forest policy outputs of regional regimes: a qualitative comparative analysis on the effects of formalization, hegemony and issue-focus around the globe

Pradip Kumar Sarker, Lukas Giessen, Max Göhrs, Sohui Jeon, Minette Nago, Fredy David Polo-Villanueva and Sarah Lilian Burns ()
Additional contact information
Pradip Kumar Sarker: Thünen Institute of International Forestry and Forest Economics
Lukas Giessen: Technical University Dresden
Max Göhrs: Georg-August University
Sohui Jeon: University of New South Wales
Minette Nago: Georg-August University
Fredy David Polo-Villanueva: Technical University Dresden
Sarah Lilian Burns: Technical University Dresden

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 2024, vol. 24, issue 2, No 9, 449-467

Abstract: Abstract International regimes, defined as sets of norms and rules around which members’ expectations converge, are providing structures for facilitating cooperation in a given issue area. Two main lines of environmental regime scholarship prevailed thus far: one on structural design aspects of international institutions and one on their effects and effectiveness. However, questions on how such effects are achieved in detail largely remain unanswered. Against this background, this study aims to analyze the institutional design conditions under which regional regimes produce strong or weak policies. We do so by qualitatively comparing, using a fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA), nine regional regimes across the world towards their ability of producing regime forest policies as an illustrative issue area. Three structural conditions were identified as being influential on regime policy: (i) The degree of formalization (ii) The existence of hegemonic/powerful member state(s) and (iii) Scope or issue specificity bearing the identity of a regime. Our results showed that no one condition on its own was necessary to produce either strong or weak regime forest policy. However, all three conditions, through three different configurations, created a robust pathway for producing strong regime policy. In addition, the combination that showed the presence of all three conditions was related to weak regime policy. These results open several prospects for future research on the relationship between regimes´ structures and regime policy.

Keywords: QCA; Regional regimes on forests; Institutional design; Regime structure; Regime policy; Forest policy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-024-09641-1 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:24:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10784-024-09641-1

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10784

DOI: 10.1007/s10784-024-09641-1

Access Statistics for this article

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics is currently edited by Joyeeta Gupta

More articles in International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().