US presidents and the failure to ratify multilateral environmental agreements

Climate Policy

Volumn 12, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 755-763

  Bang, Guri ^a   Hovi, Jon ^b   Sprinz, Detlef F ^a,c,d  

^a CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH OSLO CICERO   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^c POTSDAM INSTITUTE FOR CLIMATE IMPACT RESEARCH   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

Author keywords

enabling legislation; environmental treaties; Kyoto Protocol; political processes; ratification; United States

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; KYOTO PROTOCOL; POLITICAL PROCESS; POLITICAL SYSTEM;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84864690525     PISSN: 14693062     EISSN: 17527457     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2012.699788     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Bang, G. 2011. Signed but not ratified: limits to US participation in international environmental agreements. Review of Policy Research, 28: 65-81.
2. Baron, D. P. 1998. Comparative dynamics of parliamentary governments. American Political Science Review, 92: 593-609.
3. Bräuniger, T. and Debus, M. 2009. Legislative agenda-setting in parliamentary democracies. European Journal of Political Research, 48: 804-839.
4. Chang, H. 2010. International executive agreements on climate change. Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, 35: 337-371.
5. CIEL, 2006, US ratification of the Stockholm Convention: analysis of pending POPs legislation, Policy Brief, Center for International Environmental Law, Washington, DC.
6. Cooper, P. J. 2002. By Order of the President: The Use and Abuse of Executive Direct Action, Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.
7. DeSombre, E. 2000. Domestic Sources of International Environmental Policy: Industry, Environmentalists, and U.S. Power, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. DeSombre, E. 2010. "The United States and global environmental politics: domestic sources of U.S. unilateralism". In The Global Environment: Institutions, Law, and Policy, 3, Edited by: Axelrod, R. A., VanDeveer, S. D. and Brownie, D. L. 192-212. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
9. Evans, C. L. and Lipinski, D. 2005. "Obstruction and leadership in the U.S. Senate". In Congress Revisited, 8, Edited by: Dodd, L. C. and Oppenheimer, B. I. 227-248. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
10. Hovi, J., Sprinz, D. and Bang, G. 2012. Why the United States did not become a party to the Kyoto Protocol: German, Norwegian and U.S. perspectives. European Journal of International Relations, 18: 129-150.
11. Huber, J. D. 1996. Rationalizing Parliament, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12. Lee, F. E. 2000. Senate representation and coalition building in distributive politics. American Political Science Review, 94: 59-72.
13. Lee, F. E. 2005. "Interests, constituencies, and policy making". In Institutions of American Democracy: The Legislative Branch, Edited by: Quirk, P. J. and Binder, S. A. 281-313. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
14. Mayer, K. 2001. With the Stroke of a Pen: Executive Orders and Presidential Power, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15. Mayhew, D. R. 2005. Divided We Govern. Party Control, Lawmaking, and Investigations, 1946-2002, 2, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
16. McCright, A. and Dunlap, R. 2011. The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public's views of global warming, 2001-2010. The Sociological Quarterly, 52: 155-194.
17. Milner, H. V. and Rosendorff, B. P. 1997. Democratic politics and international trade negotiations: elections and divided governments as constraints on trade liberalization. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41: 117-146.
18. Newell, P. 2008. The political economy of global environmental governance. Review of International Studies, 34: 507-529.
19. O'Connor, K. and Sabato, L. J. 1995. American Government. Roots and Reform, Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
20. Palmer, B. 2009. Senate Consideration of Treaties, Report 7-5700, Congressional Research Service, Washington, DC
21. Paterson, M. 2009. Post-hegemonic climate politics?. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 11: 140-158.
22. Princen, T. 2009. Long-term decision-making: biological and psychological evidence. Global Environmental Politics, 9: 9-19.
23. Purvis, N. 2004. The perspective of the United States on climate change and the Kyoto Protocol. International Review for Environmental Strategies, 5(1): 169-178.
24. Purvis, N., 2008, Paving the way for U.S. climate leadership: the case for executive agreements and climate protection authority, Discussion Paper 08-09, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
25. Purvis, N., 2012, Climate of despair: the future of US climate policy and global negotiations, Climate and Energy Paper Series, German Marshall Fund of the United States, Washington, DC.
26. Putnam, R. 1988. Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42: 427-460.
27. Schafer, K.F., 2006, One more failed US environmental policy, Policy Brief, Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF), Washington, DC.
28. Schreurs, M.A., Selin, H., VanDeveer, S.D., 2009, 'Expanding transatlantic relations: implications for environment and energy politics', in: M.A. Schreurs, H. Selin, S.D. VanDeveer (eds), Trans-Atlantic Environment and Energy Politics: Comparative and International Perspectives, Ashgate Publishers, Aldershot, UK, 1-20.
29. Scruggs, L. and Benegal, S. 2012. Declining public concern about climate change: can we blame the great recession?. Global Environmental Change, 22(2): 505-515.
30. Selin, H. 2010. Global Governance of Hazardous Chemicals: Challenges of Multilevel Management, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31. Shull, S. A. 2006. Policy by Other Means: Alternative Adoption by Presidents, College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.
32. Ström, K. 2000. Delegation and accountability in parliamentary democracies. European Journal of Political Research, 37: 261-289.
33. Theriault, S. 2008. Party Polarization in Congress, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34. UN. 1992. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, New York: FCCC/INFORMAL/84, United Nations.
35. UNFCCC, 2011, 'Establishment of an ad hoc working group on the Durban Platform for enhanced action' [available at http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/durban_nov_2011/decisions/application/pdf/cop17_durbanplatform.pdf].
36. US Congressional Record, 1998, 105th Congress, 2nd session, vol. 144, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.
37. Victor, D. G. 2011. Global Warming Gridlock: Creating More Effective Strategies for Protecting the Planet, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
38. Weber, E. U. and Stern, P. C. 2011. Public understanding of climate change in the United States. American Psychologist, 66: 315-328.
39. Weingast, B. R., Shepsle, K. A. and Johnsen, C. 1981. The political economy of benefits and costs: a neoclassical approach to distributive politics. Journal of Political Economy, 89: 642-664.