Abbot, C., and Lee, M., “Economic Actors in EU Environmental Law,” Yearbook of European Law, Vol. 34, No. 1, 2015.Google Scholar

Adger, W. N., “Social and Ecological Resilience: Are They Related?,” Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2000, pp. 347–364.Google Scholar

Agné, H., Dellmuth, L. M., and Tallberg, J., “Does Stakeholder Involvement Foster Democratic Legitimacy in International Organizations? An Empirical Assessment of a Normative Theory,” The Review of International Organizations, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ambrus, M., Arts, K., Hey, E., and Raulus, H., “The Role of Experts in International and European Decision-Making Processes: Setting the Scene,” in Ambrus, M., Arts, K., Hey, E., and Raulus, H. (eds.), The Role of “Experts” in International and European Decision-Making Processes: Advisors, Decision Makers or Irrelevant Actors?, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014.Google Scholar

Andresen, S., “The Role of Scientific Expertise in Multilateral Environmental Agreements: Influence and Effectiveness,” in Ambrus, M., Arts, K., Hey, E., and Raulus, H. (eds.), The Role of “Experts” in International and European Decision-Making Processes: Advisors, Decision Makers or Irrelevant Actors?, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014.Google Scholar

Angelo, M. J., “Harnessing the Power of Science in Environmental Law: Why We Should, Why We Don’t, and How We Can,” Texas Law Review, Vol. 86, 2007–2008.Google Scholar

Armitage, D., “Governance and the Commons in a Multi-level World,” International Journal of the Commons, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2008.Google Scholar

Arnold, C. A., and Gunderson, L. H., “Adaptive Law and Resilience,” originally printed in Environmental Law Reporter, Vol. 43, No. 10427, 5–2013; reprinted with copyright to Environmental Law Institute, Washington, DC, 2013, University of Louisville, Legal Studies Research Paper Series, Paper No. 2104–04.Google Scholar

Bäckstrand, K., “Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships for Sustainable Development: Rethinking Legitimacy, Accountability and Effectiveness,” European Environment, Vol. 16, 2006.Google Scholar

Barrett, S., Environment and Statecraft: Strategy for Environmental Treaty Making, Oxford University Press, New York, 2003.Google Scholar

Barstow Magraw, D., and Hawke, L. D., “Sustainable Development,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.Google Scholar

Benson, M. H., and Craig, K. R., The End of Sustainability: Resilience and the Future of Environmental Governance in the Anthropocene, University Press of Kansas, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berkes, F., Colding, J., and Folke, C. (eds.), Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.Google Scholar

Bernstein, S., “Legitimacy in Global Environmental Governance,” Journal of International Law and International Relations, Vol. 1, No. 1–2, 2005.Google Scholar

Beyerlin, U., “Different Types of Norms in International Environmental Law: Policies, Principles and Rules,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.Google Scholar

Biermann, F., et al., “The Fragmentation of Global Governance Architectures: A Framework for Analysis,” Global Environmental Politics, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2009.Google Scholar

Biermann, F., et al., “Navigating the Anthropocene: Improving Earth System Governance,” Policy Forum, Science, Vol. 335, No. 6074, 2012.Google ScholarPubMed

Biggs, R., et al., “Principle 3 – Manage Slow Variables and Feedbacks,” in Biggs, R., Schlüter, M., and Schoon, M. L. (eds.), Principles for Building Resilience: Sustaining Ecosystem Services in Social-Ecological Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biggs, R., Schlüter, M., and Schoon, M. L., “An Introduction to the Resilience Approach and Principles to Sustain Ecosystem Services in Social-Ecological Systems,” in Biggs, R., Schlüter, M., and Schoon, M. L. (eds.), Principles for Building Resilience – Sustaining Ecosystem Services in Social-Ecological Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015a.Google Scholar

Biggs, R., Schlüter, M., and Schoon, M. L. (eds.), Principles for Building Resilience: Sustaining Ecosystem Services in Social-Ecological Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015b.Google Scholar

Birnie, P., Boyle, A., and Redgwell, C., International Law and the Environment, 3rd ed., Oxford University Press, New York, 2009.Google Scholar

Bodansky, D., “The Legitimacy of International Governance: A Coming Challenge for International Environmental Law?,” The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 93, No. 3, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bodansky, D., “Legitimacy,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.Google Scholar

Bodansky, D., The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2010.Google Scholar

Bodansky, D., “Legitimacy in International Law and International Relations,” in Dunoff, J. L., and Pollack, M. A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations – The State of the Art, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2012.Google Scholar

Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E., “International Environmental Law – Mapping the Field,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007a.Google Scholar

Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007b.Google Scholar

Bohman, B., “The Ecosystem Approach as a Basis for Managerial Compliance: An Example from the Regulatory Development in the Baltic Sea Region,” in Langlet, D., and Rayfuse, R., (eds.), The Ecosystem Approach in Ocean Planning and Governance – Perspectives from Europe and Beyond, Brill/Nijhoff, Leiden, 2018, pp. 80–116.Google Scholar

Bohman, B., “Lessons from the Regulatory Approaches to Combat Eutrophication in the Baltic Sea,” Marine Policy, Vol. 98, 2018a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bohman, B., “Regulating Eutrophication: Flexible Legal Approaches and Environmental Governance in the Baltic Sea Area,” in Ringbom, H. (ed.), Regulatory Gaps in Baltic Sea Governance – Selected Issues, MARE Publications Series, Springer Cham, 2018b.Google Scholar

Bohman, B., and Langlet, D., “Float or Sinker for Europe’s Seas? The Role of Law in Marine Governance,” in Gilek, M., and Kern, K. (eds.), Governing Europe’s Marine Environment: Europeanization of Regional Seas or Regionalization of EU Policies?, Ashgate, Farnham, Surrey, 2015.Google Scholar

Bosselmann, K., The Principle of Sustainability: Transforming Law and Governance. Abingdon, Oxon, Ashgate, 2008.Google Scholar

Bosselmann, K., Engel, R., and Taylor, P., Governance for Sustainability: Issues, Challenges, Successes, UCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper No. 70, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boyle, A. E., “Dispute Settlement and the Law of the Sea Convention: Problems of Fragmentation and Jurisdiction,” International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 46, No. 1, 1997.Google Scholar

Boyle, A., “Some Reflections on the Relationship of Treaties and Soft Law,” in Gowlland-Debbas, V. (ed.), Multilateral Treaty-Making – The Current Status of Challenges to and Reforms Needed in the International Legislative Process (Part of the series Nijhoff Law Specials, Vol. 47), Kluwer Law International, 2000.Google Scholar

Boyle, M., Kay, J., and Pond, B., “Monitoring in Support of Policy: An Adaptive Ecosystem Approach,” in Munn, T., Encyclopedia of Global Environmental Change, Vol. 4, Wiley, New York, 2001.Google Scholar

Brakeland, J.-F., “Access to Justice in Environmental Matters – Developments at EU Level,” published in the Gyeseiho-Kenkyu, 2014, No. 5.Google Scholar

Brunnée, J., “Enforcement Mechanisms in International Law and International Environmental Law,” in Beyerlin, U., Stoll, P-T., and Wolfrum, R. (eds.), Ensuring Compliance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements – A Dialogue between Practitioners and Academia, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden/Boston, 2006.Google Scholar

Brunnée, J., “Common Areas, Common Heritage, and Common Concern,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.Google Scholar

Carpenter, S., et al., “From Metaphor to Measurement: Resilience of What to What?,” Ecosystems, Vol. 4, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carvalho, W. D., et al., “Deforestation Control in the Brazilian Amazon: A Conservation Struggle Being Lost as Agreements and Regulations Are Subverted and Bypassed,” Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2019, pp. 122–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

CBD (1995), CBD II/8, The Second Meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the Convention on Biological Diversity, held in Jakarta, Indonesia (CBD COP 2) Decision 8, UNEP/CBD/COP/2/19.Google Scholar

CBD, “Ecosystem Approach, Description of the Ecosystem Approach,” COP Convention on Biological Diversity, May 2000, in Nairobi, Kenya (CBD, COP 5), Decision V/6, para. 4–5, part A, p. 1. (2000c).Google Scholar

CBD, “The Ecosystem Approach – Operational and Implementation Guidelines,” Seventh Ordinary Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, February 2004 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (CBD COP 7), Decision VII/11, UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/VII/11.Google Scholar

CBD, “The Malawi Principles,” COP Convention on Biological Diversity, May 2000, in Nairobi, Kenya (CBD, COP 5), Decision V/6, para. 4–5, part B. (2000a),Google Scholar

CBD SBSTTA (2000), Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA), fifth meeting, Montreal, January 2000, Item 4.2.1 of the provisional agenda; Ecosystem Approach: Further Conceptual Elaboration, Document: UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/11, October 23, 1999.Google Scholar

Chaffin, B. C., et al., “Transformative Environmental Governance,” Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Vol. 41:1, 2016, pp. 399–423.Google Scholar

Chaffin, B. C., Gosnell, H., and Cosens, B. A., “A Decade of Adaptive Governance Scholarship: Synthesis and Future Directions,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 19(3), 2014, p. 56.Google Scholar

Chaffin, B., Gunderson, L., and Cosens, B. C. (eds.), “Practicing Panarchy: Assessing Legal Flexibility, Ecological Resilience, and Adaptive Governance in U.S. Regional Water Systems Experiencing Climate Change,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 23(1), 2018.Google Scholar

Chambers, W. B., “Towards an Improved Understanding of Legal Effectiveness of International Environmental Treaties,” Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, Vol. 16, 2004.Google Scholar

Chapin, F. S., et al., “Resilience-Based Stewardship: Strategies for Navigating Sustainable Pathways in a Changing World,” in Chapin, F. S., Kofinas, G. P., and Folke, C. (eds.), Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship – Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World, Springer, New York, 2009a.Google Scholar

Chapin, F. S., Folke, C., and Kofinas, G. P., “A Framework for Understanding Change,” in Chapin, F. S., Kofinas, G. P., and Folke, C. (eds.), Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship – Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World, Springer, New York, 2009a.Google Scholar

Chapin, F. S., Kofinas, G. P., and Folke, C. (eds.), Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship – Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World, Springer, New York, 2009.Google Scholar

Charney, J. I., “The Impact on the International Legal System of the Growth of International Courts and Tribunals,” NYU Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 31, 1999.Google Scholar

Charnovitz, S., “Two Centuries of Participation: NGOs and International Governance,” Michigan Journal of International Law, Vol. 18, No. 183, 1996–1997.Google Scholar

Chayes, A., and Chayes, A. H., “On Compliance,” International Organization, Vol. 47, No. 2, 1993.Google Scholar

Chayes, A., and Chayes, A. H, The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1995.Google Scholar

Churchill, R., and Ulfstein, G., “Autonomous Institutional Arrangements in Multilateral Environmental Agreements: A Little-Noticed Phenomenon in International Law,” The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 94, No. 4, 2000.Google Scholar

Coleman, W. T., “Legal Barriers to the Restoration of Aquatic Systems,” Vermont Law Review, Vol. 23, 1998.Google Scholar

Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood – The Report of the Commission on Global Governance, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1995.Google Scholar

Cosens, B. A., “Transboundary River Governance in the Face of Uncertainty: Resilience Theory and the Columbia River Treaty,” University of Utah Journal of Land Resources, and Environmental Law, Vol. 30, No. 2, 2011, pp. 229ff.Google Scholar

Cosens, B. A., “Legitimacy, Adaptation, and Resilience in Ecosystem Management,” in Ecology and Society, Vol. 18, No. 1, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cosens, B. A., et al., “The Role of Law in Adaptive Governance,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 22(1):30, 2017.Google Scholar

Cosens, B., and Gunderson, L. H., “Adaptive Water Governance: Summary and Synthesis,” in Cosens, B., and Gunderson, L. H. (eds.), Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance, Springer International Publishing AG, Cham, 2018a.Google Scholar

Cosens, B., and Gunderson, L. H., “An Introduction to Practical Panarchy: Linking Law, Resilience, and Adaptive Water Governance of Regional Scale Social-Ecological Systems,” in Cosens, B., and Gunderson, L. H. (eds.), Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance – Linking Law to Social-Ecological Resilience, Springer International Publishing AG, Cham, 2018b.Google Scholar

Cosens, B., and Gunderson, L. H. (eds.), Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance – Linking Law to Social-Ecological Resilience, Springer International Publishing AG, Cham, 2018c.Google Scholar

Craig, P., and De Búrca, G., EU Law – Text, Cases, and Materials (5th ed.), Oxford University Press, New York, 2011.Google Scholar

Craig, R. K., et al., “Balancing Stability and Flexibility in Adaptive Governance: An Analysis of Tools Available in U.S. Environmental Law,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2017, p. 3.Google Scholar

Craig, R. K., et al., “Stability and Flexibility in the Emergence of Adaptive Water Governance,” in Cosens, B., and Gunderson, L. H. (eds.), Practical Panarchy for Adaptive Water Governance, Springer International Publishing AG, Cham, 2018.Google Scholar

Crutzen, P. J., “Geology of Mankind,” Nature, Vol. 415, No. 6867, 2002, p.23.Google Scholar

D’Amato, A., “Is International Law Really ‘Law’?,” Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 79, 1984–1985, pp. 1293ff.Google Scholar

Darpö, J., “Article 9 (2)of the Aarhus Convention and EU Law – Some Remarks on CJEUs Case-Law on Access to Justice in Environmental Decision-Making,” Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2014.Google Scholar

De Búrca, G., Keohane, R., and Sabel, C., “New Modes of Pluralist Global Governance,” New York University Journal of International Law & Politics, Vol. 45, No. 3, 2013, pp. 723–786.Google Scholar

De Lucia, V., “Competing Narratives and Complex Genealogies: The Ecosystem Approach in International Environmental Law,” Journal of Environmental Law, Vol. 27, 2015, pp. 91–117.Google Scholar

Dearing, J. A., et al., “Safe and Just Operating Spaces for Regional Social-Ecological Systems,” Global Environmental Change, Vol. 28, 2014, pp. 227–238.Google Scholar

Delmas, M. A., and Young, O. R., “Introduction: New Perspectives on Governance for Sustainable Development,” in Delmas, M. A., and Young, O. R. (eds.), Governance for the Environment – New Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009.Google Scholar

Downs, G. W., Rocke, D. M., and Barsoom, P. N., “Is the Good News about Compliance Good News about Cooperation?,” International Organization, Vol. 50, No. 3, 1996, pp. 379–406.Google Scholar

Duit, A., and Galaz, V., “Governance and Complexity – Emerging Issues for Governance Theory,” Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions, Vol. 21, No. 3, 2008, pp. 311–335.Google Scholar

Duit, A., et al., “Governance, Complexity and Resilience,” Global Environmental Change, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2010.Google Scholar

Dunoff, J. L., “Levels of Environmental Governance,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.Google Scholar

Dupuy, P.-M., “A Doctrinal Debate in the Globalisation Era: On the Fragmentation of International Law,” European Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2007.Google Scholar

Ebbesson, J., Compatibility of International and National Environmental Law, Iustus Förlag AB, Uppsala, 1996.Google Scholar

Ebbesson, J., “The Notion of Public Participation in International Environmental Law,” in Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), Yearbook of International Environmental Law, Vol. 8, Oxford University Press, New York, 1997.Google Scholar

Ebbesson, J., “Public Participation,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007a.Google Scholar

Ebbesson, J., “Implementing and Enforcing the Baltic Sea Convention through European Community Law,” in Führ, M., Wahl, R., and von Wilmowsky, P. (eds.), Umweltrecht und Umweltwissenschaft – Festschrift für Eckhard Rehbinder, Erich Schmidt Verlag, Berlin, 2007b.Google Scholar

Ebbesson, J., “The Rule of Law in Governance of Complex Socio-Ecological Changes,” Global Environmental Change, Vol. 20(3), 2010, pp. 414–422.Google Scholar

Ebbesson, J., Briefing to European Parliament, “The EU and the Aarhus Convention: Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, Policy Department C: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs,” European Parliament, PE 571.357, 2016.Google Scholar

Ebbesson, J., “Public Participation in Environmental Matters – International Human Rights Developments in Europe and Africa,” 2018, Faculty of Law, Stockholm University Research Paper No. 58. Available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=3164785.Google Scholar

Ebbesson, J., and Folke, C., “Matching Scales of Law with Social-Ecological Contexts to Promote Resilience,” in Garmestani, A. S., and Allen, C. R. (eds.), Social-Ecological Resilience and Law, Columbia University Press, New York, 2014.Google Scholar

Ebbesson, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), “Special Feature on Law and Social-Ecological Resilience, Part II: Contributions from Law for Social-Ecological Resilience Symposium, Stockholm, Sweden, 2010,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 18(3) 2013.Google Scholar

Ebbesson, J., and Hey, E., “Introduction: Where in Law Is Social-Ecological Resilience?,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 18(3):25, 2013.Google Scholar

Epiney, A., “The Role of NGOs in the Process of Ensuring Compliance with MEAs,” in Beyerlin, U., Stoll, P-T., and Wolfrum, R. (eds.), Ensuring Compliance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements – A Dialogue between Practitioners and Academia, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden/Boston, 2006.Google Scholar

EU 5th EAP, Fifth Environmental Action Programme, “Towards Sustainability – A European Community Programme of Policy and Action in Relation to the Environment and Sustainable Development,” OJ No C138, 17. 5.93;EU 6th EAP, Sixth Environmental Action Programme, Decision No. 1600/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of July 2002 laying down the Sixth Community Environment Action Programme, OJ L 242, 10.9.2002.Google Scholar

EU COM (1999), Communication from the Commission, “Europe’s Environment: What Directions for the Future? – The Global Assessment of the European Community Programme of Policy and Action in Relation to the Environment and Sustainable Development, ‘Towards Sustainability,’” Brussels, 24.11.1999, COM(1999) 543 final, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

EU COM (2003), Commission Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (presented by the Commission), Brussels, 24. 10.2003, COM(2003) 624 final, 2003/0246 (COD), C5-0513–03.Google Scholar

EU COM (2003a), Commission Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Application of the Provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to EC Institutions and Bodies (presented by the Commission), Brussels, 24.10.2003, COM(2003) 622 final, 2003/0242 (COD).Google Scholar

EU COM Report (2012a), Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, “On the Experience Gained in the Application of the Directive 2003/4/EC on Public Access to Environmental Information,” Brussels, 17.12.2012, COM(2012) 774 final.Google Scholar

EU COM Report (2014), Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, “The First Phase of Implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC) – The European Commission’s Assessment and Guidance [SWD(2014) 49 final],” Brussels, 20.2.2014COM(2014) 97 final.Google Scholar

EU Treaties Office Database of the European External Action Service, http://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/default.home.do.Google Scholar

EU WFD CIS, Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), “Carrying Forward the Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive: Progress and Work Programme for 2003 and 2004,” as agreed by the Water Directors 17 June 2003.Google Scholar

EU White Paper (2001), Communication from the EU Commission, “European Governance – A White Paper,” Brussels, 25. 7.2001, EU COM(2001) 428 final, OJ Document: 2001/C 287/01.Google Scholar

Farber, D. A., “Politics and Procedure in Environmental Law,” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol. 8, 1992.Google Scholar

Fitzmaurice, M. A., and Redgwell, C., “Environmental Non-compliance Procedures and International Law,” Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 31, 2000.Google Scholar

Folke, C., “Resilience: The Emergence of a Perspective for Social-Ecological Systems Analysis,” Global Environmental Change, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2006, pp. 253–267.Google Scholar

Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Elmqvist, T., et al., “Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive Capacity in a World of Transformations,” Scientific Background Paper on Resilience for the Process of the World Summit on Sustainable Development on Behalf of the Environmental Advisory Council to the Swedish Government, Edita Norstedts Tryckeri AB, Stockholm, 2002a.Google Scholar

Folke, C., Chapin, F. S., and Olsson, P., “Transformations in Ecosystem Stewardship,” in Chapin, F. S., Kofinas, G. P., and Folke, C. (eds.), Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship – Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World, Springer, New York, 2009.Google Scholar

Folke, C., Colding, J., and Berkes, F., “Synthesis: Building Resilience and Adaptive Capacity in Social-Ecological Systems,” in Berkes, F., Colding, J., and Folke, C. (eds.), Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.Google Scholar

Folke, C., Jansson, Å., Rockström, J., et al., “Reconnecting to the Biosphere,” Ambio, Vol. 40:719, 2011.Google Scholar

Folke, C., et al., “Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive Capacity in a World of Transformations,” Ambio, Vol. 31, No. 5, 2002, pp. 437–440.Google Scholar

Folke, C., et al., “Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems,” Annual Review of Environmental Recourses, Vol. 30, 2005, pp. 441–473.Google Scholar

Folke, C., et al., “Resilience Thinking: Integrating Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2010, pp. 20–28.Google Scholar

Folke, C., et al., “Transnational Corporations and the Challenge of Biosphere Stewardship,” Nature Ecology & Evolution, Vol. 3, 2019, pp. 1396–1403.Google Scholar

Franck, T. M., Fairness in International Law and Institutions, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1995.Google Scholar

Franck, T. M., “Legitimacy in the International System,” American Journal of International Law, Vol. 82, No. 4, 1988.Google Scholar

Galaz, V., et al., “Analytical Themes: The Problem of Fit among Biophysical Systems, Environmental and Resource Regimes, and Broader Governance Systems: Insights and Emerging Challenges,” in Young, O.R., King, L. K., and Schröder, H. (eds.), Institutions and Environmental Change – Principal Findings, Applications, and Research Frontiers, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2008, pp. 147–182.Google Scholar

Garmestani, A. S., Allen, C. R., and Benson, M.H. (eds.), “Special Feature on Law and Social-Ecological Resilience, Part I: Contributions from Resilience 2011,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 18(2), 2013.Google Scholar

Garmestani, A. S., Allen, C. R., and Benson, M. H., “Can Law Foster Social-Ecological Resilience?” Ecology and Society, 18 (2):37, 2013.Google Scholar

Garmestani, A. S., Allen, C. R., and Cabezas, H., “Panarchy, Adaptive Management and Governance: Policy Options for Building Resilience,” Nebraska Law Review, Vol. 87, 2008, pp. 1036ff.Google Scholar

Garmestani, A. S., and Benson, M. H., “A Framework for Resilience-Based Governance of Social- Ecological Systems,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 18(1): 9, 2013.Google Scholar

Garmestani, A. S., and Allen, C. R. (eds.), Social-Ecological Resilience and Law, Columbia University Press, New York, 2014a.Google Scholar

Garmestani, A. S., et al., “Introduction – Social-Ecological Resilience and Law,” in Garmestani, A. S., and Allen, C. R. (eds.), Social-Ecological Resilience and Law, Columbia University Press, New York, 2014b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gehring, T., “Treaty-Making and Treaty Evolution,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.Google Scholar

Gonzales, C. G., “Global Justice in the Anthropocene,” in Kotzé, L. J. (ed.), Environmental Law and Governance for the Anthropocene, Bloomsbury Publishing, Oxford, 2017.Google Scholar

Green, O. O., et al., “EU Water Governance: Striking the Right Balance between Regulatory Flexibility and Enforcement?,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 18 (2):10, 2013.Google Scholar

Green, O. O., et al., “Barriers and Bridges to the Integration of Social–Ecological Resilience and Law,” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, Vol. 13, 2015a, pp. 332–337.Google Scholar

Green, O. O., et al., “The Role of Bridging Organizations in Enhancing Ecosystem Services and Facilitating Adaptive Management of Social-Ecological Systems,” in Allen, C. R., and Garmestani, A. S. (eds.), Adaptive Management of Social-Ecological Systems, Springer Science, Dordrecht, 2015b.Google Scholar

Gunningham, N., and Holley, C., “Next-Generation Environmental Regulation: Law, Regulation, and Governance,” Annual Review of Law and Social Science, Vol. 12:1, 2016, pp. 273–293.Google Scholar

Guzman, A. T., How International Law Works: A Rational Choice Theory, Oxford University Press, New York, 2008.Google Scholar

Hafner, G., “Risks Ensuing from Fragmentation of International Law,” Volume II (Part 2): Report of the Commission to the General Assembly, Document A/55/10: Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its fifty-second session in UN ILC 2000, Yearbook of the International Law Commission 2000.Google Scholar

Hafner, G., “Pros and Cons Ensuing from Fragmentation of International Law,” Michigan Journal of International Law, Vol. 25, 2004.Google Scholar

Hahn, T., et al., “Trust-Building, Knowledge Generation and Organizational Innovations: The Role of Bridging Organization for Adaptive Comanagment of a Wetland Landscape around Kristianstad, Sweden,” Human Ecology, Vol. 34, 2006.Google Scholar

Handl, G., “Compliance Control Mechanisms and International Environmental Obligations,” Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 5, 1997.Google Scholar

Hardin, G., “The Tragedy of the Commons,” Science, Vol. 162, No. 3859, 1968, pp. 1243–1248.Google Scholar

Helfner, L. R., “Flexibility in International Agreements,” in Dunoff, J., and Pollack, M. A., (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations – The State of the Art, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013.Google Scholar

Henkin, L., How Nations Behave: Law and Foreign Policy, Columbia University Press, New York, 1979Google Scholar

Hey, E., “Multi-Dimensional Public Governance Arrangements for the Protection of Transboundary Aquatic Environment in the European Union – The Changing Interplay between European and Public International Law,” International Organizations Law Review, Vol. 6, 2009.Google Scholar

Holling, C. S., and Meffe, G. K., “Command and Control, and the Pathology of Natural Resource Management,” Conservation Biology, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1996.Google Scholar

Huitema, D., et al., “Adaptive Water Governance: Assessing the Institutional Prescriptions of Adaptive (Co-)Management from a Governance Perspective and Defining a Research Agenda,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 14 (1):26, 2009.Google Scholar

Jacobson, H. K., and Brown Weiss, E., “Compliance with International Environmental Accords,” in Rolén, M., Sjöberg, H., and Svedin, U. (eds.), International Governance on Environmental Issues, Environment and Policy, Vol. 9, Springer Science+Business Media, Dordrecht, 1997.Google Scholar

Jacobson, H. K., and Brown Weiss, E., “A Framework for Analysis,” in Brown Weiss, E., and Jacobson, H. K. (eds.), Engaging Countries – Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental Accords, MIT Press, Cambridge and London, 1998.Google Scholar

Jacobson, H. K., and Brown Weiss, E., “Assessing the Record and Designing Strategies to Engage Countries,” in Brown Weiss, E., and Jacobson, H. K. (eds.), Engaging Countries – Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental Accords, MIT Press, Cambridge and London, 1998b.Google Scholar

Jans, J.H., et al., “‘Gold Plating’ of European Environmental Measures?,” Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law, Vol. 6(4), 2009.Google Scholar

Jans, J. H., and Vedder, H. H. B., European Environmental Law After Lisbon, 4th ed., Europa Law Publishing, Groningen, 2012.Google Scholar

Jendroska, J., “Citizen’s Rights in European Environmental Law: Stock-Taking of Key Challenges and Current Developments in Relation to Public Access to Information, Participation and Access to Justice,” Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2012.Google Scholar

Josefsson, H., and Baaner, L., “The Water Framework Directive – A Directive for the Twenty-First Century?,” Journal of Environmental Law, Vol. 23, No. 3, 2011.Google Scholar

Jänicke, M., and Jörgens, H., “New Approaches to Environmental Governance” in Jänicke, M., and Jacob, K. (eds.), Environmental Governance in Global Perspective: New Approaches to Ecological Modernisation (FFU Report 01–2006), Freie Universität, Berlin, 2006. (First published in Neue Steuerungskonzepte in der Umweltpolitik. Zeitschrift für Umweltpolitik & Umweltrech,. Jg. 27, H.3, 2004, s. 297–348.)Google Scholar

Jönsson, C., and Tallberg, J., “Transnational Actor Participation in International Institutions: Where, Why, and with What Consequences?,” in Jönsson, C., and Tallberg, J. (eds.), Transnational Actors in Global Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2010.Google Scholar

Juda, L., “Considerations in Developing a Functional Approach to the Governance of Large Marine Ecosystems,” Ocean Development and International Law, Vol. 30, No. 2, 1999.Google Scholar

Juda, L., “The EU and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive: Continuing the Development of the European Ocean Use Management,” Ocean Development and International Law, Vol. 41, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kim, R. E., “The Emergent Network Structure of the Multilateral Environmental Agreement System,” Global Environmental Change, Vol. 23, 2013.Google Scholar

Kim, R. E., and Mackey, B., “International Environmental Law as a Complex Adaptive System,” International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Vol. 14, No. 1, Springer, 2014, pp. 5–24.Google Scholar

Kirk, E. A., “Noncompliance and the Development of Regimes Addressing Marine Pollution from Land-Based Activities,” Ocean Development and International Law, Vol. 39, No. 3, 2008, pp. 235–256.Google Scholar

Kiss, A., and Shelton, D., International Environmental Law, 2nd ed., Transnational Publishers, Ardsley, New York, 2000.Google Scholar

Klabbers, J., “Compliance Procedures,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007,Google Scholar

Koskenniemi, M., “Peaceful Settlement of Environmental Disputes,” Nordic Journal of International Law, Vol. 60, No. 1, 1991Google Scholar

Koskenniemi, M., “Environmental Cooperation in the Baltic Region,” Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 1, 1993, pp. 81–106.Google Scholar

Koskenniemi, M., and Leino, P., “Fragmentation of International Law? Postmodern Anxieties,” Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 15, No. 3, 2002.Google Scholar

Koskenniemi, M., “Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from Diversification and Expansion of International Law,” UN ILC Report 2006, Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission, International Law Commission, fifty-eighth session, Geneva 2006, United Nations, General Assembly, Document: A/CN.4/L.682 13 April 2006.Google Scholar

Kotschy, K., et al., “Principle 1 – Maintain Diversity and Redundancy,” in Biggs, R., Schlüter, M., and Schoon, M. L. (eds.), Principles for Building Resilience: Sustaining Ecosystem Services in Social-Ecological Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015.Google Scholar

Kotzé, L. (ed.), Environmental Law and Governance for the Anthropocene, Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2017.Google Scholar

Kotzé, L. J., and Kim, R. E., “Earth System Law: The Juridical Dimensions of Earth System Governance,” Earth System Governance, Vol. 1, 2019.Google Scholar

Krämer, L., EU Environmental Law, 7th ed., Sweet and Maxwell, London, 2011.Google Scholar

Kravchenko, S., “The Aarhus Convention and Innovations in Compliance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements,” Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, Vol. 18, No. 1, 2007.Google Scholar

Kuokkanen, T., “Practice of the Implementation Committee under the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution,” in Beyerlin, U., Stoll, P-T., and Wolfrum, R. (eds.), Ensuring Compliance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements – A Dialogue between Practitioners and Academia, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden/Boston, 2006.Google Scholar

Langlet, D., and Mahmoudi, S., EU Environmental Law and Policy, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2016.Google Scholar

Langlet, D., and Rayfuse, R., “Challenges in Implementing the Ecosystem Approach: Lessons Learned,” in Langlet, D., and Rayfuse, R. (eds.), The Ecosystem Approach in Ocean Planning and Governance – Perspectives from Europe and Beyond, Brill/Nijhoff, Leiden, 2018.Google Scholar

Lebel, L., Anderies, J. M., Campbell, B., et al., “Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2006.Google Scholar

Lee, M., “Law and Governance of Water Protection Policy,” in Scott, J. (ed.), Environmental Protection – European Law and Governance, Oxford University Press, New York, 2009.Google Scholar

van Leeuwen, J., et al., “Implementing the Marine Strategy Framework Directive: A Policy Perspective on Regulatory, Institutional and Stakeholder Impediments to Effective Implementation,” Marine Policy, Vol. 50, Part B, 2014.Google Scholar

van Leeuwen, J., van Hoof, L., and van Tatenhove, J., “Institutional Ambiguity in Implementing the European Union Marine Strategy Framework Directive,” Marine Policy, Vol. 36, 2012.Google Scholar

Leitch, A. M., et al., “Principle 6 – Broaden Participation,” in Biggs, R., Schlüter, M., and Schoon, M. L. (eds.), Principles for Building Resilience: Sustaining Ecosystem Services in Social-Ecological Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015.Google Scholar

Linderfalk, U., On the Interpretation of Treaties – The Modern International Law as Expressed in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Springer, Dordrecht, 2007.Google Scholar

Liu, J., et al., “Complexity of Coupled Human and Natural Systems,” Science, Vol. 317, No. 5844, 2007, pp. 1513–1516.Google Scholar

Long, R., “The Marine Strategy Framework Directive: A New European Approach to the Regulation of the Marine Environment, Marine Natural Resources and Marine Ecological Services,” Journal of Energy and Natural Resource Law, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2011.Google Scholar

Long, R., “Legal Aspects of Ecosystem-Based Marine Management in Europe,” in Chircop, A., McConnell, M. L., and Coffen-Smou, S. (eds.), Ocean Yearbook, Vol. 26, Hijhoff, The Hague, 2012.Google Scholar

Low, B., et al., “Redundancy and Diversity: Do They Influence Optimal Management?,” in Berkes, F., Colding, J., and Folke, C. (eds.), Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.Google Scholar

March, J. G., and Olsen, J. P., “The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders,” International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998.Google Scholar

Martin, L. L., “Against Compliance,” in Dunoff, J. L., and Pollack, M. A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations – The State of the Art, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2012.Google Scholar

Matz, N., “Financial and Other Incentives for Complying with MEA Obligations,” in Beyerlin, U., Stoll, P-T., and Wolfrum, R. (eds.), Ensuring Compliance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements – A Dialogue between Practitioners and Academia, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden/Boston, 2006.Google Scholar

Mitchell, R. B., “International Environmental Agreements: A Survey of Their Features, Formation, and Effects,” Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Vol. 28, 2003, pp. 429–461.Google Scholar

Mitchell, R. B., “Compliance Theory – Compliance, Effectiveness, and Behaviour Change in International Environmental Law,” in Bodansky, D., Brunneé, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007.Google Scholar

Morgera, E., “The Ecosystem Approach and the Precautionary Principle,” in Morgera, E., and Razzaque, J., (eds.), Biodiversity and Nature Protection Law, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, 2017.Google Scholar

Morrison, T. H., et al., “The Black Box of Power in Polycentric Environmental Governance,” Global Environmental Change, Vol. 57, 2019.Google Scholar

Natarajan, U., and Khoday, K., “Locating Nature: Making and Unmaking International Law,” Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 27(3), 2014.Google Scholar

Newig, J., Pahl-Wostl, C., and Sigel, K., “The Role of Public Participation in Managing Uncertainty in the Implementation of the Water Framework Directive,” European Environment, Vol. 15, No. 6, 2005, pp. 333–343.Google Scholar

Nilsson, A. K., and Bohman, B., “Legal Prerequisites for Ecosystem-Based Management in the Baltic Sea Area: The Example of Eutrophication” Ambio, Vol. 44, Suppl. 3, 2015.Google Scholar

Oberthür, S., and Gehring, T., “Conceptual Foundations of Institutional Interaction,” in Oberthür, S., and Gehring, T. (eds.), Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance: Synergy and Conflict among International and EU Policies, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2006a.Google Scholar

Oberthür, S., and Gehring, T., “Comparative Empirical Analysis and Ideal Types of Institutional Interaction,” in Oberthür, S., and Gehring, T. (eds.), Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance: Synergy and Conflict among International and EU Policies, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2006b.Google Scholar

Österblom, H., et al., “Making the Ecosystem Approach Operational – Can Regime Shifts in Ecological- and Governance Systems Facilitate the Transition?,” Marine Policy, Vol. 34, 2010.Google Scholar

Ostrom, E., Governing the Commons – The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1990.Google Scholar

Ostrom, E., Gardner, R., and Walker, J., Rules, Games, and Common-Pool Resources, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1994.Google Scholar

Ostrom, E., and Janssen, M. A., “Multi-Level Governance and Resilience of Social Ecological Systems,” in Spoor, M. (ed.), Globalization, Poverty and Conflict, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, 2004.Google Scholar

Ostrom, V., “Polycentricity,” in McGinnis, M. (ed.), Polycentricity and Local Public Economies: Readings from the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1999.Google Scholar

Pahl-Wostl, C., “A Conceptual Framework for Analysing Adaptive Capacity and Multi-Level Learning Processes in Resource Governance Regimes,” Global Environmental Change, Vol. 19, 2009.Google Scholar

Pallemaerts, M., “Introduction,” in Pallemaerts, M. (ed.), The Aarhus Convention at Ten – Interactions and Tensions between Conventional International Law and EU Environmental Law, Vol. 9, Avosetta series, Europa Law Publishing, Groningen, 2011a.Google Scholar

Pallemaerts, M., “Access to Environmental Justice at EU Level. Has the ‘Aarhus Regulation’ Improved the Situation?,” in Pallemaerts, M. (ed.), The Aarhus Convention at Ten – Interactions and Tensions between Conventional International Law and EU Environmental Law, Vol. 9, Avosetta series, Europa Law Publishing, Groningen, 2011b.Google Scholar

Palm, E., “Rättspraxis och tolkningsmetoder i Europadomstolen för de mänskliga rättigheterna,” Juridisk Tidskrift, No. 4, 2003.Google Scholar

Phillips, R., Freeman, R. E., and Wicks, A. C., “What Stakeholder Theory Is Not,” Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 4, 2003.Google Scholar

Piattoni, S., “Multi‐Level Governance: A Historical and Conceptual Analysis,” Journal of European Integration, Vol. 31, No. 2, 2009.Google Scholar

Platjouw, F., Environmental Law and the Ecosystem Approach: Maintaining Ecological Integrity through Consistency in Law, Routledge, Abingdon and New York, 2016.Google Scholar

Platjouw, F. M., “Dimensions of Transboundary Legal Coherence Needed to Foster Ecosystem-Based Governance in the Arctic,” Marine Policy, Vol. 110, 2019.Google Scholar

Plummer, R., “The Adaptive Co-Management Process: An Initial Synthesis of Representative Models and Influential Variables,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 14(2): 24. 2009.Google Scholar

Profeta, T. H., “Managing without a Balance: Environmental Regulation in Light of Ecological Advances,” Duke Environmental Law and Policy, Vol. 7, 1996.Google Scholar

Raustiala, K., “States, NGOs, and International Environmental Institutions,” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 41, No. 4, 1997a.Google Scholar

Raustiala, K., “The ‘Participatory Revolution’ in International Environmental Law,” Harvard Environmental Law Review, Vol. 21, 1997b.Google Scholar

Raustiala, K., “Form and Substance in International Agreements,” American Journal of International Law, Vol. 99, No. 3, 2005.Google Scholar

Raustiala, K., and Slaugther, A.-M., “International Law, International Relations and Compliance,” in Carlsnaes, W., Risse, T., and Simmons, B. A. (eds.), Handbook of International Relations, SAGE Publications, London, 2002.Google Scholar

Raworth, K., “A Safe and Just Space for Humanity: Can We Live within the Doughnut?,” Oxfam Discussion Paper, Oxfam Policy and Practice: Climate Change and Resilience, Vol. 8, No. 1, 2012, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar

Redgwell, C., “Multilateral Environmental Treaty-Making,” in Gowlland-Debbas, V. (ed.), Multilateral Treaty-Making – The Current Status of Challenges to and Reforms Needed in the International Legislative Process (Part of the series Nijhoff Law Specials, Vol. 47), Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, Originally published by Kluwer Academic Publishers, Kluwer Law International, 2000.Google Scholar

The Revised African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, https://au.int/en/treaties/african-convention-conservation-nature-and-natural-resources-revised-version.Google Scholar

Reyers, B., et al., “Social-Ecological Systems Insights for Navigating the Dynamics of the Anthropocene,” Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Vol. 43, 2018, pp. 267–289.Google Scholar

Rockström, J., et al., “Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 14(2):32, 2009.Google Scholar

Rosenbloom, J., “Defining Nature as a Common Pool Resource,” in Hirokawa, K. H. (ed.), Environmental Law and Contrasting Ideas of Nature – A Constructivist Approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014.Google Scholar

Ruhl, J. B., “Thinking of Environmental Law as Complex Adaptive System: How to Clean up the Environment by Making a Mess of Environmental Law,” Houston Law Review, Vol. 34, No. 4, 1997.Google Scholar

Ruhl, J. B., “Regulation by Adaptive Management – Is It Possible?,” Minnesota Journal of Law, Science and Technology, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2006.Google Scholar

de Sadeleer, N., Environmental Principles – From Political Slogans to Legal Rules, Oxford University Press, New York, 2002.Google Scholar

Sands, P., Peel, J., Fabra, A., and MacKenzie, R., Principles of International Environmental Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012.Google Scholar

Sands, P. H., “The Evolution of International Environmental Law,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.Google Scholar

Sarma, K. M., “Compliance with the Multilateral Environmental Agreement to Protect the Ozone Layer,” in Beyerlin, U., Stoll, P-T., and Wolfrum, R. (eds.), Ensuring Compliance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements – A Dialouge between Practitioners and Academia, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden/Boston, 2006.Google Scholar

Saunders, C., “International Regimes and Domestic Arrangements: A View from Inside Out,” in Young, M. A. (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012.Google Scholar

Saunders, F., “Planetary Boundaries: At the Threshold … Again: Sustainable Development Ideas and Politics,” Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Vol. 17(4), 2015, pp. 823–835.Google Scholar

Schiele, S., Evolution of International Environmental Regimes – The Case of Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014.Google Scholar

Schoon, M. L., et al., “Principle 7 – Promote a Polycentric Governance System,” in Biggs, R., Schlüter, M., and Schoon, M. L. (eds.), Principles for Building Resilience: Sustaining Ecosystem Services in Social-Ecological Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015.Google Scholar

Schout, A., and Sleifer, J., “Expertise at the Crossroads of National and International Policy Making: A Public Management Perspective,” in Ambrus, M., Arts, K., Hey, E., and Raulus, H. (eds.), The Role of “Experts” in International and European Decision-Making Processes: Advisors, Decision Makers or Irrelevant Actors?, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014.Google Scholar

Schrefler, L., “Reflections on the Different Roles of Expertise in Regulatory Policy Making,” in Ambrus, M., Arts, K., Hey, E., and Raulus, H. (eds.), The Role of “Experts” in International and European Decision-Making Processes: Advisors, Decision Makers or Irrelevant Actors?, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014.Google Scholar

Scott, J., and Holder, J., “Law and New Environmental Governance in the European Union,” in De Búrca, G., and Scott, J., Law and New Governance in the EU and the US, Hart Publishing, London, 2006, pp. 211–242.Google Scholar

Scott, J., and Trubek, D. M., “Mind the Gap: Law and New Approaches to Governance in the EU,” European Law Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1, 2002, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar

Shany, Y., “The First MOX Plant Award: The Need to Harmonize Competing Environmental Regimes and Dispute Settlement Procedures,” Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 17, No. 4, 2004.Google Scholar

Snidal, D., “Rational Choice and International Relations,” in Simmons, B. A., Risse-Kappen, T., and Carlsnaes, W. (eds.), Handbook of International Relations, SAGE Publications, London, 2013.Google Scholar

Sofrononva, E., Holley, C., and Nagarajan, V., “Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations and Russian Environmental Governance: Accountability, Participation and Collaboration,” Transnational Environmental Law, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2014.Google Scholar

Soininen, N., and Platjouw, F. M., “Resilience and Adaptive Capacity of Aquatic Environmental Law in the EU: An Evaluation and Comparison of the WFD, MSFD, and MSPD,” in Langlet, D., and Rayfuse, R., (eds.), The Ecosystem Approach in Ocean Planning and Governance – Perspectives from Europe and Beyond, Brill/Nijhoff, Leiden, 2018, pp. 17–79.Google Scholar

Spiro, P. J., “Non-governmental Organizations and Civil Society,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.Google Scholar

Spiro, P. J, “Non-governmental Organizations in International Relations (Theory),” in Dunoff, J. L., and Pollack, M. A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations – The State of the Art, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2013.Google Scholar

Stec, S., and Jendrośka, J., “The Escazú Agreement and the Regional Approach to Rio Principle 10: Process, Innovation, and Shortcomings,” Journal of Environmental Law, Vol. 31, 2019, pp. 533–545.Google Scholar

Steffen, W., Crutzen, P. J., and McNeill, J. R., “The Anthropocene: Are Humans Now Overwhelming the Great Forces of Nature?,” Ambio, Vol. 36, No. 8, 2007, p. 614.Google Scholar

Steffen, W., et al., “The Anthropocene: From Global Change to Planetary Stewardship,” Ambio, Vol. 40, No. 7, 2011, p.739.Google Scholar

Steffen, W., et al., “Planetary Boundaries: Guiding Human Development on a Changing Planet,” Science, Vol. 347, No. 6223, 2015.Google Scholar

Stephens, T., “What Is the Point of International Environmental Law Scholarship in the Anthropocene?,” in Pedersen, O. W. (ed.), Perspectives on Environmental Law Scholarship: Essays on Purpose, Shape and Direction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2018a.Google Scholar

Stephens, T., “Wishful Thinking? The Governance of Climate Change-Related Disasters in the Anthropocene,” in Lyster, R., and Verchick, R. R. M. (eds.), Research Handbook on Climate Disaster Law: Barriers and Opportunities, Elgaronline, 2018b.Google Scholar

Stewart, R. B., “Instrument Choice,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.Google Scholar

Stone, C. D., “Should Trees Have Legal Standing? – Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects,” Southern California Law Review, Vol. 45(450), 1972.Google Scholar

Tallberg, J., “Transnational Access to International Institutions: Three Approaches,” in Jönsson, C., and Tallberg, J. (eds.), Transnational Actors in Global Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire and New York, 2010.Google Scholar

Tarlock, A. D., “The Nonequilibrium Paradigm in Ecology and the Partial Unraveling of Environmental Law,” Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, Vol. 27, 1994.Google Scholar

Thomas, C. A., “The Uses and Abuses of Legitimacy in International Law,” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 34, No. 4, 2014.Google Scholar

Thompson, A., “Coercive Enforcement of International Law,” in Dunoff, J. L., and Pollack, M. A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations – The State of the Art, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2013Google Scholar

Toope, S. J., “Emerging Patterns of Governance and International Law,” in Byers, M. (ed.), The Role of Law in International Politics: Essays in International Relations and International Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000.Google Scholar

Trouwborst, A., “The Precautionary Principle and the Ecosystem Approach in International Law: Differences, Similarities and Linkages,” Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, Vol. 18(1), 2009.Google Scholar

Trubek, D. M., and Trubek, L. G., “New Governance and Legal Regulation: Complementarity, Rivalry, and Transformation,” Columbia Journal of European Law, Vol. 13, 2006.Google Scholar

Ulfstein, G., “Treaty Bodies,” in Bodansky, D., Brunnée, J., and Hey, E. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.Google Scholar

Underdal, A., “Complexity and Challenges of Long-Term Environmental Governance,” Global Environmental Change, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2010, pp. 386–393.Google Scholar

UN, Report on Sustainable Development, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, 1987 (the Brundtland Report), Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment.Google Scholar

UN, United Nations Environment and Development Agenda, “Agenda 21,” adopted at the 1992 UN Rio Conference on Environmental and Development, U.N. GAOR, 46th Sess., Agenda Item 21, UN Doc A/Conf.151/26 (1992).Google Scholar

UN, The Future We Want, outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, in Rio de Janeiro, June 2012, UN doc nr: A/RES/66/288, Section II C.Google Scholar

UN, United Nations Environment Programme, “Putting Rio Principle 10 into Action: An Implementation Guide,” Published by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), October 2015.Google Scholar

UNECE 2002, Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (the Aarhus Convention), “Report of the First Meeting of the Parties,” Decision I/7 on Review of Compliance, adopted at the first meeting of the Parties held in Lucca, Italy, October 2002, ECE/MP.PP/2/Add.8.Google Scholar

UNECE 2005 Aarhus Convention, Report of the Second Meeting of the Parties, DECISION II/4, Promoting the Application of the Principles of the Aarhus Convention in International Forum, ECE/MP.PP/2005/2/Add.5, Annex, p. 4, article 1.Google Scholar

UNECE, ACCC/C/2008/32 (Part I), Report of the Compliance Committee: Findings and recommendations with regard to communication concerning compliance by the European Union, Adopted on 14 April 2011, ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2011/4/Add.1.Google Scholar

UNECE website, www.unece.org/env/pp/ratification.html (Official UN doc nr: Ch_XXVII_13 Environment, United Nations, Treaty Series, Vol. 2161, p. 447).Google Scholar

Victor, D. G., Raustiala, K., and Skolnikoff, E. B., “Introduction and Overview,” in Victor, D. Raustiala, G, K., and Skolnikoff, E. B. (eds.), The Implementation and Effectiveness of International Environmental Commitments: Theory and Practice, MIT Press, Cambridge and London, 1998.Google Scholar

von Homeyer, I., “The Evolution of EU Environmental Governance,” in Scott, L. (ed.), Environmental Protection – European Law and Governance, Oxford University Press, New York, 2009.Google Scholar

Wang, H., “Ecosystem Management and Its Application to Large Marine Ecosystems: Science, Law, and Politics,” Ocean Development and International Law, Vol. 53, No. 1, 2004, pp. 41–74.Google Scholar

Walker, B., and Salt, D., Resilience Thinking – Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a Changing World, Island Press, Washington, DC, 2006.Google Scholar

Walker, B. H., et al., “Drivers, ‘Slow’ Variables, ‘Fast’ Variables, Shocks, and Resilience,” Ecology and Society, Vol. 17(3):30, 2012.Google Scholar

Wennerås, P., The Enforcement of EC Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007.Google Scholar

Westerlund, S., Miljörättsliga Grundfrågor 2.0, IMIR Institutet för miljörätt, Åmyra förlag, Uppsala, 2003.Google Scholar

Westerlund, S., Fundamentals of Environmental Law Methodology, Uppsala: Uppsala University, Department of Law, 2007, electronic version at http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-258801.Google Scholar

Wiener, J. B., “On the Political Economy of Global Environmental Regulation,” The Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 87, 1999.Google Scholar

Wiersema, A., “A Train without Tracks: Rethinking the Place of Law and Goals in Environmental and Natural Resources Law,” Environmental Law, Vol. 38, 2008.Google Scholar

Young, M. A., “Regime Interaction in Creating, Implementing and Enforcing International Law,” in Young, M. A. (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012.Google Scholar

Young, O. R., International Governance – Protecting the Environmental in a Stateless Society, Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London, 1994.Google Scholar

Young, O. R., “Governance for Sustainable Development in a World of Rising Interdependencies,” in Delmas, M. A., and Young, O. R. (eds.), Governance for the Environment – New Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2009.Google Scholar

Young, O. R., “Institutional Dynamics: Resilience, Vulnerability and Adaptation in Environmental and Resource Regimes,” Global Environmental Change, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2010, pp. 378–385.Google Scholar

Young, O. R., “Effectiveness of International Environmental Regimes: Existing Knowledge, Cutting-Edge Themes, and Research Strategies,” PNAS, 2011, Vol. 108, No. 50, pp. 19853–19860.Google Scholar

Young, O. R., and Levy, M. A., “The Effectiveness of International Environmental Regimes,” in Young, O. R. (ed.), The Effectiveness of International Environmental Regimes: Causal Connections and Behavioral Mechanisms, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999.Google Scholar

Zengerling, C., Greening International Jurisprudence: Environmental NGOs before International Courts, Tribunals, and Compliance Committees, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden, 2013Google Scholar