Compliance Theory

Abstract

International lawyers and legal scholars often assess the effects of international environmental agreements (IEAs) in terms of the extent to which states comply with their commitments. International relations scholars tend to examine IEA effects through a broader set of questions. They are concerned with any behavioural or environmental changes that can be attributed to an IEA – whether these changes involve compliance or not and regardless of whether these changes were desired, unintended, or even perverse. International relations scholars also focus on the reasons why states change their behaviour and what aspects, if any, of an IEA explain those behavioural changes. To see the difference between these approaches, consider four categories of behaviour: treaty-induced compliance, coincidental compliance, good faith non-compliance, and intentional non-compliance. This article reviews the theoretical terrain and shows that nominally ‘competing’ perspectives have different insights to offer those seeking to improve the practice of international environmental law.