Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Access
  • Open access
  • Print publication year: 2020
  • Online publication date: June 2020

2 - Analytical Framework

from Part I - Mapping the Climate-Energy Nexus
  • View HTML
    • Send chapter to Kindle

      To send this chapter to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Available formats
      ×

      Send chapter to Dropbox

      To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Available formats
      ×

      Send chapter to Google Drive

      To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Available formats
      ×

Summary

This chapter establishes four evaluative themes that will be employed across this volume to analyze the institutional complexity of policy fields in the climate-energy nexus: coherence, management, legitimacy, and effectiveness. Coherence among institutions is conceptualized along four dimensions: convergence on an overarching core norm for the policy field, balanced coverage and distribution of memberships (private, public, hybrid), balanced coverage and distribution of governance functions (standards and commitments, operational activities, information and networking, financing), and mechanisms underlying cross-institutional relations (cognitive, normative, behavioural). Management will be examined according to types of managing agents, political levels (from domestic to global), and the consequences of management efforts in enhancing coherence. Legitimacy will be assessed along nine dimensions, among them expertise, transparency, accountability, or procedural and distributive fairness. Effectiveness, finally, will be examined in terms of normative and legal output produced by the institutions, their behaviour-changing outcome, and their ultimate problem-solving impact. Altogether, the four themes and their dimensions make up a novel framework for an in-depth analysis of a governance nexus. They help us examine a variety of important questions in a comparative research design, combining a high level of ambition with feasibility and novelty.

2.5
Abbott, K. W. 2012. The Transnational Regime Complex for Climate Change. Environment & Planning C: Government & Policy 30(4), 571590.
Abbott, K. W. and Snidal, D. 2009a. Strengthening International Regulation through Transnational New Governance: Overcoming the Orchestration Deficit. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 42(2), 501578.
Abbott, K. W. and Snidal, D. 2009b. The Governance Triangle: Regulatory Standards Institutions and the Shadow of the State. In The Politics of Global Regulation, edited by Mattli, W. and Woods, N.. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Abbott, K. W., Green, J. F., and Keohane, R. O. 2016. Organizational Ecology and Institutional Change in Global Governance. International Organization 70(2), 247277.
Agné, H. 2018. Legitimacy in Global Governance Research: How Normative or Sociological Should It Be? In Legitimacy in Global Governance: Sources, Processes, and Consequences, edited by Tallberg, J., Bäckstrand, K., and Scholte, J. A.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alter, K. J. and Meunier, S. 2009. The Politics of International Regime Complexity. Perspectives on Politics 7(1), 1324.
Andresen, S. and Hey, E. 2005. The Effectiveness and Legitimacy of International Environmental Institutions. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 5(3), 211226.
Bäckstrand, K. and Söderbaum, F. 2018. Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance: Discursive, Institutional, and Behavioural Practices. In Legitimacy in Global Governance: Sources, Processes, and Consequences, edited by, Tallberg, J., Bäckstrand, K., and Scholte, J. A.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bernauer, T. 1995. The Effect of International Environmental Institutions: How We Might Learn More, International Organization 49(2), 351377.
Bernstein, S. 2005. Legitimacy in Global Environmental Governance. Journal of International Law and International Relations 1(1–2), 139166.
Bernstein, S. 2011. Legitimacy in Intergovernmental and Non-State Global Governance. Review of International Political Economy 18(1), 1751.
Biermann, F. and Kim, R. E. Forthcoming. Introduction. In Global Governance for the Earth: Transforming Institutional Architectures in the Anthropocene, edited by Biermann, F. and Kim, R. E.. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Braithwaite, J. and Drahos, P. 2000. Global Business Regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buchanan, A. and Keohane, R. O. 2006. The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions. Ethics & International Affairs 20(4), 405437.
Clark, I. 2007. Legitimacy in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Conca, K. 2006. Governing Water: Contentious Transnational Politics and Global Institution Building. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Eberlein, B. et al. 2014. Transnational Business Governance Interactions: Conceptualization and Framework for Analysis. Regulation & Governance 8(1), 121.
Finnemore, M. 1996. National Interests in International Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Gehring, F. and Faude, B. 2014. A Theory of Emerging Order within Institutional Complexes. Review of International Organizations 9(4), 471498.
Gehring, T. and Oberthür, S. 2006. Comparative Empirical Analysis and Ideal Types of Institutional Interaction. In Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance: Synergy and Conflict among International and EU Policies, edited by Oberthür, S. and Gehring, T.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gehring, T. and Oberthür, S. 2009. The Causal Mechanisms of Interaction between International Institutions. European Journal of International Relations 15(1), 125156.
Gronau, J. and Schmidtke, H. 2016. The Quest for Legitimacy in World Politics – International Institutions’ Legitimation Strategies. Review of International Studies 42(3), 535557.
Gutner, T. and Thompson, A. 2010. The Politics of IO Performance: A Framework. The Review of International Organizations 5(3), 227248.
Helfer, L. 2009. Regime Shifting in the International Intellectual Property System. Perspectives on Politics 7(1), 3944.
Hurd, I. 1999. Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics. International Organization 53(2), 379408.
Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. I. and McGee, J. 2013. Legitimacy in an Era of Fragmentation: The Case of Global Climate Governance. Global Environmental Politics 13(3), 5678.
Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. I. and Vihma, A. 2009. Comparing the Legitimacy and Effectiveness of Global Hard and Soft Law: An Analytical Framework. Regulation and Governance 3(4), 400420.
Keohane, R. O. 1989. International Institutions and State Power. Essays in International Relations Theory. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Keohane, R. O. 1993. The Analysis of International Regimes. Towards a European-American Research Programme. In Regime Theory and International Relations, edited by Rittberger, V.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Keohane, R. O. 2011. Global Governance and Legitimacy. Review of International Political Economy 18(1), 99109.
Lenz, T. and Viola, L. A. 2017. Legitimacy and Institutional Change in International Organisations: A Cognitive Approach. Review of International Studies 43(5), 939961.
Mena, S. and Palazzo, G. 2012. Input and Output Legitimacy of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives. Business Ethics Quarterly 22(3), 527556.
Nasiritousi, N., Hjerpe, M., and Bäckstrand, K. 2016. Normative Arguments for Non-State Actor Participation in International Policymaking Processes: Functionalism, Neocorporatism or Democratic Pluralism? European Journal of International Relations 22(4), 920943.
Oberthür, S. 2009. Interplay Management: Enhancing Environmental Policy Integration among International Institutions. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 9(4), 371391.
Oberthür, S. and Gehring, T. 2006. Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance: The Case of the Cartagena Protocol and the World Trade Organization. Global Environmental Politics 6(2), 131.
Oberthür, S. and Stokke, O. S. 2011. Managing Institutional Complexity: Regime Interplay and Global Environmental Change. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Ruggie, J. G. 1998. Introduction: What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-Utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge. In Constructing the World Polity: Essays on International Relations, edited by Ruggie, J. G.. London: Routledge.
Schneider, C. J. and Urpelainen, J. 2013. Distributional Conflict Between Powerful States and International Treaty Ratification. International Studies Quarterly 57:1, 1327.
Scholte, J. A. and Tallberg, J. 2018. Theorizing the Institutional Sources of Global Governance Legitimacy. In Legitimacy in Global Governance: Sources, Processes and Consequences, edited by Tallberg, J., Bäckstrand, K., and Scholte, J. A.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stokke, O. S. 2001. The Interplay of International Regimes: Putting Effectiveness Theory to Work? FNI Report 10/2001. Lysaker: Fridtjof Nansen Institute.
Suchman, M. 1995. Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. The Academy of Management Review 20(3), 571610.
Symons, J. 2011. The Legitimation of International Organisations: Examining the Identity of the Communities that Grant Legitimacy. Review of International Studies 37(5), 25572583.
Tallberg, J., Sommerer, T., Squatrito, T., and Lundgren, M. 2016. The Performance of International Organizations: An Output-Based Approach. Journal of European Public Policy 23(7), 10771096.
Tosun, J., Koos, S., and Shore, J. 2016. Co-Governing Common Goods: Interaction Patterns of Private and Public Actors. Policy and Society 35(1), 112.
Underdal, A. 2002. One Question, Two Answers. In Environmental Regime Effectiveness: Confronting Theory with Evidence, edited by Miles, E. et al. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Van de Graaf, T. 2013. Fragmentation in Global Energy Governance: Explaining the Creation of IRENA. Global Environmental Politics 13(3), 1433.
Van de Graaf, T. and Zelli, F. 2016. Actors, Institutions and Frames in Global Energy Politics. In The Palgrave Handbook of the International Political Economy of Energy, edited by Van de Graaf, T., Sovacool, B. K., Kern, F., Ghosh, A., and Klare, M. T.. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Young, O. R. 1996. Institutional Linkages in International Society: Polar Perspectives. Global Governance 2(1), 124.
Zelli, F. 2010. Conflicts among International Regimes on Environmental Issues. A Theory-driven Analysis. PhD Dissertation. Tübingen: Eberhard-Karls University.
Zelli, F. 2018. Global Governance. In Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics and International Relations. 4th edition, edited by Brown, G. W., McLean, I., and McMillan, A.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zelli, F., Gupta, A., and van Asselt, H. 2013. Institutional Interactions at the Crossroads of Trade and Environment: The Dominance of Liberal Environmentalism? Global Governance 19(1), 105118.