TY - JOUR
T1 - State power and diffusion processes in the ratification of global environmental treaties, 1981–2008
AU - Yamagata, Yoshiki
AU - Yang, Jue
AU - Galaskiewicz, Joseph
N1 - Funding Information:
We acknowledge the Climate Risk Assessment Research Project at the National Institute for Environmental Studies in Tsukuba, Japan for providing funding for this research, the International Studies Program at the University of Arizona for travel funds, and the Fulbright Program which enabled the third author to teach and do research at the University of Tsukuba in 2007. Finally, thanks to Thomas J. Volgy, Gary Goertz, Noah Friedkin, Eugene Johnsen, Scott Eliason, Robert Pekkanen, Scott Savage, Daisuke Murakami, Hajime Seya, and several graduate students in the Sociology Department at Arizona for their help with this paper.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
PY - 2017/8/1
Y1 - 2017/8/1
N2 - There have been many explanations for why countries ratify global environmental treaties. They range from neorealist theory, to hegemony theory, world society theory, and network embeddedness theory. Drawing on hegemonic transition theory, this paper provides evidence that prior to the fall of the Soviet Union, strong and weak countries ratified a treaty if the USA or the USSR ratified the treaty first. After the fall of the Soviet Union, countries’ proximity to world society institutions increased the likelihood of ratifying a treaty, and only weaker countries emulated the ratifications of the USA and Russia. However, weaker countries also emulated economic, religious, and language peers, diplomatic ties, and neighbors as well. In contrast, more powerful countries ratified treaties more independently. We studied the ratifications of eight universal environmental treaties by 166 countries between 1981 and 2008 and showed that as the geopolitical context changed, the diffusion process changed. The paper argues that the hegemonic transition which took place in the late 1980s and early 1990s was an enabling event that helped to explain the new roles that major powers assumed in the 1990s and 2000s and opened the door to the ascendency of global institutions and broader participation in the environmental regime.
AB - There have been many explanations for why countries ratify global environmental treaties. They range from neorealist theory, to hegemony theory, world society theory, and network embeddedness theory. Drawing on hegemonic transition theory, this paper provides evidence that prior to the fall of the Soviet Union, strong and weak countries ratified a treaty if the USA or the USSR ratified the treaty first. After the fall of the Soviet Union, countries’ proximity to world society institutions increased the likelihood of ratifying a treaty, and only weaker countries emulated the ratifications of the USA and Russia. However, weaker countries also emulated economic, religious, and language peers, diplomatic ties, and neighbors as well. In contrast, more powerful countries ratified treaties more independently. We studied the ratifications of eight universal environmental treaties by 166 countries between 1981 and 2008 and showed that as the geopolitical context changed, the diffusion process changed. The paper argues that the hegemonic transition which took place in the late 1980s and early 1990s was an enabling event that helped to explain the new roles that major powers assumed in the 1990s and 2000s and opened the door to the ascendency of global institutions and broader participation in the environmental regime.
KW - International environmental agreements
KW - Policy diffusion
KW - Social networks
KW - State power
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84979255688&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84979255688&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10784-016-9332-y
DO - 10.1007/s10784-016-9332-y
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84979255688
SN - 1567-9764
VL - 17
SP - 501
EP - 529
JO - International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics
JF - International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics
IS - 4
ER -