Mapping the fragmentation of the international forest regime complex: institutional elements, conflicts and synergies

Abstract

In the field of global environmental governance, a plethora of international regimes have emerged over the past decades. In some issue areas, multiple regimes aim to govern the issue, sometimes reinforcing, oftentimes conflicting with each other. Consequently, international regime complexes are an empirical phenomenon, which are inherently characterized by specific degrees of fragmentation. For any given issue area, one of the key questions is whether the institutional fragmentation encountered in such regime complexes is synergistic or conflictive in nature. Scrutinizing this question poses methodological challenges of how to delineate a regime complex and how to assess its fragmentation. Drawing on the highly fragmented case of the international forest regime complex, this paper aims to map its institutional fragmentation and to analyse the degrees to which it is conflictive or synergistic. For this we conceptualize the notion of institutional elements and develop a novel method for mapping regime complexes based on their core institutional elements. We then employ tools from the sub-discipline of policy analysis on the complex's institutional elements for analysing in detail, which of the elements are mutually synergistic and conflictive with other elements of the regime complex. Our results indicate that synergistic relations mostly exist among rather vague elements, often built around sustainability as a core principle. On the contrary, conflictive relations prevail as soon as the elements are designed in more concrete and substantial ways. We conclude that the forest regime complex displays only degree of seemingly synergistic fragmentation through a number of non-decisions and the use of "sustainability" as an empty formula. De facto, conflictive fragmentation prevails among elements of concrete subject matter. This raises questions on whether vast parts of regime complexes merely serve symbolic functions, while conflicts on substance are being camouflaged.

Spatial and Temporal Pattern Analysis of Land Use in Yangtze River Delta Based on Remote Sensing and GIS in Intelligent Environment

“…In order to study the degree of fragmentation of the landscape, the number of patches is selected as the analysis index, which represents the total number of patches. e higher the value, the higher the degree of fragmentation of the landscape [16]. A patch is a landscape pattern different from a relatively uniform nonlinear area.…”

How Do Configuration Shifts in Fragmented Energy Governance Affect Policy Output? A Case Study of Changing Biogas Regimes in Indonesia

“…In the last decade, the fragmentation concept is often utilised for the topics of (global) climate and environmental governance [15]. As a renewable energy, biogas governance can be argued to be part of climate-energy governance.…”

“…In conflictive fragmentation, there are different programmes with (almost) the same purpose, coming from different policies and different institutions, with unclear governance architecture [15]. Each programme and each institution are exclusive to each other.…”

Forest Governance: <I>Hydra</I> or <I>Chloris</I>?

“…Well, forests differ from many other natural resources (like those of the open seas) and many other environmental issues (like those of the atmosphere) in that they belong to national territories of nation states. Although many would consider forests and their problems (such as deforestation and degradation) global issues and concerns, others strongly disagree, and oppose any global governance response by the international community (for an overview of this debate see Fernández-Blanco et al, 2019;Giessen, 2013;Humphreys, 1996;Kolk, 1996;Sotirov et al, 2020). Yet, many global governance initiatives have been launchedfrom declarations, programmes, strategies and labelling schemes to codes of conductalbeit mostly voluntary and non-legally binding in nature.…”