¿Regiones verdes? Comparación del activismo de la sociedad civil en el Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte y la Unión Europea
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18504/pl2447-008-2016Palabras clave:
Unión Europea (ue), Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte (tlcan), política ambiental, sociedad civil, organizaciones no gubernamentales (ong), teoría de la red transnacional de defensa.Resumen
En este documento se compara el papel de la sociedad ambientalista civil en dos organizaciones regionales: la Unión Europea y el Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte. Para ello se utiliza la red transnacional de defensa que evalúa cómo las ong aprovechan las oportunidades para influenciar la política y los efectos del compromiso de la sociedad civil. Pese a las grandes diferencias entre esas organizaciones, comparten aspectos fundamentales: proporcionan recursos e importantes puntos de acceso a las ong, presentan límites y frustraciones, y ambas fomentan la construcción de coaliciones entre ong.Descargas
Citas
Abel, A. (2003, marzo). nafta’s North American Agreement for Environmental Cooperation: A Civil Society Perspective. America’s Program, Interhemispheric Resource Center. Recuperado de americas.irc-online.org/reports/2003/0303nacec_body.html.
Alanís, G. (2005). Presidente del cemda, entrevista personal.
Ansolabehere, K. (2010). More Power, More Rights? The Supreme Court and Society in Mexico. En Couso, J. A., Huneeus, A. & Sieder, R. (Eds.), Cultures of Legality: Judicalization and Political Activism in Latin America (pp. 78-111). Nueva York: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511730269.004
Azuela, A. (2008). Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales, unam, procurador de la Profepa (oficina general para el medio ambiente), entrevista personal.
becc & nadb. (2008, 30 de junio). Joint Status Report. Ciudad Juárez y San Antonio.
A. R. Zito, M. Aspinwall | ¿Regiones verdes? Comparación del activismo de la sociedad civil en el Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte y la Unión Europea | Perfiles Latinoamericanos, 24(47) | Flacso México | pp. 121-149
doi: 10.18504/pl2447-008-2016
•
Beyers, J. (2008). Policy Issues, Organisational Format and the Political Strategies of Interest Organisations. West European Politics, 31, 1188-1211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380802372654
Block, G. (2003). Trade and Environment in the Western Hemisphere: Expanding the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation into the Americas. Environmental Law, 33, 501-546.
Bomberg, E. (2009). Climate Change Activism: Transatlantic Comparisons And Cooperation. Paper presentado para el Workshop on Climate Change and the New Transatlantic Relationship, University of Edinburgh.
Bomberg, E. (2003, septiembre). Environmental ngos, nepis and eu Enlargement. Paper preparado para la ECPR Conference Marburg.
Bourget, A. (2004). Ten Years of the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation’s Joint Public Advisory Committee. Commission for Environmental Cooperation, Montreal. Recuperado el 17 de octubre de 2008, de www.cec.org/files/pdf/JPAC/CCPM
-AnnBourget-June-2004_en.pdf
Bouwen, P. (2009). The European Commission. En Coen, D. & Richardson, J. (Eds.), Lobbying the European Union: Institutions, Actors, and Issues (pp. 19-38). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bravo, G. (2008, octubre-noviembre). Comisión de Cooperación Ecológica Fronteriza: La cocef y la participación comunitaria. Derecho Ambiental y Ecología, 5(27), 41-45.
Cabrera, J. (2008). Gerente general de la Border Environmental Cooperation Commission, entrevista personal.
Carmona, C. (2008). Profepa (oficina general del medio ambiente mexicana), entrevista personal.
cec. (1997). Final Factual Record of the Cruise Ship Pier Project in Cozumel, Quintana Roo, Factual Record no. 1, Montreal.
Commission of the European Communities. (2005, 6 de septiembre). The Århus Convention. Recuperado de http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/aarhus/index.htm
Corrie, H. (1997). Experiences and Realities of Participation in Regional Development. En Collier, U., Golub, J. & Kreher, A. (Eds.). Subsidiarity and Shared Responsibility: New Challenges for EU Environmental Policy (pp. 135-147). Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft.
Dannenmaier, E. (2005, marzo). The JPAC at Ten: A Ten-Year Review of the Joint Public Advisory Commission of the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA. Commission on Environmental Cooperation, Montreal.
A. R. Zito, M. Aspinwall | ¿Regiones verdes? Comparación del activismo de la sociedad civil en el Tratado de Libre
Comercio de América del Norte y la Unión Europea | Perfiles Latinoamericanos, 24(47) | Flacso México | pp. 121-149 doi: 10.18504/pl2447-008-2016
• 147
De Buen, B. H. (2008). Directora general de participación ciudadana, semarnat, entrevista personal.
eeb. (2005, 7 de octubre). Environmentalists call for postponement of EU ratification of Aarhus Convention. Comunicado de prensa recuperado de http://www.eeb.org/press/pr_postpone_eu_ratification_Aarhus_140205.htm.
eeb. (2003). eeb Annual Report 2002 and Plans for 2003. Bruselas: eeb.
Hallo, R. (2003). Assessing the Results of the Convention. Metamorphosis, 30, 1, 12.
Friends of the Earth Europe. (2010, 8 de febrero). Green 10 Member Groups. Recuperado de http://www.foeeurope.org/links/green10.htm.
Friends of the Earth Europe. (2006). Submission to the Consultation on the ETI Green Paper. Bruselas: Friends of the Earth Europe.
gao. (1997, septiembre). North American Free Trade Agreement: Impacts and Implementation. Washington, D.C.
Gallagher, K. (2004). Free Trade and the Environment: Mexico, nafta and Beyond. Stanford: Stanford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804767507
Gonzalez, E. (2014). Persuade Them or Oust Them: Crafting Judicial Change and Transitional Justice in Argentina. Comparative Politics, 46(4), 1-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5129/001041514812522725
Grant, W., Matthews, D. & Newell, P. (2000). The Effectiveness of European Union Environmental Policy. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780333981405
Greenwood, J. (2003). Interest Representation in the European Union. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Héritier, A. (1999). Elements of Democratic Legitimation in Europe: An Alternative Perspective. Journal of European Public Policy, 6, 269-282. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/135017699343711
Joachim, J. (2003). Framing Issues and Seizing Opportunities: The un, ngos and Women’s Rights. International Studies Quarterly, 47, 247-274. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2478.4702005
Jordan, A. (1999). The Implementation of EU Environmental Policy: A Policy Problem without a Political Solution? Environment and Planning C, 17, 69-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/c170069
jpac. (2008, 27 de febrero). Advice to Council No 08-01. Montreal.
A. R. Zito, M. Aspinwall | ¿Regiones verdes? Comparación del activismo de la sociedad civil en el Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte y la Unión Europea | Perfiles Latinoamericanos, 24(47) | Flacso México | pp. 121-149
doi: 10.18504/pl2447-008-2016
•
Keck, M. & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca y Londres: Cornell University Press.
Kelly, M. (2002). Cross-Border Work on the Environment: Evolution, Successes, Problems and Future Outlook. En Brooks, D. & Fox, J. (Eds.). Cross-Border Dialogues: US-Mexico Social Movement Networking (pp. 133-143). La Jolla, C.A.: Center for US-Mexican Studies.
Lehman, J. (2001). US-Mexico Border Five-Year Outlook. San Antonio, tx: North American Development Bank.
Lehmann, W. (2009). The European Parliament. En Coen, D. & Richardson, J.(Eds.), Lobbying the European Union: Institutions, Actors, and Issues (pp. 39-69). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lenschow, A. & Zito, A. (1998). Blurring or Shifting of Policy Frames? Institutionalization of the Economic-Environmental Policy Linkage in the European Community. Governance, 11, 415-441. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0952-1895.00080
Long, T. (1998). The Environmental Lobby. En Lowe, P. & Ward, S. (Eds.), British Environmental Policy and Europe (pp. 105-118). Londres: Routledge.
Long, T. & Lörinczi, L. (2009). ngos as Gatekeepers. En Coen, D. & Richardson, J.(Eds.), Lobbying the European Union: Institutions, Actors, and Issues (pp. 169-185). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mazey, S. & Richardson, J. (1992). Environmental Groups and the EC: Challenges and Opportunities. Environmental Politics, 1, 109-128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09644019208414048
Meidinger, E. (2007). Beyond Westphalia: Competitive Legalization in Emerging Transnational Regulatory Systems. En Brütsch. Ch. & Lehmkuhl, D. (Eds.), Law and Legalization in Transnational Relations (pp. 121-143). Londres: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.917952
Mumme, S. P. (1992, invierno). System Maintenance and Environmental Reform in Mexico: Salinas’s Preemptive Strategy. Latin American Perspectives, 19(1), 123-143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0094582X9201900106
Raustiala, K. (1997). The “Participatory Revolution” in International Environmental Law, 21. Harvard Environmental Law Review, 537.
Rucht, D. (1993). ‘Think Globally, Act Locally’? Needs, Forms and Problems of Cross-National Cooperation among Environmental Groups. En Liefferink, D., Lowe, P. & Mol, A. (Eds.), European Integration and Environmental Policy (pp. 75-95). Londres: Belhaven Press.
Sbragia, A. (1993). The European Community: A Balancing Act. Publius: the Journal of Federalism, 23, 23-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3330840
A. R. Zito, M. Aspinwall | ¿Regiones verdes? Comparación del activismo de la sociedad civil en el Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte y la Unión Europea | Perfiles Latinoamericanos, 24(47) | Flacso México | pp. 121-149 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18504/pl2447-008-2016
doi: 10.18504/pl2447-008-2016• 149
Schön, D. & Rein, M. (1994). Frame Reflection: Towards the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies. Nueva York, NY: BasicBooks.
semarnat. (2006). Capacidades y sinergias: el desafío ambiental en México. México.
Sieder, R., Schjolden, L. & Angell, A. (Eds.). (2005). The Judicialization of Politics in Latin America. Nueva York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-10887-6
Silvan, L. (2004). cec Makes a Difference in Mexico by Fostering Public Participation. Recuperado el 30 de mayo de 2005 de www.cec.org/files/pdf/JPAC/CEC-Mexico-LauraSilvan-June-2004_en.pdf
Torres, B. (2002). The North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation: Rowing Upstream. En Deere, C. & Esty, D., Greening the Americas: nafta’s Lessons for Hemispheric Trade. Cambridge, MA: mit Press.
trac. (2004, 15 de junio). Ten Years of North American Environmental Cooperation: Report of the Ten-year Review and Assessment Committee. Montreal: Commission for Environmental Cooperation.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (unece). (1998). Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, 25 June 1988.
Vanhala, L. (2012). Legal Opportunity Structures and the Pradox of Legal Mobilization by the Environmental Movement in the uk. Law and Society Review, 46(3), 523-556. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5893.2012.00505.x
Vormedal, I. (2008). The Influence of Business and Industry ngos in the Negotiation of the Kyoto Mechanisms: The Case of Carbon Capture and Storage in the cdm. Global Environmental Politics, 8, 36-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/glep.2008.8.4.36
Warleigh, A. (2000). The Hustle: Citizenship Practice, ngos and ‘Policy Coalitions’ in the European Union – The Cases of Auto Oil, Drinking Water and Unit Pricing. Journal of European Public Policy, 7, 229-243. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/135017600343179
Zito, A. (2000). Creating Environmental Policy in the European Union. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780333983935
Zito, A. & Jacobs, J. (2009). ngos, the European Union and the Case of the Environment. En Joachim, J. & Locher, B. (Eds.), Transnationa
Publicado
Citas a este artículo:
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Esta obra está bajo una licencia Atribución-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC 4.0)
