Suchergebnisse

Parties to international negotiations typically invoke conflicting notions of justice. If these can be reconciled, this has positive effects on the negotiation process and outcome. If conflicts over justice persist, negotiations can stall or result in suboptimal outcomes. However, research to date paid scant attention to the means by which justice in international negotiations can be attained. This dissertation addresses this gap and studies two aspects of justice in international negotiations, as well as factors that shape them. The first two essays of the composite dissertation focus on perceptions of justice during negotiations; the latter two on shared justice formulas that parties devise to guide the negotiations. The empirical focus lies primarily on international environmental negotiations – an issue area where justice is central and often explicitly addressed. The final essay extends the analysis of justice to the Cyprus Talks – negotiations on a protracted social conflict that share some key characteristics with environmental negotiations in terms of complexity and interlinkages. Essay I develops the concept of justice and suggests a comprehensive approach to justice in international environmental negotiations. This conceptualization better explains variations in parties' perceptions of justice than conventional approaches, which only cover some of the four components identified in the comprehensive approach. Essay II finds that the relationship between the chairperson and the negotiating parties affects perceptions of justice. Justice is attained, when the actors involved build a cooperative relationship based on their ability to form expectations and on a positive assessment of their exchange. If necessary, such relationship formation can be facilitated through the involvement of intermediary actors. Essay III distinguishes between three different types of shared justice formula that parties devise in international environmental negotiations. A cursory analysis shows that different explanatory factors shape the different types of shared justice formula, which furthermore are linked in different ways to negotiation effectiveness, both fruitful avenues for future research. Essay IV finds that ripeness theory – in a modified form that accounts for complexity and relationships among a multitude of players – helps to explain when parties devise a shared justice formula to guide negotiations. In conjunction, the essays contribute to current debates in the literature on justice and international negotiations, by taking account of complexity in the study of justice, and by stressing the importance of relationship formation with actors beyond the negotiating parties to attain justice. ; Typischerweise berufen sich Parteien in internationalen Verhandlungen auf Gerechtigkeitsprinzipien, die sich gegenseitig widersprechen. Können diese widersprüchlichen Positionen in Einklang gebracht werden, hat dies positive Auswirkungen auf den Verhandlungsprozess und das Ergebnis. Bleiben sie allerdings bestehen, kann dies das Fortschreiten der Verhandlungen beeinträchtigen und zu suboptimalen Ergebnissen führen. Die bisherige Forschung befasst sich kaum damit, auf welche Art und Weise ein Übereinkommen in Bezug auf Gerechtigkeit erreicht werden kann. Die vorliegende Doktorarbeit adressiert diese Forschungslücke und erforscht zwei Aspekte von Gerechtigkeit in internationalen Verhandlungen sowie Faktoren, die diese beeinflussen. Die ersten beiden Essays widmen sich Gerechtigkeitswahrnehmungen während des Verhandlungsprozesses. Die anderen beiden erforschen die von Parteien gemeinschaftlich entwickelten Gerechtigkeitsformeln zur Lenkung der Verhandlungen. Der empirische Fokus liegt primär auf internationalen Umweltverhandlungen – ein Gebiet auf dem Gerechtigkeitsfragen besonders zentral sind und oft explizit angesprochen werden. Der letzte Essay weitet den empirischen Kontext auf die Analyse von Gerechtigkeit in den Verhandlungen des Zypernkonflikts aus, und damit auf einen "protracted social conflict", einen langwierigen Konflikt. Dieser hat einige wichtige Eigenschaften mit internationalen Umweltverhandlungen gemein, vor allem in Bezug auf Komplexität und Verkettungen. Essay I setzt sich mit dem Konzept der Gerechtigkeit auseinander und entwickelt einen umfassenden Ansatz zu Gerechtigkeit in internationalen Umweltverhandlungen. Diese Konzeptualisierung ist besser geeignet, unterschiedliche Gerechtigkeitswahrnehmungen der Parteien zu erklären als konventionelle Ansätze. Letztere decken oft nur einzelne der vier Komponenten ab, die in dem umfassenden Ansatz enthalten sind. Essay II stellt heraus, dass die Beziehung zwischen dem Vorsitzenden und den verhandelnden Parteien die Gerechtigkeitswahrnehmung beeinflusst. Gerechtigkeitsempfinden kann erzielt werden, wenn die involvierten Akteure eine kooperative Beziehung entwickeln. Grundlage hierfür ist zum einen die Fähigkeit beider Seiten, Erwartungen für den gemeinsamen Umgang zu formulieren und zum anderen eine positive Einschätzung des Austausches. Sofern nötig, kann eine solche Beziehungsentwicklung durch mittelnde Akteure unterstützt werden. Essay III unterscheidet zwischen drei verschiedenen Typen von Gerechtigkeitsformeln, die die Parteien in internationalen Umweltverhandlungen entwerfen. Eine erste Studie der Typen skizziert, dass diese von verschiedenen Faktoren geprägt werden und sich des Weiteren unterschiedlich auf Aspekte der Verhandlungseffektivität auswirken – beides interessante Ansatzpunkte für weiterführende Forschung. Essay IV modifiziert das Konzept der "Ripeness Theory", um Komplexität und Beziehungen zwischen einer Vielzahl an Akteuren in Betracht zu ziehen. Dies trägt zur Erklärung bei, wann Parteien eine Gerechtigkeitsformel zur Lenkung der Verhandlungen entwerfen. In Kombination tragen die Essays zu aktuellen Debatten in der Literatur zu Gerechtigkeit und internationalen Verhandlungen bei. Sie berücksichtigen die Komplexität in der Studie von Gerechtigkeit und unterstreichen die zentrale Bedeutung der Beziehungen zwischen den Parteien sowie mit weiteren Akteuren, um ein Gerechtigkeitsempfinden oder eine Gerechtigkeitsformel zu erzielen.

AbstractJustice is of central importance in international environmental negotiations. Key characteristics of this type of negotiation augment the complexities of justice issues and warrant a customized approach. Based on a discussion of these characteristics, the article derives four components that are central to a more comprehensive theoretical framework for analyzing justice in environmental negotiations: 1) going beyond narrow self-interest, 2) extending the notion of reciprocity, 3) linking backward- and forward-orientation, and 4) connecting process and outcome. The usefulness of the framework is illustrated by applying it to two important Conferences of the Parties (COP) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – COP15 in Copenhagen and COP21 in Paris – which are compared. The framework is suited for a systematic analysis of the complex role played by justice issues in international environmental negotiation, as a key avenue for addressing global threats emerging from anthropogenic environmental change.

Questions of justice are often at the heart of international negotiations. While previous research has established a link between justice and the effectiveness of negotiations, the mechanisms behind justice behaviour in international negotiations remain understudied. Against this background, this paper will investigate the question: What factors determine which justice principle negotiators invoke or agree to in international environmental negotiations? In order to answer this question this study will apply a controlled comparison applying the congruence method to five pairs of cases, covering a broad range of environmental negotiations. Within each pair, one factor theorized to play an important role in shaping justice behaviour in environmental negotiations will be analysed. The factors are 1) setting of the negotiations, 2) power balance between the parties, 3) scientific (un)certainty, 4) domestic constituencies, and 5) common crisis experience. The findings are expected to discern factors determining which justice principles negotiators invoke and under what conditions agreement on justice notions is promoted. Better understanding of what motivates negotiators' choices of justice principles and their mutual acceptance can help to strengthen the link between justice and effectiveness of negotiations. In this way, the paper's findings will be of relevance from both a research and policy perspective.

Parties to international negotiations typically invoke conflicting notions of justice. If these can be reconciled, this has positive effects on the negotiation process and outcome. If conflicts over justice persist, negotiations can stall or result in suboptimal outcomes. However, research to date paid scant attention to the means by which justice in international negotiations can be attained. This dissertation addresses this gap and studies two aspects of justice in international negotiations, as well as factors that shape them. The first two essays of the composite dissertation focus on perceptions of justice during negotiations; the latter two on shared justice formulas that parties devise to guide the negotiations. The empirical focus lies primarily on international environmental negotiations – an issue area where justice is central and often explicitly addressed. The final essay extends the analysis of justice to the Cyprus Talks – negotiations on a protracted social conflict that share some key characteristics with environmental negotiations in terms of complexity and interlinkages. Essay I develops the concept of justice and suggests a comprehensive approach to justice in international environmental negotiations. This conceptualization better explains variations in parties' perceptions of justice than conventional approaches, which only cover some of the four components identified in the comprehensive approach. Essay II finds that the relationship between the chairperson and the negotiating parties affects perceptions of justice. Justice is attained, when the actors involved build a cooperative relationship based on their ability to form expectations and on a positive assessment of their exchange. If necessary, such relationship formation can be facilitated through the involvement of intermediary actors. Essay III distinguishes between three different types of shared justice formula that parties devise in international environmental negotiations. A cursory analysis shows that different explanatory factors shape the different types of shared justice formula, which furthermore are linked in different ways to negotiation effectiveness, both fruitful avenues for future research. Essay IV finds that ripeness theory – in a modified form that accounts for complexity and relationships among a multitude of players – helps to explain when parties devise a shared justice formula to guide negotiations. In conjunction, the essays contribute to current debates in the literature on justice and international negotiations, by taking account of complexity in the study of justice, and by stressing the importance of relationship formation with actors beyond the negotiating parties to attain justice.