The adoption of administrative procedures in global governance has the potential to foster proper consideration of marginalized actors’ interests, yet risks entrenching the dominance of the well-resourced and powerful. Accordingly, this book proposes a new framework for evaluating the extent to which administrative procedures in the compliance systems of multilateral environmental agreements constrain power and promote regard for the interests of affected states, which are frequently developing and transition countries. This framework is applied to the compliance systems under the Montreal Protocol, the Kyoto Protocol and CITES, which address critical global environmental issues of ozone-layer depletion, climate change and trade in endangered species, respectively. The analysis shows that, under certain conditions, administrative procedures limit the influence of states’ asymmetric power on compliance deliberations. Furthermore, systematic adoption of these procedures increases the opportunities for affected states’ interests to be voiced and considered in compliance decision-making processes.
1 Administrative procedures and MEA compliance systems
2 Evaluating proceduralization in MEA compliance systems
3 An introduction to the case study compliance systems
4 The Montreal compliance system: An exemplar of procedural regard
5 The Kyoto compliance system and the potential for procedurally constrained decision-making
6 The CITES compliance system and the risks associated with inadequate procedural safeguards
7 The benefits of administrative procedures in MEA compliance systems