Abstract
The Kyoto summit witnessed vigorous EU–US disagreements over a new environmental policy instrument (NEPI)—an emissions trading system. This NEPI was promoted by the US and opposed by the EU. Unlike the US, after Kyoto, the EU surprisingly switched from resisting the NEPI to designing in earnest a domestic emissions trading system. This transition from resistance to policy innovation is best explained as a process of policy transfer. The current study identifies the important role of domestic policy paradigms for both shaping the formation of national interests in international arenas and determining the contours of the process of policy transfer.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
