Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
each regime they examine three phases of activity; agenda-setting, interna-
tional policies and national policy responses, which are referring to each
of the three conditions respectively. Thus, a regime is deemed ef ective if
it increases governmental concern, enhances the contractual environment
and builds national capacity. They ask the question 'Is the quality of the
environment or resource better because of the institution?', but due to
lack of available data concerning changes to the state of the biophysical
environment that can be actually assigned to the institution, they decide to
focus on 'observable political ef ects rather than directly on environmental
impact' (Haas et al., 1993, p. 7).
Young (1999) looks at causal connections and behavioural mechanisms.
A regime is considered ef ective based on the extent it ameliorates the
problem that led to the regime's creation in the i rst place. However, he
admits that this approach is practically dii cult to analyse since complex
social and natural systems within which regimes operate do not allow for
the observed changes to be assigned to the regime itself. According to the
legal approach, the regime is ef ective to the extent it is followed by legal
compliance, and in the economic approach if it incorporates the legal
dei nition and adds a cost-ei ciency criterion. In the normative approach,
ef ectiveness equals achievement of values such as fairness or justice,
stewardship and participation, whereas in the political approach a regime
is ef ective if it causes changes to the behaviour of actors, in the interests
of actors, or in the policies and performance of institutions in ways that
contribute to positive management of the targeted problem. Moreover,
Young dif erentiates the ef ects of environmental regimes in three dimen-
sions. First, he divides them into internal and external to the behavioural
complex, which is the group of actors, interests and interactions on a spe-
cii c issue area. Second, he separates them into direct and indirect ef ects.
Finally, he divides them into good or bad according to the impact on the
problem, in other words if they ameliorate or worsen it (Young, 1999).
Another approach to the measurement of ef ectiveness focuses on
institutional factors and addresses a series of related questions based on
the identii cation of problem structure, institutions and institutional i t
and the analysis of legal and organizational issues that arise from this
approach (von Moltke, 2000). This research strategy begins with consider-
ation of a problem's structure. It then proceeds to identify the institutions
that may be needed - and those that have been employed - to address the
issue in light of its problem structure. Von Moltke's underlying hypothesis
is that it is more likely for a regime to be ef ective when it achieves a good
i t between problem structure and institutional characteristics, and that
it is the desirable i t between problem structure and institutions that is a
primary reason for its ef ectiveness. Moreover, he stresses the importance
Search WWH ::




Custom Search