Abstract

Implementation theory has always been a central focus of the policy process. How a policy gets implemented can take many formats. Implementation can take a top-down approach, a bottom-up approach, or an approach that combines the two. Most scholarship today looks at these various approaches from the perspective of a single, small scale policy problem.
Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) offer scholars a unique opportunity to view implementation theory on a global scale. Once an MEA is ratified and entered into force it must then be implemented. This is no easy task. Implementing a single policy at the local level is difficult enough. Trying to implement a global environmental policy can be daunting. There are many actors and institutions involved in the process and all must come to some sort of agreement as to who will be responsible for implementation, how implementation will take place, what sort of timetable will it involve, and where in the institutional structure is to begin and end. Many of these questions are answered, at least on paper, in the actual agreements. But how the “paper” process translates into reality is not always clear. This study looks at how MEAs get implemented and once implemented, how they are monitored and how they are complied with. Implementation is looked at through the lens of historical institutionalism. Within this framework, the issues of sovereignty, collective action, capacity building, and resources are evaluated. This was done through analysis of the National Reports submitted by the parties to the agreements and an original survey mailed out to the implementing agencies of the MEAs studied.