Search

Governance institutions of the polar regions, as well as global oceans, may hold room for improvement in terms of effectiveness but, on the whole, their existence can be regarded as a success story. The arrangements managed to pool responsibility for regional resources amid Cold War geopolitics, mostly by delegating discussions to science committees. Changing global climate, however, provides considerable challenges to these governance arrangements. It begs the question of how the success story can be continued into the future. After sketching the emergence of polar and ocean governance and their core organizational principles during the 20th century, this article identifies some of the challenges linked to global warming that have been altering the context of governance fundamentally. The article discusses emerging issues that warrant attention, but which may be difficult to accommodate in present governance networks. Ultimately, the article argues that anchoring principles of “responsibility” that take into account the relational quality of polar and ocean spaces is key to any institutional design that seeks to take governance arrangements into the 21st century and beyond.

What does responsibility mean in international relations (IR)? This handbook brings together cutting-edge research on the critical debates about responsibility that are currently being undertaken in IR theory. This handbook both reflects upon an emerging field based on an engagement in the most crucial theoretical debates and serves as a foundational text by showing how deeply a discussion of responsibility is embedded in broader questions of IR theory and practice. Contributions cover the way in which responsibility is theorized across different approaches in IR and relevant neighboring disciplines and demonstrate how responsibility matters in different policy fields of global governance. Chapters with an empirical focus zoom in on particular actor constellations of (emerging) states, international organizations, political movements, or corporations, or address how responsibility matters to structure the politics of global commons, such as oceans, resources or the Internet. Providing a comprehensive overview of IR scholarship on responsibility, this accessible and interdisciplinary text will be a valuable resource for scholars and students in many fields including IR, international law, political theory, global ethics, science and technology, area studies, development studies, business ethics and environmental and security governance.

This article proposes to apply a praxeological approach to study contemporary constitutionalism. The approach is conceptualized following critical constructivist research on constitutionalism that focuses on experience and expectation when studying the contested meaning of norms in international relations. It argues that the concept of memory offers an important view on the language-based concept of experience which extends beyond the confines of behavioural approaches that study habitual change with regard to norms. The article offers a conceptual discussion of approaches to constitutionalism, emphasizing the distinction between modern and contemporary constitutionalism and their respective foci on regulatory versus cultural practices, introduces a praxeological dimension of horizons and elaborates on political memory and myth as concepts of functional memory.