Transcript POSC 2200 - Introduction

POSC 2200 – International
Political Economy
Russell Alan Williams
Department of Political Science
Unit Six: International Political
Economy
“Environmental Cooperation"
Required Reading:
Globalization of World Politics, Chapter 21.
 David Layfield, “International policy on climate change: after Kyoto, what
next?” Environmental Politics, 19:4, (2010), Pp. 657-661. (Available from
e-journals, or from the instructor.)

Outline:
Sovereign States and the Tragedy of the Commons
2. Theoretical Issues
3. Practical Environmental Challenges:
1.



4.
The Impact of the Trade Regime
Ozone Depletion and CFC’s
Carbon Emissions and the Kyoto Protocol
Conclusions
1) Sovereignty & the Tragedy of Commons:
Environmental issues highlight problematic
legacy of “Westphalian” system of sovereignty:
“Sovereignty”: provides
states with right act
within their own territory
as they wish, but . . . .
Environmental issues do
not respect territoriality
 E.g. “Acid Rain”

“Tragedy of the Commons”:


Much like “Prisoners’ Dilemma” – individual self
interested rationality leads to collective outcomes that
make everyone worse off.
Concept has become a metaphor for global
environmental issues:

E.g. Clean air, water and the depletion/damage of “open
access” resources
2) Theoretical Issues:
As awareness of globalization and environmental
problems grew after the 1970s, IR scholars speculated
that there were two types of problems . . . .
1) The “Race to the Bottom” dynamic


Increased economic integration and competition, made it “rational”
for states to reduce costly environmental regulations.
Since all states understood this, all would act in the same way.
=More pollution and more environment and health problems
Record suggest the “race to the bottom” has not materialized . . .
2) Theoretical Issues:
As awareness of globalization and environmental
problems grew after the 1970s, IR scholars speculated
that there were two types of problems . . . .
2) States have different “Ecological Footprints”

“Ecological Footprint”: System for measuring the
load placed on natural systems by human activity.


Assumes:
 Some loads may not be sustainable over the long
term
 Loads go up as standards of living increase
E.g. “Globalization” and “development”, by increasing
standards of living will create unsustainable ecological
footprints
Concern over “Ecological Footprints” reflect emerging
“norms” . . . .

“Sustainable Development”: Development that meets
people’s current social and economic needs without
depleting the ability of people in the future to meet their
needs.

Supported by:
 Bundtland
Commission (1987)
 United Nations
Environmental
Program (UNEP)
 Many NGO’s
Very challenging – suggest the
need to limit growth . . .
somewhere!
Key point:

Both potential “race to the bottom” problems
and challenges of “ecological footprints” that
meet “sustainable development” require
international cooperation . . . .


E.g.
“International Law”
“International Regimes”
Lessons from IR . . . ?

Depends on your perspective! Do regimes and
international law “work” in other areas . . . .
3) Practical Environmental Challenges:
a) The impact of the “trade regime”:
WTO and trade law encourages globalization and
discourages states from creating barriers to trade – E.g.
“Liberalization”



Includes domestic standards about how products are created – States
are not allowed discriminate on the basis of environmental concerns
E.g. The “Tuna-Dolphin” Cases . . . .
= Obstacle to internationalizing environmental
standards based on consumption
3) Practical Environmental Challenges:
b) Ozone Depletion &
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC’s):
CFC’s were a standard and highly valued
industrial product, however . . .
After 1980s scientific consensus emerged
that their emission was eroding the ozone
layer exposing humans to harm.


Result = “Montreal Protocol”: States
create a regime to ban the use of CFC’s
– highly effective
Illustrates role of a scientific
“Epistemic Community”
3) Practical Environmental Challenges:
c) Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate
Change:
After 1980s many scientists argued that the emission of some
forms of pollution were creating a “greenhouse” effect that
would contribute to global warming
= Uncertain environmental consequences (rising seas, droughts
in some regions, habitat collapses) – potentially very $$$$$

Result: Long running international efforts to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions (primarily
carbon)

“Kyoto Protocol” (1997): International Regime
designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Developed states were supposed to implement systems to
reduce emissions by approx. 5% between 1990 and 2008.
 Many developing states were not included in limits (E.g. to
allow increases in development)


Widely perceived as a failure . . . ?
David Layfield: International Policy
on Climate : After Kyoto, What Next?
Piece is a review of contemporary literature on the
problems with the “Kyoto Protocol” - Written in
period when standards were not being met and the
protocol had not been renewed
 Arguments about what was “wrong” with the deal:

1) Lessons in IR theory: Sovereign statehood was going to
make this hard.

No one state is responsible for the system as a whole and there is no
way to enforce standards(!)
2) International Political Economy: Demand for carbon
emissions continue to increase(!)

States developing new, dirtier sources of energy to support economy
(Coal or “Tar/Oil Sands”)
3) Regime focused on producers that caused carbon
emissions rather than consumers of final product.

Unfair! Made Europe look good since they don’t make anything,
but their real carbon producing consumption has gone up.
David Layfield: International Policy
on Climate : After Kyoto, What Next?
Arguments suggest need for a reformed
system, but obstacles are steep(!)


States have “cheated”
Some states (including several of the worst
polluters) have left the system


E.g. Canada?
Scientific “debates” different from “Montreal
Protocol” = absence of “consensus” . . . .

4) Conclusions:
Environmental issues illustrate many of the
dynamics of international politics:
“Anarchy”
 Collective action problems
 Weaknesses in regimes and law
 And . . . the problematic implications of “sovereignty” and
“globalization”


However, some of the obstacles to better cooperation
are the products of successful international regimes
(e.g. Trade)

Suggests problems should be manageable . . . .
5) For Next Time . . .
Unit Six: International Political Economy
“Poverty, Development and Human Security”
Required Reading:
 Globalization of World Politics, Chapters 28 and
29.
 Bruce R. Scott, “The Great Divide in the Global
Village,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 80, No. 1 (Jan. Feb., 2001), Pp. 160-177. (Available from ejournals, or as an excerpt, from the instructor).