You are here

Home » Content

ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLERDE ÇEVRE GÜNDEMİNİN İNŞASI, ÇEVRENİN BOYUTLARI VE ÇEVRE REJİMİ

CONSTRUCTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA, DIMENSIONS OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REGIME IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Journal Name:

  • Turkish Studies

Publication Year:

  • 2017
DOI: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.12317

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
This study argues the environmental agenda, the development of environmental awareness, and the success of environmental regimes in international relations. In this context, the study consists of three parts. In the first chapter, the environmental agenda of international relations is discussed. It is evaluated that many sub-topics from environmental security to biodiversity contribute to the development of environmental agenda. In the second chapter, international initiatives/conventions for environmental protection are discussed in the context of the development of environmental awareness, in the process from Stockholm in 1972 and up to the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015. In the third chapter, the success of the international regimes related to the environment, which has become an important issue of international relations, is evaluated. In this respect, it appears that in some cases regimes have been successfully established and functioned but in issue of environment have not been established in the same way. The biggest factor in this failure is that the actors who the most polluter the environment, or the ones that cause the most damage to the environment, are the main actors to escape from taking responsibility at the same time, even if they are shareholders to the protective regulations. The fact that actors are also not at the same capacity at the point of having environmental/natural resources and overusing them, is affecting the success of the regimes. It is observed harms of buck-passing behaviors in collective actions in issue of environment in which interdependence is so profound. It is hoped that this study will provide significant contributions to Turkish literature.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışma; uluslararası ilişkilerde çevre gündemi, çevre bilincinin gelişimi ve çevre rejimlerinin başarısını tartışmakta ve büyük oranda durum tespit edici bir analiz sunmaktadır. Bu bağlamda çalışma üç bölümden oluşmaktadır: Birinci bölümde, uluslararası ilişkilerin çevresel gündemi ele alınmaktadır. “Çevre” sepeti içine atılan güvenlikten biyoçeşitliliğe kadar birçok alt başlığın çevresel gündemin gelişmesine katkıda bulunduğu değerlendirilmektedir. İkinci bölümde, çevresel bilincin gelişimi bağlamında 1972 Stockholm ile başlayan ve 2015 Paris İklim Anlaşması’na kadar olan süreçte çevreyi korumaya yönelik uluslararası girişimler/sözleşmeler tartışılmaktadır. Üçüncü bölümde ise, uluslararası ilişkilerin önemli bir sorunu/konusu haline gelen çevreye ilişkin uluslararası rejimlerin başarısı değerlendirilmektedir. Bu bağlamda, bazı konularda başarılı şekilde kurulan ve işleyen rejimlerin çevre konusunda aynı şekilde kurulamamış olduğu görülmektedir. Bu başarısızlıktaki en büyük etmen ise çevreyi en çok kirleten veya çevreye en fazla zararı veren aktörlerin korumaya dönük düzenlemelere taraf olsa bile aynı zamanda sorumluluk almaktan kaçan temel aktörler olmasıdır. Çevresel/doğal kaynaklara sahip olma ve onları aşırı kullanarak çevreye zarar verme noktasında aktörlerin aynı kapasitede olmaması da rejimlerin başarısını etkilemektedir. Karşılıklı bağımlılığın oranı da bu anlamda önemlidir. Karşılıklı bağımlılığın çok derin olduğu çevre konusunda da kolektif eylemlerde sorumluluktan kaçma davranışının zararları fazlası ile gözlenmektedir. Bu çalışmanın uluslararası ilişkilerde çevresel gündemin inşası, çevre bilincinin gelişimi ve uluslararası çevre rejiminin birlikte değerlendirilerek özellikle Türkçe literatüre katkı sağlaması umulmaktadır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-uluslararasi-iliskilerde-cevre-gundeminin-insasi-cevrenin-boyutlari-cevre-rejimi.pdf
  • 24
33
54
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

__ Kyoto Protocol to The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (1998)
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf.
__About UN Enviroment, http://web.unep.org/about/who-we-are/overview, Erişim Tarihi: 13.03.17.
__http://www.columbia.edu/dlc/cup/litfin/litfin13.html. Erişim Tarihi: 17.09.2017
__http://www.mfa.gov.tr/birlesmis-milletler-cevre-programi.tr.mfa, Erişim Tarihi: 13.03.17.
__https://www.eea.europa.eu/tr/themes/climate/policy-context
__International Environmental Agreements and Associations, https://iea.uoregon.edu/internationalenvironmental-
agreements-ieas-defined, Erişim Tarihi: 17.04.2017.
__International Institute for Sustainable Development, http://enb.iisd.org/process/climate_atmfcccintro.
htm, Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.17.
__IPCC Factsheet: What is the IPCC?,
http://www.ipcc.ch/news_and_events/docs/factsheets/FS_what_ipcc.pdf, Erişim Tarihi:
13.03.2017.
__Sprinz, D. ve Vaahtoranta, T. (1994). The Interest-Based Explanation of International
Environmental Policy. International Organization, 48(1): 77-105.
__The Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer,
http://ozone.unep.org/pdfs/viennaconvention2002.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 17.04.17.
__United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,
https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.17.
Barrett, S. (1994). Self-Enforcing International Environmen- Tal Agreements. Oxford Economic
Papers, 46(8): 887-894.
Bartscher, M. A., Rübbelke, D. T. G. ve Sheshinski, E. (2010). Environmental Protection and the
Private Provision of International Public Goods. Economica, 77: 775-784.
Bechtel, M. M. ve Tosun, J. (2009). Changing Economic Openness for Environmental Policy
Convergence: When Can Bilateral Trade Agreements Induce Convergence of Environmental
Regulation?. International Studies Quarterly, 53(4): 931-953.
Berberoğlu, N. (2013). İklim Değişikliği: Post-Kyoto Müzakereleri ve Türkiye. Ekonomik Sorunlar
Dergisi, 33: 18-26.
Bieschke, B. (2015). A “Green” Lining: Closing the Door on Environmental Litigants in Bellon
Could Lead to More Successful Environmental Challenges in the Future Brian. Boston
College Environmental Affairs Law Review, 42(3): 28-40.
Bishop. A. S. ve Munro, R. D. (1972). The UN Regional Economic Commissions and Environmental
Problems. International Organization, 26(2): 348-349.
Botcheva, L. ve Martin, L. L. (2001). Institutional Effects on State Behavior: Convergence and
Divergence, International Studies Quarterly, 45(1): 1-26.
50 Fazlı DOĞAN - Gül Seda ACET
Turkish Studies
International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic
Volume 12/24
Brack, D. (1995). Balancing Trade and the Environment. International Affairs, 71(3): 497-514.
Brown, C. ve Ainley, K. (2008). Uluslararası İlişkileri Anlamak, Arzu Oyacıoğlu, (Çev.) İstanbul:
Yayınodası.
Busch, P. O., Jörgens, H. ve Tews, K. (2005)., The Global Diffusion of Regulatory Instruments: The
Making of a New International Environmental Regime, The Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, 598(1): 146-167.
Byrne, A. (2015). The 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution: Assessing its
Effectiveness as a Multilateral Environmental Regime After 35 Years. Transnational
Environmental Law,4(1): 37-67.
Cairncross, F. (1994). Environmental Pragmatism. Foreign Policy, 95: 35-52.
Choucri, N. (1993). Political Economy of the Global Environment. International Political Science
Review, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1993, s. 103.
Christoff, P. (2006). Post-Kyoto? Post-Bush? Towards an Effective 'Climate Coalition of the
Willing'. International Affairs, 82(5): 843-844.
Clemencon, R. (2016). The Two Sides of the Paris Climate Agreement: Dismal Failure or Historic
Breakthrough?. Journal of Environment & Development, 25(1):, s. 3-24.
Cock, A. R. (2008). Tropical Forests in the Global States System, International Affairs, 84(2): 315-
333.
Çoban, A. (2016). Politico-Environmental Relations in the International Arena. Alternatif Politika,
8(1), 67-108.
D'Arge, R. C., Kneese, A. V. (1972). Environmental Quality and International Trade. International
Organization, 26(2): 419-465.
Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, http://www.undocuments.
net/unchedec.htm. Erişim Tarihi: 12.04.17.
Dimitrov, R. S. (2003). Knowledge, Power, and Interests in Environmental Regime Formation.
International Studies Quarterly, 47(1): 123-150.
Driesen, D. M. (2006). Environmental Protection, Free Trade, and Democracy. American Academy
of Political and Social Science, 603: 252-261.
Elver, H. (2006). International Environmental Law, Water and the Future. Third World Quarterly,
27(5): 885-901.
Falkner, R. (2005). (2005). American Hegemony and the Global Environment. International Studies
Review, 7(4): 585-599.
Feraru, A. T. (1974). Transnational Political Interests and the Global Environment. International
Organization, 28(1): 33-37.
Gomes, F. T. (2012). International Relations and the Environment: Practical Examples Of
Environmental Multilateralism. Observare, 3(2): 87-102.
Green, J. F. ve Colgan, J. (2013). Protecting Sovereignty, Protecting the Planet: State Delegation to
International Organizations and Private Actors in Environmental Politics. Governance: An
International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 26(3): 473-497.
Grubb, M. (1990). The Greenhouse Effect: Negotiating Targets. International Affairs, 66(1): 67-89.
Uluslararası İlişkilerde Çevre Gündeminin İnşası, Çevrenin Boyutları ve Çevre Rejimi 51
Turkish Studies
International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic
Volume 12/24
Haas, E. B. (1975). Is There a Hole in the Whole? Knowledge, Technology, Interdependence, and
the Constructionof International Regimes, International Organization, 29(3): 827-876.
Haas, E. B. (1975). On Systems and International Regimes. World Politics, 27(2): 147-174.
Haas, P. M. (1989). Do Regimes Matter? Epistemic Communities and Mediterranean Pollution
Control. International Organization, 43(3): 377-403.
Hamblin, J. D. (2008). Gods and Devils in the Details: Marine Pollution, Radioactive Waste, and
an Environmental Regime Circa 1972. Diplomatic History, 32(4): 539-560.
Heijden, H. A. (2002). Political Parties and NGOs in Global Environmental Politics, International
Political Science Review, 23(2): 187-201.
Hoad, D. (2016). The 2015 Paris Climate Agreement: Outcomes and Their Impacts on Small Island
States. Island Studies Journal, 11(1): 315-320.
Holzinger, K. (2008). Environmental Policy Convergence: The Impact of International
Harmonization, Transnational Communication, and Regulatory Competition. International
Organization, 62(4): 553-554.
Johnson, B. (1972). The United Nations' Institutional Response to Stockholm: A Case Study in the
International Politics of Institutional Change. International Organization, 26(2): 255-301.
Johnson, T. (2015). Information Revelation and Structural Supremacy: The World Trade
Organization’s Incorporation of Environmental Policy. Rev Int Organ, 10: 207-229.
Karakaya, E. (2015). Paris Anlaşması: İçeriği ve Türkiye Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme”,
http://www.sut-d.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/sut-d-paris-anlasmasi.pd...şim Tarihi:
31.08.17.
Keleş, R. (2013). 100 Soruda Çevre: Çevre Sorunları ve Çevre Politikası. İzmir: Yakın Kitabevi.
Kellenberg, D. ve Levinson A. (2014). Waste of Effort? International Environmental Agreements.
Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 1(1/2): 135-169.
Keohane, R. O. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy,
New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Keohane, R. O., Haas, P. M. ve Levy M. A. (1993). Institutions for the Earth Sources of Effective
International Environmental Protection, USA: The MIT Press.
Keohane, R. O., Nye, J. S. (1993). International Interdependence and Integration, Şu kitaptan: Viotti,
P. R. ve Kauppi, M. V. (Edit), International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism,
Globalism, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Kilian, B. ve Elgström, O. (2010). Still a Green Leader? The European Union’s Role in International
Climate Negotiations. Cooperation and Conflict, 45(3): 255–273.
Kollman, K. ve Prakash, A. (2001). Green by Choice? Cross-National Variations in Firms' Responses
to EMS-Based Environmental Regimes. World Politics, 53(3): 399-403.
Krasner, S. D. (1982). Regimes and the Limits of Realism: Regimes as Autonomous Variables.
International Organization, 36(2): 497-510.
Krasner, S. D. (1983). Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening
Variables. Şu kitaptan: Krasner, S. (Der). International Regimes, New York: Cornell
University Press.
52 Fazlı DOĞAN - Gül Seda ACET
Turkish Studies
International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic
Volume 12/24
Laursen, F. (2003). Comparing Regional Integration Schemes: International Regimes or Would-be
Polities. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series, 3(8): 1-20.
Li, Q. ve Reuveny, R. (2006). Democracy and Environmental Degradation. International Studies
Quarterly, 50(4): 935-956.
Litfini K. T. (2000). Environment, Wealth, and Authority: Global Climate Change and Emerging
Modes of Legitimation. International Studies Review, 2(2): 119-148.
Lofdahl, C. L. (1998). On the Environmental Externalities of Global Trade. International Political
Science Review, 19(4): 339-355.
Maliniak, D. (2009). Inside Ivory Tower. Foreign Policy, 171, 2009.
Martin, L. L. (2007). Neoliberalism, Şu kitaptan: Dunne, T. (Edit). International Relations Theories:
Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mcmichael, P. (2009). Contemporary Contradictions of the Global Development Project:
Geopolitics, Global Ecology and the ‘Development Dlimate. Third World Quarterly, 30(1):
247–262.
Meyer, J. W. (1997). The Structuring of a World Environmental Regime, 1870-1990. International
Organization, 51(4): 623-651.
Meyer, J. W., Frank, D. J., Hironaka, A., Schofer, E ve, and Tuma, N. B. (1997). The Structuring of
a World Environmental Regime, 1870–1990. International Organization. 51(4): 623-51.
Myers, N. (1989). Environment and Security. Foreign Policy, 74: 18-34.
Nakazawa, H. (2006). Between the Global Environmental Regime and Local Sustainability: A Local
Review on the Inclusion, Failure and Reinventing Process of the Environmental Governance.
International Journal of Japanese Sociology, 15(1): 69-85.
O’Neill, B. C. ve Oppenheimer, M. (2002). Dangerous Climate Impacts and the Kyoto Protocol”,
Scıence’ s Compas, 296(5575): 1971-1972.
Özdemir, A. D., Demirel, D., Yazıcı ve Tahmiscioğlu, M. S. (2013). BM İklim Değişikliği Çerçeve
Sözleşmesi Kapsamında Sürdürülen Müzakere Sürecinin Değerlendirilmesi, III. Türkiye
İklim Değişikliği Kongresi – TİKDEK.
Özlüer, I. Ö., Turhan, E. ve Özlüer, F. (2016). BM İklim Değişikliği Çerçeve Sözleşmesinin 21.
Taraflar Konferansı. Ekoloji Kolektifi Derneği.
https://unfccc.int/files/meetings/paris_nov_2015/application/pdf/cop21cm...
nt_turkey.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 31.08.17.
Özlük, Erdem (2017). "Dengeleme mi Peşine Takılmak mı?: Dış Politika Stratejilerini Yeniden
Düşünmek". Gazi Akademik Bakış, 10(2): 221-263.
Pallemaerts, M. (1993). Stockholm'den Rio'ya Uluslararası Çevre Hukuku: Geleceğe Doğru Geri
Adım Mı?, Bülent Duru (Çev.) Şu kitaptan: Sands, F. (1993). Greening International Law,
London: Eartscan Publications Limited.
Palmer, G. (1992). New Ways to Make Internatıonal Envıronmental Law. The American Journal of
International Law, 86(2): 259-283.
Paterson, M. (2012). Yeşil Siyaset. Şu Kitapta: Burchill, S. Uluslararası İlişkiler. Ali Aslan, M. Ali
Ağcan (Çev). İstanbul: Küre Yayınları.
Uluslararası İlişkilerde Çevre Gündeminin İnşası, Çevrenin Boyutları ve Çevre Rejimi 53
Turkish Studies
International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic
Volume 12/24
Peel, J. (2010). Science and Risk Regulation in International Law, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Raustiala, K. (1997). States, NGOs, and International Environmental Institutions. International
Studies Quarterly, 41(4): 719-740.
Ringquis, E. J. ve Kostadinova, T. (2005). Assessing the Effectiveness of International
Environmental Agreements: The Case of the 1985 Helsinki Protocol. American Journal of
Political Science, 49(1): 86-102.
Ruggie, J. G. (1982). International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the
Postwar Economic Order. International Organization, 36(2): 380-381.
Samhat, N. H. (2005). International Regimes and the Prospects for Global Democracy. The
Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, 6(1): 179–189.
Savaşan, Z. (2017). A Brief Assesment on the Paris Climate Agreement and Compliance Issue,
Uluslararası İlişkiler, 14(54): 107-125.
Science, P. J. (2013) Risk Regulation in International Law, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Skolnikoff, E. B. (1990). The Policy Gridlock on Global Warming. Foreign Policy, 79.
Sprinz, D. ve Vaahtoranta, T. (1994). The Interest-Based Explanation of International Environmental
Policy, International Organization, 48(1): 77-105.
Sussman, G. (2004). The USA and Global Environmental Policy: Domestic Constraints on Effective
Leadership. International Political Science Review, 25(4): 349-369.
Tanlay, İ. (2010). Cancun İklim Değişikliği Zirvesi – Değerlendirme Notu,
https://www.tobb.org.tr/AvrupaBirligiDairesi/Dokumanlar/Raporlar/cop16.pdf, Erişim
Tarihi: 18.04.17.
Tarasofsky, R. ve Palmer, A. (2006). The WTO in Crisis: Lessons Learned from the Doha
Negotiations on the Environment. International Affairs, 82(5): 899-900.
Turgut, N. Y. (2014). Çevreyi Koruyucu Uluslararası Sözleşmelerin Yadsınamaz Önemi,
Uluslararası Çevre Koruma Sözleşmeleri, 247: 11-39, Ankara: Türkiye Barolar Birliği
Yayınları.
Underdal, A. (2012). Can Conditional Commitments Break the Climate Change Negotiations
Deadlock?. International Political Science Review / Revue Internationale de Science
Politique, 33(4): 475-487.
Ünver, H. A. (2017). Paris İklim Anlaşmasına Teorik Yaklaşım: Neo-Neo Tartışması, Eko-Marksizm
ve Yeşil Kapitalizm, Uluslararası İlişkiler,14(54): 3-19.
Wapner, P. (1995). Politics Beyond the State: Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics.
World Politics, 47(3): 311-340.
Wapner, P. (2002). The Sovereignty of Nature? Environmental Protection in a Postmodern Age.
International Studies Quarterly, 46(2): 167-187.
Ward, H. (1993). Game Theory and the Politics of the Global Commons. The Journal of Conflict
Resolution, 37(2): 203-235.
Williamson, R. L. (1990). Bulding The International Environmental Regime: A Status Report, The
University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, 21(3): 679-760.
Yamin, F. (1995). Biodiversity, Ethics and International Law. International Affairs, 71(3) : 529-546.
54 Fazlı DOĞAN - Gül Seda ACET
Turkish Studies
International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic
Volume 12/24
Zawahri, N. A. ve Mitchell, S. M. (2011). Fragmented Governance of International Rivers:
Negotiating Bilateral Versus Multilateral Treaties. International Studies Quarterly, 55(3):
835-858.
Zeng, K. ve Eastin, J. (2007). International Economic Integration and Environmental Protection: The
Case of China. International Studies Quarterly, 51(4): 971-995.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com