JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
A Study on International Environmental Regime -The Case of the Antarctic Treaty System-
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
  • Journal title : Ocean and Polar Research
  • Volume 28, Issue 2,  2006, pp.163-173
  • Publisher : Korea Institute of Ocean Science & Technology
  • DOI : 10.4217/OPR.2006.28.2.163
 Title & Authors
A Study on International Environmental Regime -The Case of the Antarctic Treaty System-
Kang, Ryang;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
The so called Antarctic Treaty System, started from the Antarctic Treaty in 1959, has gradually been enlarged into the concept of an international environmental regime, which has been included in not a few international institutions, treaties, conventions, and international non-governmental organizations (INGO). This kind of movement, as in the role of an international environmental regime, has recently been highlighted in the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. This Protocol is taking appropriate measures as an international environmental regime in regulating its member nations by enforcing principles in protecting Antarctic resources and environment, regulating member nations` Antarctic activities, establishing norms in the adoption of international and domestic laws, and devising regulations for deciding administrative actions through the member nations` collective decision-making procedures. h this context, this paper is to test a few questions; firstly, how the Antarctic Treaty System can be related with the role of international environmental regime; secondly, how the theories of international environmental regime, such as the hegemony theory, rational choice theory, and international morality theory, can be tested in the role of Antarctic Treaty System as an international environmental regime. Finally, this paper provides a solution for the future problems of the Antarctic Treaty System as an international environmental regime regarding the regime`s principle (conflict between the environmental principle and the right of nation-state), norms and regulations (the conflict between the developed and underdeveloped nations in terms of the concept of `common but differentiated environmental responsibility`), cooperation directions (the leadership problems between hegemonic nation and multilateral leading groups), and management methods (cooperation and arrangement problems among expert institutions, observer groups, and INGO).
 Keywords
environmental regime;hegemony theory;rational choice theory;differentiated environmental responsibility;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
권문상, 김예동. 1996. 남극 석유자원 개발규제의 국제적 동향과 대책. 해양정책연구, 11(2), 375-401.

2.
권문상, 이용희, 박성욱, 최정옥, 김현진. 2000. 남극 환경보전 정책수립 연구. 한국해양연구소, EC PP 99 001-07. 502 p.

3.
권문상, 이원갑, 이용희, 정갑용, 이지현, 박성욱. 1996. 신남극조약 체제에 관한 대응전략 연구. 한국해양연구소, BSPN 00279-920-7. 208 p.

4.
권문상, 정갑용, 이원갑. 1996. 새로운 남극조약체제와 유엔 해양법협약. 해양정책연구, 11(2), 343-374.

5.
김예동, 안인영. 2001. 남극과 지구환경. 해양과학총서 제7권. 한국해양연구원. 139 p.

6.
박재영. 1998. 국제기구정치론. 법문사, 서울. 611 p

7.
성재호. 2004. 국제기구와 국제법. 한울아카데미, 서울. 324 p.

8.
오경택. 1999. 미국 환경단체들의 발전 및 정치적 활동. 국제정치논총, 39(1), 419-425.

9.
외무부 국제경제국. 1992. 한국의 지구환경 외교: 지속 가능한 개발을 위한 외교적 대응 방향. 외무부 국제경제국, 서울. 160 p.

10.
조경근. 1996. 그린라운드의 국제정치적 특성. 국제정치논총, 35(2), 39-58.

11.
Clark, A.M. 1993. NGOs and their influence on international society. J. Int. Affairs, 48(2), 507-526.

12.
Donnelly, J. 1990. International environmentalism: A regime analysis. Int. Organ., 40(3), 599-642. crossref(new window)

13.
Haggard, S.D. and B.A. Simmons. 1987. Theories of international regimes. Int. Organ., 41, 491-517. crossref(new window)

14.
Henkin, L. 1995. Law and politics in international relations: State and human values. J. Int. Affairs, 44(1), 183-208.

15.
Hurrell, A. and B. Kingsbury. 1992. The international politics of the environment: An introduction. p. 1-47. In: The International Politics of the Environment. ed. by A. Hurrell and B. Kingsbury. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.

16.
Kaplan, M.A. 1957. System and Process in International Politics. John Wiley & Sons, New York. p. 121-134.

17.
Kaufman, J. 1968. Conference Diplomacy. Oceania, Dobbs Ferry. 284 p.

18.
Keohane, R.O. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton. 583 p.

19.
Keohane, R.O. 1986. Theory of world politics: Structural realism and beyond. p. 2-23. In: Neorealism and Its Critics. ed. by R.O. Keohane. Columbia Univ. Press, New York.

20.
Keohane, R.O. 1989. International Institutions and State Power: Essays in International Relations Theory. West View Press, Boulder. 374 p.

21.
Krasner, S.D. 1984. International regimes. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca. 372 p.

22.
Puchala, D.J. 1972. Of blind men. Elephants and international integration. J. Common Mark. Stud., 10(3), 267-284.

23.
Shabecoff, P. 1993. A Fierce Green: The American Environment Movement. Hill and Wang, New York. 279 p.

24.
Sinnar, S. 1996. Mixed blessing: The growing influence of NGOs. Harvard Int. Rev. 18(1), 57-58.

25.
Vioti, Paul. ed. 1987. International Relations Theory. Macmillan Publishing, New York. 483 p.

26.
Willetts, P. 1982. The impact of promotional pressure group on global politics. p. 185-187. In: Pressure Group in Global System: The Transnational Relations of Issue-Oriented Non-Governmental Organizations. ed. by Peter Willetts. St. Martin's Press, New York.

27.
Young, R.O. 1979. Compliance and Public Authority. Institute for the Future, Washington, D.C. p. 23-43.