This report critically tests the two hypotheses set forth by respectively Robert Putnam (1988) and Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), that the Danish 92 Group either sought to influence the COP15 through domestic polities of states, or by working across boundaries in order to gain direct influence on the negotiation. As scholars based in the tradition of critical rationalism this report critically tests the two hypotheses based on two “less likely” critical case studies, namely the Danish 92 Group and the COP15. In analysing their strategies this report has derived four analytical indicators: resources, access, activities and discursive practices, which has been operationalized with the theoretical assumptions. The report concludes that the Danish 92 Group to a large extent sought to influence through the domestic polities, thus providing most explanatory power to hypothesis 1 set forth by Putnam. However, the report furthermore finds some areas within the analysis, which is not well grasped by hypothesis 1. Thus, hypotheses 2 seem to be strengthened in areas, where transnational actors, normative settings and values are taking into account.
|Uddannelser||Global Studies, (Bachelor/kandidatuddannelse) Bachelor el. kandidat|
|Udgivelsesdato||14 jan. 2016|
|Vejledere||Michael Friederich Kluth|
- Danish 92 Group
- Non-state actors
- Two-level games