微信扫一扫联系客服

微信扫描二维码

进入报告厅H5

关注报告厅公众号

258

全球治理(英)-2022.8

# 全球治理 大小:0.24M | 页数:37 | 上架时间:2022-08-31 | 语言:英文
全球治理(英)-2022.8.pdf

试看10页

类型: 专题

上传者: XR0209

出版日期: 2022-08-29

摘要:

Many observers expected the Sustainable Development Goals to strengthen the institutional architecture of global sustainability governance within the United Nations system and beyond. This ambition was already part of the negotiations of the goals. Here, the United Nations General Assembly had created an ‘open working group’ of only 30 countries, driven by fears that negotiations with universal participation would not lead to an agreement. However, when over 70 countries wanted to join this group, the United Nations found an innovative way to accommodate them by sharing the 30 seats among ‘duos’ and ‘trios’ of countries. In another innovation, the open working group first went through a ‘stocktaking’ process to create a common understanding of the issues and to create legitimacy among governments and stakeholders (Chasek and Wagner 2016; Dodds, Donoghue and Roesch 2016; Kamau, Chasek and O’Connor 2018).

However, some studies criticized these negotiations for being ‘unpolitical’ and brushing over conflicts (Rivera 2017; Thérien and Pouliot 2020).

The academic literature has characterized the 2030 Agenda as ‘governing through goals’ (Kanie and Biermann 2017: ix). Typical features include a goalsetting process that aims to be broadly inclusive; the non-legally binding nature of the goals; reliance on weak institutional arrangements to promote and implement the goals; and extensive leeway for states or other actors and institutions in responding to the goals (Biermann, Kanie and Kim 2017; Vijge et al. 2020: 256).

Some studies argued that goal-setting can be impactful and that the Sustainable Development Goals encapsulate ‘seeds for transformation’ (Stevens and Kanie 2016). Yet, global governance through goals remains a contested strategy (Kanie et al. 2017: 6; Young 2017: 38). Legal scholars emphasize that goals that are aspirational need additional mechanisms to reach beyond the fragmented and compartmentalized system of international law (Kim 2016: 17). In principle, such mechanisms can be found in the other parts of the 2030 Agenda, especially in the sections on the means of implementation and on the follow-up and review.

展开>> 收起<<

请登录,再发表你的看法

登录/注册

XR0209

相关报告

更多

浏览量

(153)

下载

(5)

收藏

分享

购买

5积分

0积分

原价5积分

VIP

*

投诉主题:

  • 下载 下架函

*

描述:

*

图片:

上传图片

上传图片

最多上传2张图片

提示

取消 确定

提示

取消 确定

提示

取消 确定

积分充值

选择充值金额:

30积分

6.00元

90积分

18.00元

150+8积分

30.00元

340+20积分

68.00元

640+50积分

128.00元

990+70积分

198.00元

1640+140积分

328.00元

微信支付

余额支付

积分充值

填写信息

姓名*

邮箱*

姓名*

邮箱*

注:填写完信息后,该报告便可下载

选择下载内容

全选

取消全选

已选 1