50 Years on, w(h)ither the Ramsar convention?:A case of institutional drift

Wetlands have declined in area and quality at an accelerating pace in the last 50 years. Yet, the last 50 years is when international attention has been focussed on wetlands through the Ramsar Convention. An analysis of how the convention has evolved over the past 50 years suggests it has been drifting away from its original mandate in a maladaptive manner, and this drift is a problem for achieving its original objectives. A review of the strategic plans of the convention revealed two key conditions for institutional drifting and the associated lack of success. The first condition lies in its unique situation as a non-UN convention, which reduces the convention’s visibility and interactivity with other biodiversity-related conventions, agencies, or programmes. The second condition is an increasing number of conventions dealing with biodiversity issues, all forcing the Ramsar Convention to seek different roles in an increasingly competitive institutional landscape. A more effective future for the convention arguably lies in reasserting its original mandate, but with cognisance of the changed environmental pressures of the twenty-first century. While this would narrow its increasingly broad focus, such a reorientation will allow wetlands and waterfowl to start a track to recovery, backed by active and focused Contracting Parties in a renewed international convention on wetland conservation, management, and sustainable use

Augment the SDG indicator framework

The 231 indicators of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are crucial for measuring progress on 169 targets. But the seemingly large number of indicators and the associated cost of monitoring have led to calls for streamlining. Here I present an alternative perspective on the SDG indicators by paying due regard to their performativity, or ability to shape outcomes. By drawing on the literature on conditions under which indicators have unintended consequences, I argue that there are rather limited, chiefly quantitative indicators to adequately address the multifaceted aspects of diverse targets they serve. The SDG indicators in their current form run the risk of ‘the tail wagging the dog’ by powering over their targets. Further streamlining the indicator framework would likely exacerbate the risk, and undermine the ambition, integrity, and legitimacy of the SDGs. The analysis recommends augmenting the indicator framework and integrate indicator development into future negotiations of global goals and targets

The likely impact of the BBNJ Agreement on the architecture of ocean governance

In June 2023, governments agreed to a new treaty on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). Unlike most other multilateral environmental agreements that typically emerge in response to newly identified transboundary environmental issues, the BBNJ Agreement steps into an already crowded institutional landscape as a global authority with broad objectives. The challenge facing this new legal instrument is unique. It must transform the architecture of ocean governance by harmonizing existing institutions, frameworks, and bodies (IFBs) while respecting their autonomy. This study examines the numerous references to IFBs in the treaty text to shed light on how the BBNJ Agreement might affect the dynamics with and among existing IFBs. The findings suggest that the BBNJ Agreement represents a new model for multilateral environmental agreements. It relies on its capacity to orchestrate incumbent IFBs and forge a new polycentric order centered around its treaty objectives. Its institutional power is likely to be constrained by the obligation to involve relevant IFBs in its decision-making processes. But the primary strength of the BBNJ Agreement lies in the normative authority it has established. Its objectives are effectively promoted within IFBs, potentially taking precedence in the event of serious or irreversible harm to marine biodiversity. When fully implemented, the BBNJ Agreement has the potential to redefine the relationships among existing IFBs and improve their coherence for more holistic ocean governance

Taming Gaia 2.0: Earth system law in the ruptured Anthropocene

If the Anthropocene is a rupture in planetary history, what does it mean for international environmental law? When the Earth System crosses irreversible tipping points and begins a forceful, nonlinear transformation into a hostile state which I call the ruptured Anthropocene, the concept of protecting the global environment from humans would lose its meaning. Not only the dichotomy between humans and nature becomes irrelevant, but the environment itself will no longer exist as an object for protection. I argue that, for international environmental law to stay relevant in the ruptured Anthropocene, it needs to shift away from its traditional focus on restoring the planetary past, and instead play an active role in the making of planetary futures. Its new purpose will need to be active planetary stewardship, whereby humans add self-awareness for deliberate self-regulation of the Earth System. Such an attempt at ‘taming’ the so-called Gaia 2.0 will, however, create winners and losers, and the new form of law will have to address fundamental questions of justice on a planetary scale. Building on the concept of earth system law emerging in the earth system governance literature, I draw the contours of international environmental law 2.0 for the ruptured Anthropocene and discuss the challenges of instituting active planetary stewardship

Planetary Boundaries at the Intersection of Earth System Law, Science, and Governance: A State-of-the-Art Review

First developed in earth system science, the idea of planetary boundaries has gradually spilled over into social science research in the past decade. An interdisciplinary body of lit-erature has emerged as a result at the intersection of earth system science, law, and gov-ernance. In this paper we provide a bird’s eye view of the state of the art, and examine how social scientists frame the planetary boundaries framework and what they identify as key regulatory challenges and implications. To that end, we conducted a systematic review of 80 peer-reviewed articles identified through keyword search. Our survey finds that social scientists have approached the planetary boundaries framework using four key problem framings, which revolve around the notion of planetary boundaries as embodying a set of interdependent and politically constructed environmental limits that are global in scale. We also identify four key clusters of governance solutions offered in the literature, which broadly relate to the ideas of institutionalizing, coordinating, downscaling, and democra-tizing planetary boundaries. We then apply the foregoing insights to the legal domain and explore their implications for law. More specifically, we discuss how the recently proposed notion of earth system law is related to these emerging problem framings and how it might contribute to these responses

Towards earth-space governance in a multi-planetary era

The recent surge of private enterprise-led space activities is driving what is dubbed the New Space revolution. SpaceX as a frontrunner is working towards colonizing Mars by 2050, with the goal of transforming humans into a multi-planetary species. These developments and the imaginaries they generate are reshaping the discourse on planetary sustainability, where celestial bodies like Mars are seen as a solution to the challenges facing our Earth. Yet, space and its sustainability remain a rather distant concern in earth system governance. In this Perspective, we argue that the New Space revolution necessitates a corresponding shift in the governance paradigm from planetary to multi-planetary for a more integrated approach that recognizes the interdependencies of Earth and space sustainability. We propose a new governance model, earth-space governance, aimed at promoting justice and integrity for all forms of life in a multi-planetary context

Earth System Law

The existing body of international environmental law has been created in the context of a relatively stable and harmonious Holocene epoch. This assumed regulatory premise of Holocene stability and harmony has resulted in a collection of international environmental law norms that are unable to sufficiently address the governance challenges emanating from within the context of the Anthropocene’s complex, unstable, unpredictable, and intertwined earth system. Earth system law has recently been proposed as an alternative vision for international environmental law in the Anthropocene. Earth system law is intended to serve as an imaginative framework that can guide innovative questions regarding the difficulties posed to international environmental law in responding to the complex challenges of earth system governance, and as a roadmap for international environmental law to better address these challenges on an appropriate planetary level in the Anthropocene

The latent net effectiveness of institutional complexes: a heuristic model

International institutions strive to achieve their own objectives while operating within a complex network of interdependencies. These interdependencies create an extensive web of relationships that serve as potential pathways for broader institutional impacts. The actions taken by individual institutions, their mutual influences, and the pattern of connectivity collectively shape the overall performance of institutional complexes. Understanding the performance of these complexes is crucial, yet we currently lack a methodology to assess it. To address this gap, we have developed a conceptual framework that integrates three distinct areas of study on three different scales: institutional effectiveness, institutional interlinkages, and institutional networks. This framework enables us to consider what we call the latent net effectiveness, or collective problem-solving potential, of a group of interconnected institutions. To put this framework into practice, we have devised a heuristic model, drawing from the extensive literature on international environmental institutions. As an illustrative example, we have applied this model to a network of 378 multilateral environmental agreements with 810 known issue linkages. Our work underscores the relevance of considering the system-level properties of institutional complexes and emphasizes the need for timely network-based governance and policy interventions to enhance the overall effectiveness of institutional complexes. This article is part of the theme issue 'A complexity science approach to law and governance'

Negotiating discord in sustainability transformations

Policy action for sustainability transformation faces inherent and ever-present sources of conflict, pushback, and resistance (i.e., discord). However, conceptual frameworks and policy prescriptions for sustainability transformations often reflect an undue image of accord. This involves simplified assumptions about consensus, steering, friction, discreteness, and additiveness of policy action, conferring an unrealistic view of the potential to deliberately realize transformation. Instead, negotiating discord through continuously finding partial political settlements among divided actors needs to become a key focus of policy action for sustainability transformations. Doing so can help to navigate deeply political settings through imperfect but workable steps that loosen deadlock, generate momentum for further policy action, and avoid complete derailment of transformation agendas when discord arises

The SDGs as integrating force in global governance? Challenges and opportunities

In 2015, the United Nations agreed on 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as an “integrated and indivisible” set of policy objectives with the aim, among others, to unite the diverse and vast system of international organizations under one shared normative agenda. And yet, have these SDGs really become such an integrative force in global governance? Our conclusion here is negative, and our research suggests that the SDGs have not lived up to these high expectations. We find instead that the 17 global goals have not been taken up by a substantial group of international organizations, and some organizations rather cherry-pick those goals that best fit their own agenda and interests. To overcome these challenges and to fulfill the promise of integrated global sustainability governance enshrined in the SDGs, we propose three urgent actions: first, to further push the use of the SDGs across all international organizations, in particular regional organizations outside the United Nations system; second, to facilitate better collaboration across policy domains; and third, to focus attention on those SDGs that are so far “left behind.