Radioactive Waste Disposal at Sea: Public Ideas ... - IMO

184 Chapter 10
time converging and conflicting, and both integrative and distributive issues
are at stake in regime processes. For instance, as this study illustrated, the
transnational coalition of policy entrepreneurs instigated cooperation by
influencing states’ perception of the ocean dumping problem and their interests
with respect to ocean dumping; however, it did not have a similar influence
on states’ perception of distributive issues existing outside this issue
area that would be negotiated in the upcoming UNCLOS III. Perhaps surprisingly,
nonenvironmental issues were among the most difficult ones
when the regime was established. Neither did the transnational coalition
shape or redefine how states perceived their basic economic interests.
Moreover, with respect to individual motivation, there is no reason to
assume that politicians always are public spirited or that ENGOs do not
try to achieve rewards and benefits for themselves, just as there is no reason
to assume that politicians never are public spirited or that ENGOs are
unwilling to receive private benefits. Regime analysis should reflect that
conflict and cooperation, and private and public interest, are integrated,
not essentially separable. The presence and significance of nonmaterial
interests in regime processes should be acknowledged.
But is it possible to combine the prominent approaches to regime analysis
in a fruitful way? It is encouraging that scholars recently have begun to
examine this question. 11 In order to do so, however, closer attention should
be paid to the scope of validity of power-based, interest-based, and knowledge-based
regime theories. 12 Theorists mostly treat the three regime
“schools” as if they are mutually exclusive, although in reality they deal
with different aspects and different stages of regime establishment. To
advance the present state of regime analysis, it will be necessary to identify
with more precision the dependent variable, the path or paths to regime
formation that theoretical models attempt to explain, and the aspects and
stages with which they are primarily concerned. Until this is done, it will be
rather futile to combine prominent regime theories.
Systematic attention to public ideas and public debate would add several
dimensions to regime analysis. The ideational approach broadens the analysis
to include the broader political arena, and state-society relationships are
seen as important in understanding policy development. The intrinsic
strength of this approach is that it connects three important factors in environmental
cooperation: elites, policies (and their institutionalization), and
the public realm. As repeatedly stressed, public opinion and support is con-