Suchergebnisse

Abstract
The negotiations for a new instrument for the conservation and sustainable use of high-seas marine biodiversity (marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction; BBNJ) finally concluded after difficult negotiations. The BBNJ negotiations had to address a regime complex of sectoral and regional organizations regulating different aspects of marine biodiversity and a political struggle about the epistemologies that ought to inform marine biodiversity governance, which is driven by limited, unequally distributed, and contested knowledge. However, to be implemented, the new BBNJ Agreement will have to be equipped with expert authority to be able to address these challenges and make competent statements about the state of high-seas marine biodiversity. We address a gap in empirical work on expert authority in the regime complex by analyzing state references to the expertise of different international organizations in the BBNJ negotiations. Combining collaborative event ethnography and social network analysis, we show that states strategically and politically refer to the expertise of international organizations, and we coin the term authority shopping to describe this behavior.

This article broadens the understanding and empirical study of regime complexes by shifting the focus from the negotiation outcome to the processes of negotiating new international agreements. Although they are important to regime-complex formation and delimitation, the sites where states negotiate new agreements are rather neglected. We aim to enhance the methodological toolbox available to scholars studying global governance in two ways: (1) by demonstrating how dynamic relationships between states and international organisations (IOs) unfolding within the social space of international treaty negotiations contribute to regime-complex formation; and (2) how social network analysis (SNA) can help us to detect patterns in these relationships. Combining participant observation and collaborative event ethnography (CEE) with social network analysis, we present new empirical material illustrating how we delimited a regime complex and how IOs interact throughout the negotiation process. We applied our methodology to the case of marine-biodiversity governance and use observational data collected during three intergovernmental conferences (IGCs) (2018–19) on a new treaty for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) for our analysis. We discuss the results in relation to our approach's strengths and weaknesses and implications for future research on regime complexity.

AbstractThis article broadens the understanding and empirical study of regime complexes by shifting the focus from the negotiation outcome to the processes of negotiating new international agreements. Although they are important to regime-complex formation and delimitation, the sites where states negotiate new agreements are rather neglected. We aim to enhance the methodological toolbox available to scholars studying global governance in two ways: (1) by demonstrating how dynamic relationships between states and international organisations (IOs) unfolding within the social space of international treaty negotiations contribute to regime-complex formation; and (2) how social network analysis (SNA) can help us to detect patterns in these relationships. Combining participant observation and collaborative event ethnography (CEE) with social network analysis, we present new empirical material illustrating how we delimited a regime complex and how IOs interact throughout the negotiation process. We applied our methodology to the case of marine-biodiversity governance and use observational data collected during three intergovernmental conferences (IGCs) (2018–19) on a new treaty for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) for our analysis. We discuss the results in relation to our approach's strengths and weaknesses and implications for future research on regime complexity.

The aim of this study is to look into into role behaviour of local councillors and their relation with citizens in their municipality. As little is known about the actual interaction between councillors and citizens in local government the nature of the study is mainly explorative. The research focuses on councillors in 4 different municipalities in the 3 countries of the Meuse-Rhine Euregion: Valkenburg (Netherlands), Riemst (Belgium-Flanders), Visé (Belgium-Wallonia) and Übach-Palenberg (Germany). The study reveals that there are many similarities between the councillors in the different countries. All councillors receive input from citizens, always about specific and often even individual issues of citizens, and surprisingly they leave the initiative mostly to the citizens, instead of actively looking for input. We also found significant differences. We noticed different patterns of contacts between citizens and councillors in the municipalities and it seems that input by citizens is valued differently on the different sides of the border. Several questions for further research were identified.

MARIPOLDATA is an ERC Starting Grant project running from November 2018 to October 2023. A research team led by the Principal Investigator Assoc. Prof. Mag. Dr. Alice Vadrot develops and applies a new interdisciplinary and multi-scale approach to study new forms of power at the intersection between science, and politics. The project uses ongoing negotiations on a new inter-national legally binding instrument under the United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) to study these processes in action. The rapid spread of the coronavirus (COVID-19) has led to quarantine measures worldwide and resulted in the cancellation or postponement of a significant number of global meetings. The fourth conference on an international legally binding instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea - on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ Instrument) - was no exception. It is not yet known when it will take place. This greatly affected the international agenda and strategies set for the ocean in 2020. One important pillar of MARIPOLDATA is to investigate the negotiations of a new legally-binding treaty under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, aiming to protect marine biodiversity based on collaborative event ethnography. Since conducting field research (WP1) was impossible, the MARIPOLDATA team developed a survey in May 2020 to assess how the COVID-19 outbreak affects the various parties working on the BBNJ Treaty, and its impacts on the activities carried out towards the conclusion of an agreement. This study targeted all actors interested or actively working on the BBNJ Treaty. Any answers provided were confidential and resulted in a publication in Global Environmental Politics and a special report summing up the findings. This report presents the MARIPOLDATA Corona Survey results from a geographical ...

This perspective identifies how recent advances contribute to re-evaluating and re-constructing global environmental negotiations as a research object by calling into question who constitutes an actor and what constitutes a site of agreement formation. Building on this scholarship, we offer the term agreement-making to facilitate further methodological and ethical reflection. The term agreement-making broadens the conceptualisation of the actors, sites and processes constitutive of global environmental agreements and brings to the fore how these are shaped by, reflect and have the potential to re-make or transform the intertwined global order of social, political and economic relations. Agreement-making situates research within these processes, and we suggest that enhancing the methodological diversity and practical utility is a potential avenue for challenging the reproduction of academic dominance. We highlight how COVID-19 requires further adapting research practices and offers an opportunity to question whether we need to be physically present to provide critical insight, analysis and support.