Core Concept

Confronted with a proliferation of “persistent and connected sets of [formal or informal] rules that: prescribe behavioural roles, constrain activity and shape expectations”¹ , a cross-section of contemporary research in social sciences has come to focus on the impact of both horizontal and vertical overlaps between international institutions. While the socially constructed thematic issue-linkages associated with the former have been the object of several empirical taxonomies²;  institutionalised interactions born from the latter are defined by scope, scale, size and membership. These overlaps can generate confusion, redundancies and inefficiencies thus weakening rule-based outcomes while strengthening already powerful actors³. Conversely, they can equally result in heightened competition favouring more polycentric, adaptive and innovative forms of governance⁴. Given these mixed outcomes, GEM-STONES’ central hypothesis is that regime complexes are to be purposefully managed to avoid negative effects while favouring desirable ones.

Purposeful regime complex management is therefore GEM-STONES central concept, understood as the  “conscious efforts by any relevant actor or group of actors, in whatever form or forum, to address and improve institutional interaction and its effects”⁵.  All research deliverables associated with the project - whether collective or individual - will consider this core concept, as they will either empirically examine it or theoretically expand on it.

¹ Keohane, R. O. (1989). International institutions and state power: Essays in international relations theory.p.3
² Substantive/Tactical (Aggarwal 1998) ; Utilitarian/ Normative / Ideational (Stokke 2001) ; Compatoble/Diverging (Rosendal 2001) ; Disruptive/Synergistic/Neutral (Gehring & Oberthür 2009) ; Cooperative / Conflicting (Biermann et al. 2009) ; Substantative / Normative / Operative (Orsini et al. 2013)
³ Young A; & Peterson J; (eds) The European Union and the New Trade Politics Journal of European Public Policy (Special issue), 13/6,
⁴ Aggarwal V. K (2006), Reconciling Institutions: Nested, Horizontal, Overlapping, and Independent Institutions, Paper Presented at Princeton Workshop, February 24th (see: https://www.princeton.edu/~smeunier/Aggarwal%20memo.pdf) 
⁵ Oberthür S. &   Schram  Stokke O. (eds) (2011), Managing Institutional Complexity: Regime Interplay and Global Environmental Change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press., p. 6