Abstract
In 2005, the objectives of the Kyoto Protocol appear somewhat out of reach, even if Russia gave life to the protocol by signing it in 2004. Even if implemented, the protocol entails huge operational problems. Will the United States prove to be the first country to realize the difficulties in implementing Kyoto, or did they refuse to ratify it for reasons that are very particular to their own institutions? This article is an attempt at supporting the latter proposition. In March 2001, the US government announced that it was withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol on the reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG) and it has not replaced this participation with a credible program of greenhouse gas reduction. This decision could be analyzed through different angles. In this article, we would like to look at these hesitations through an institutional angle, through the American institutions themselves. Few elements from their institutional and historical past prepare the United States to initiate a vigorous program of GHG reduction, other than through technological innovation or voluntary actions. Even though the institutional concept of path dependency is identified as the concept most helpful in explaining, from an institutional point of view, these hesitations, other institutional explanations are called upon to explain and understand these decisions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.