2021/07/03 by Yelena Yermakova · 29 citations
Environmental Science · Earth and Planetary Sciences · #Polar Research and Ecology #Cryospheric studies and observations #Climate Change and Geoengineering #Legitimacy #Institution #Accountability #Order (exchange) #Political science #Public administration #Corporate governance #Treaty #Global governance #Law and economics #Law #Sociology #Economics #Politics #Management
paper · pdf · doi:10.1080/2154896x.2021.1977048
published in The Polar Journal 11(2), 342-359 (Taylor & Francis)
openalex publication_date 2021/07/03 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29
The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) has governed the Antarctic for the last six decades ensuring it to be a place of peace and scientific cooperation. Like any institution, the ATS exists in order to solve collective action problems through coordination and the creation of norms. But how do we know if a particular institution is the right one to solve a specific problem or address issues regarding the governance of a region? And when is it time to replace or reform such an institution? To answer these questions, we need an account of institutional legitimacy. An assessment of the legitimacy of the ATS is necessary in order to determine whether it is worthy of being empowered through support, or if it is time to reform some aspects of it. Building on the account of legitimacy of global governance institutions proposed by Buchanan and Keohane, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS and argues that it is time to reform some components of it. Specifically, the paper assesses the legitimacy of the ATS based on the following criteria: minimal moral acceptability; comparative benefit; institutional integrity; and accountability. The paper highlights the ATS’ shortcomings based on these criteria and suggests reforms that will strengthen the legitimacy of the ATS