Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
with given interests on a particular matter, generated by their position in
the international system, whereas on environmental issues the interests
of states can vary according to their internal structure, for example, the
interests of states in the climate change debate (Paterson, 1996, p. 108).
Third, according to Young (2001, 2003), while specii cally criticizing the
Oslo-Potsdam solution, these approaches encounter many analytical
and empirical problems that are largely to do with neglecting important
factors when accounting for the hypothetical situation in the absence of
the regime, and for the collective optimal solution.
Historical materialism and international political economy
Another
approach often used for assessing international cooperation is an inter-
national political economy approach based largely on historical material-
ism (Paterson, 1996, ch. 8). Historical materialism is mainly concerned
with the distribution of economic resources and international equal-
ity, often expressed as the North-South divide. Historical materialists
explain cooperation in terms of the control of powerful capitalist states
(for example, North American and European countries) over weaker
ones (for example, developing or Third World countries). According to
them the world is broadly divided into three categories on the basis of
the division of labour internationally. These are the highly industrialized
Western countries, the industrializing countries and i nally the develop-
ing countries (Haas, 1990, p. 47). Historical materialists identify a much
less democratic and equitable structure of international relations (both
economic and political) than the neorealists, by suggesting that in cases
where ef ective cooperation does take place it always repeats the principles
of capitalism, that is, reproducing the structures where the North takes
advantage of the South (Haas, 1990, p. 47). Some authors have found the
international political economy approach appropriate for understanding
the complex patterns of cooperation with regard to international environ-
mental agreements. For example, according to Paterson (1996, ch. 8) it
has been useful in assessing the dii cult negotiations among countries over
global warming and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
However, economic globalization gives rise to complex relations between
environment on one hand and global trade and investment on the other,
and so raises debates (Stevis and Assetto, 2001; Clapp and Dauvergne,
2005, ch. 5). According to Clapp (2006) there are three dif erent views
within this debate. The i rst one can see positive ef ects for the environ-
ment from international growth and even in cases where some negative
side- ef ects appear, then environmental issues can i nd ways around them
without restricting economic relations. The second view is primarily
negative, suggesting that international economic growth can only harm
