We conducted case studies in Ecuador to assess subnational governments’ implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and to identify factors linked with successful implementation. We anticipated resources to be the main limiting factor, yet the record of implementation is not as closely tied to the availability of financial and human resources as might be expected in a developing country. Governments, in diverse sociopolitical and economic contexts, do have alternatives to implement multilateral environmental agreements. The type of development leaders promote and the priority they grant to environmental issues determine the use of available resources. We also observed the significant role played by local, national, and international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and funding agencies in circulating biodiversity messages and spurring the elaboration of policies as well as on the ground projects. This picture would suggest to enhance awareness-raising trainings and to explore further the role of collaboration between governments and NGOs at local scales.
AallC.GrovenK.LindsethG. (2007) The scope of action for local climate policy: The case of Norway. Global Environmental Politics7(2): 83–101.
2.
AcharyaK. P. (2005) Private, collective, and centralized institutional arrangements for managing forest “Commons” in Nepal. Mountain Research and Development25(3): 269–277.
3.
AdgerW. N. (1995) Compliance with the climate-change convention. Atmospheric Environment29(16): 1905–1915.
4.
AndonovaL. B.MitchellR. B. (2010) The rescaling of global environmental politics. Annual Review of Environment and Resources35: 255–282.
Asemblea Nacional Constituyente. (1998). Constitución Política de la República del Ecuador [Political constitution of the Republic of Ecuador]. Washington, DC: Georgetown University. Retrieved from http://pdba.georgetown.edu/constitutions/Ecuador/ecuador98.html.
7.
BennettG.LigthartS. (2001) The implementation of international nature conservation agreements in Europe: The case of the Netherlands. European Environment11: 140–150.
8.
BerkesF. (2007) Community-based conservation in a globalized world. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America104(39): 15188–15193.
9.
BernsteinS. (2002) International institutions and the framing of domestic policies: The Kyoto Protocol and Canada’s response to climate change. Policy Sciences35(2): 203–236.
10.
BetsillM. M.BulkeleyH. (2006) Cities and the multilevel governance of global climate change. Global Governance12: 141–159.
11.
Carrión, F. (2003). Descentralización en América Latina: Una perspectiva comparada. In M. E. González, K. Andrade-Eekhoff, & C. G. Ramos (Eds.), Descentralización y desarrollo local: una mirada a los procesos de descentralización y de desarrollo local en América Latina [Decentralization and local development: A look into decentralization and local development processes in Latin America] (pp. 29–69). San Salvador, El Salvador: FLACSO-Programa El Salvador.
12.
ChandraA.IdrisovaA. (2011) Convention on biological diversity: A review of national challenges and opportunities for implementation. Biodiversity Conservation20: 3295–3316.
13.
ChayesA.ChayesA. H. (1993) On compliance. International Organization47(2): 175–205.
14.
CheckelJ. T. (1997) International norms and domestic politics: Bridging the rationalist-constructivist divide. European Journal of International Relations3(4): 473–495.
15.
ConneryK. (2009) Biodiversity and urban design: Seeking an integrated solution. Journal of Green Building4(2): 23–38.
16.
Consejo Ambiental Regional. (2006). Plan estratégico ambiental regional, Loja - Zamora Chinchipe [Loja and Zamora-Chinchipe regional environmental strategic plan]. Loja, Ecuador: Ministerio del Ambiente del Ecuador/Gobierno Provincial de Loja/H. Consejo Provincial de Zamora Chinchipe.
17.
Consejo Municipal del Cantón Zamora. (2004). Ordenanza que Declara a “Zamora, Ciudad de Aves y Cascadas” [Bylaw declaring “Zamora, City of Birds and Waterfalls”]. Zamora, Ecuador: I. Municipalidad del Cantón Zamora.
18.
Convention on Biological Diversity. (1992). Convention on biological diversity. Retrieved from www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf.
19.
Convention on Biological Diversity. (2002). COP 6 decision VI/26 strategic plan for the convention on biological diversity. Retrieved from www.cbd.int/decision/cop/default.shtml?id=7200.
Convention on Biological Diversity. (2010). Revised and updated strategic plan: Technical rationale and suggested milestones and indicators. Note by the Executive Secretary. Retrieved from www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/cop/cop-10/official/cop-10-09-en.pdf.
Correa O. E. G. (2006). Unidad de Gestión Ambiental, Informe Técnico—Periodo Marzo–Diciembre 2005 [Environmental Management Unit, Technical Report—March–December 2005]. Azogues, Ecuador: I. Municipalidad de Azogues.
24.
CortellA. P.DavisJ. W. (1996) How do international institutions matter? The domestic impact of international rules and norms. International Studies Quarterly40(4): 451–478.
25.
Cuentas Nacionales. (2005). Ecuador: Proyección de población por áreas y años calendario, según provincias y cantones, Período 2001–2010 [Ecuador: Projection of population according to business lines and years in provinces and counties from 2001 to 2010]. Quito, Ecuador: Banco Central del Ecuador.
26.
DinarA.RahmanS. M.LarsonD. F.AmbrosiP. (2011) Local actions, global impacts: International cooperation and the CDM. Global Environmental Politics11(4): 108–133.
27.
DolsakN. (2009) Climate change policy implementation: A cross-sectional analysis. Review of Policy Research26(5): 551–570.
28.
DownesD. R. (1999) Integrating implementation of the convention on biological diversity and the rules of the World Trade Organization. Gland,, Switzerland: World Conservation Union.
EngelenE.KeulartzJ.LeistraG. (2008) European nature conservation policy making: From substantive to procedural sources of legitimacy. In: KeulartzJ.LeistraG. (eds) Legitimacy in European nature conservation policy: Case studies in multilevel governance, London, England: Springer, pp. 3–21.
31.
Espinosa CorderoS. (1999) Informe sobre desarrollo humano, Ecuador [Ecuador Human Development Report], Quito, Ecuador: PNUD.
32.
FeeE.GerberK.RustJ.HaggenmuellerK.KornH.IbischP. (2009) Stuck in the clouds: Bringing the CBD’s ecosystem approach for conservation management down to Earth in Canada and Germany. Journal for Nature Conservation17: 212–227.
33.
FinnemoreM.SikkinkK. (1998) International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization52(4): 887–917.
34.
Fretes-CibilsV.GiugaleM. M.López-CálixJ. R. (2003) Ecuador: An economic and social agenda in the new millennium, Washington, DC: The World Bank.
35.
Fundación Natura, & I. Municipalidad de Azogues. (2006). I. Municipio de Azogues, Plan de mejoramiento ambiental [Environmental improvement plan of the Municipality of Azogues]. Azogues, Ecuador: I. Municipalidad de Azogues/Fundación Natura.
36.
Gagnon-Légaré, A. (2008). La mise en œuvre de la Convention sur la diversité biologique de l’échelon global à l’infranational: étude de cas en Équateur [The implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity from the global to the sub-national scale: Case study in Ecuador]. Québec, Canada: Université Laval. Retrieved from http://ariane2.bibl.ulaval.ca/ariane/?id=a1698994.
Gobierno Provincial del Azuay. (2005). Plan Participativo de Desarrollo del Azuay 2005–2015 [2005–2015 Azuay development participative plan]. Cuenca, Ecuador: Author.
39.
Gobierno Provincial del Azuay. (2006). Reglamento de la Estructura Funcional del Gobierno Provincial del Azuay [Azuay provincial government functional structure regulation]. Cuenca, Ecuador: Author.
40.
GoreC. D. (2010) The limits and opportunities of networks: Municipalities and Canadian climate change policy. Review of Policy Research27(1): 27–46.
41.
H. Consejo Provincial de Cañar. (2004). Plan Estratégico de la Provincia del Cañar, 2004–2009. Medio Ambiente & Recursos Naturales [2004–2009 Cañar province strategic plan. Environment and natural resources]. Azogues, Ecuador: HCPC/CODEGE.
42.
HarropS. R.PritchardD. J. (2011) A hard instrument goes soft: The implications of the convention on biological diversity’s current trajectory. Global Environmental Change21: 474–480.
43.
HerkenrathP. (2002) The implementation of the convention on biological diversity – A non-government perspective ten years on. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law11(1): 29–37.
HønnelandG.JørgensenA.-K. (2003) Implementing international environmental agreements in Russia: Lessons from fisheries management, nuclear safety and air pollution control. Global Environmental Politics3(1): 72–98.
46.
I. Municipalidad de Azogues. (2005). Plan estrategico de Azogues. Diagnostico: Sintesis nacional y regional [Azogues strategic plan. Diagnostic: National and regional synthesis]. Azogues, Ecuador: Author.
47.
I. Municipio de Loja. (2005). Plan Participativo de Fortalecimiento de la Democracia y Desarrollo del Cantón Loja [Loja county democracy and development strengthening participative plan]. Loja, Ecuador: Author.
48.
I. Municipio De Loja. (2007). Plan de acción municipal 2005–2009 [2005–2009 Municipal action plan]. Loja, Ecuador: Author.
49.
Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos. (2002). Empleo por Rama de Actividad [Employment by activity sector]. Quito, Ecuador: Consejo Nacional de Estadística y Censos.
50.
Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos. (2006). VI Censo de población y V de vivienda – Resultados [6th Census of Population and 5th Census of Housing – Results]. Quito, Ecuador: Consejo Nacional de Estadística y Censos del Ecuador. Retrieved from www.inec.gov.ec/interna.asp?inc=cs_resultados&idCenso=7.
Jacobson, H. K., & Brown Weiss, E. (2000). Assessing the record and designing strategies to engage countries. In E. Brown Weiss & H. K. Jacobson (Eds.), Engaging countries, strengthening compliance with international environmental accords (pp. 511–554). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54.
JakobsenS. (1999) International relations and global environmental change. Review of the burgeoning literature on the environment. Cooperation and Conflict34(2): 205–236.
55.
KenwardR. E.WhittinghamM. J.ArampatzisS.ManosB. D.HahnT.TerryA.RutzC. (2001) Identifying governance strategies that effectively support ecosystem services, resource sustainability, and biodiversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America108(13): 5308–5312.
56.
Krilasevic, E. (2010). The role of international organizations in the implementation of biodiversity conservation policies—The case of Bosnia-Herzegovina. In T. Tuomasjukka (Ed.), Forest policy and economics in support of good governance (pp. 131–140). EFI Proceedings No. 58. Joensuu, Finland: European Forest Institute. Retrieved from www.efi.int/files/attachments/publications/efi_proceedings_58_net.pdf.
57.
KullenbergG. (1999) Approaches to addressing the problems of pollution of the marine environment: An overview. Ocean & Coastal Management42(12): 999–1018.
58.
LeibenathM. (2008) Legitimacy of biodiversity policies in a multi-level setting: The case of Germany. In: KeulartzJ.LeistraG. (eds) Legitimacy in European nature conservation policy: Case studies in multilevel governance, London, England: Springer, pp. 233–250.
59.
LindsethG. (2006) Scalar strategies in climate-change politics: Debating the environmental consequences of a natural gas project. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy24: 739–754.
60.
MaesF. (1998) Implementation of the international North Sea conference declarations by Belgium: The case of toxics reduction programmes. International Journal of Marine & Coastal Law13(3): 337–354.
61.
MartinP. L. (2011) Global governance from the Amazon: Leaving oil underground in Yasuní National Park, Ecuador. Global Environmental Politics11(4): 22–42.
62.
MeyerhoffJ.AngeliD.HartjeV. (2012) Valuing the benefits of implementing a national strategy on biological diversity—The case of Germany. Environmental Science & Policy23: 109–119.
63.
Ministerio del Ambiente. (2001). Política y Estrategia Nacional de Biodiversidad del Ecuador 2001–2010 [2001–2010 National biodiversity policy and strategy of Ecuador]. Quito, Ecuador: Ministerio del Ambiente del Ecuador.
64.
Ministerio del Medio Ambiente del Ecuador. (2000). Estrategia para el Desarrollo Forestal Sustentable del Ecuador [Sustainable forest development strategy of Ecuador]. Quito, Ecuador: Author.
65.
MitchellR. B. (1994) Regime design matters: Intentional oil pollution and treaty compliance. International Organization48(3): 425–458.
66.
MitchellR. B. (2003) International environmental agreements: A survey of their features, formation, and effects. Annual Review of Environment and Resources28: 429–461.
67.
Moncada, M., Vásquez, M., López, A., & Hernández, P. (2004). Ecuador NCSA, Perfil temático en biodiversidad [Ecuador national capacity self-assessment, biodiversity technical profile]. Quito, Ecuador: EcoCiencia/REGAL.
68.
Municipalidad de Zamora. (2006). Plan de Desarrollo Cantonal Concertado – Zamora [Zamora county coordinated development plan]. Zamora, Ecuador: Author.
Peña Carrasco, D. (2003). Ecuador, descentralización y participación ciudadana. In M. E. González, K. Andrade-Eekhoff & C. G Ramos (Eds.), Descentralización y desarrollo local: una mirada a los procesos de descentralización y de desarrollo local en América Latina [Decentralization and local development: A look into decentralization and local development processes in Latin America] (pp. 309–340). San Salvador, El Salvador: FLACSO-Programa El Salvador.
71.
PerkinsR.NeumayerE. (2007) Implementing multilateral environmental agreements: An analysis of EU directives. Global Environmental Politics7(3): 13–41.
72.
Prip, C., Gross, T., Johnston, S., & Vierros, M. (2010). Biodiversity planning: An assessment of national biodiversity strategies and action plans. Yokohama, Japan: UNU-IAS.
73.
Puppim de OliveiraJ. A.BalabanO.DollC. N. H.Moreno-PeñarandaR.GasparatosA.IossifovaD.SuwadeA. (2011) Cities and biodiversity: Perspectives and governance challenges for implementing the convention on biological diversity (CBD) at the city level. Biological Conservation144: 1302–1313.
74.
Puyol, A., & Ortiz, B. (1999). Estrategias de biodiversidad: avances en América del Sur [Biodiversity strategies: Progress in South America]. Quito, Ecuador: UICN-Sur.
75.
RaustialaK. (1997) Domestic institutions and international regulatory cooperation – Comparative responses to the convention on biological diversity. World Politics49(4): 482–509.
76.
Revelt, J.-M. (1998). Implementation of international environmental agreements (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
77.
RosenbergJ.Spencer ThomasL. (2005) Participating or just talking? Sustainable development councils and the implementation of agenda 21. Global Environmental Politics5(2): 61–87.
78.
SchreursM. A. (2010) Multi-level governance and global climate change in East Asia. Asian Economic Policy Review5: 88–105.
79.
SelinH. (2012) Global environmental governance and regional centers. Global Environmental Politics12(3): 18–37.
80.
SharmaE.ChettriN.Prasad OliK. (2010) Mountain biodiversity conservation and management: A paradigm shift in policies and practices in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas. Ecological Research25: 909–923.
81.
SharpE.DaleyD. M.LynchM. S. (2011) Understanding local adoption and implementation of climate change mitigation policy. Urban Affairs Review47(3): 433–457.
82.
SprinzD.VaahtorantaT. (1994) The interest-based explanation of international environmental policy. International Organization48(1): 77–105.
83.
SteinbergP. F. (2001) Environmental leadership in developing countries: Transnational relations and biodiversity policy in Costa Rica and Bolivia, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
84.
Suárez, L., Amparo Albán, M., Josse, C., & Cano, V. (2001). Aspectos institucionales relacionados con el manejo de la biodiversidad. In C. Josse (Ed.), La biodiversidad del Ecuador, Informe 2000 [Biodiversity in Ecuador, 2000 report] (pp. 229–262). Quito, Ecuador: Ministerio del Ambiente/EcoCiencia/UICN.
85.
TorgersonD.PaehlkeR. (2005) Environmental administration: Revising the agenda of inquiry and practice. In: PaehlkeR.TorgersonD. (eds) Managing Leviathan: Environmental politics and the administrative state, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada: Broadview Press, pp. 3–10.
86.
United Nations Environment Programme. (2006). Evaluation brief 4, environmental policy implementation. Nairobi, Kenya: Evaluation and Oversight Unit, UNEP. Retrieved from www.unep.org/eou/Portals/52/Reports/DEPI.pdf.
87.
United Nations Environment Programme. (2010). Latin America and the Caribbean: Environment outlook. Panama City, Panama: UNEP, Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean. Retrieved from www.unep.org/pdf/GEOLAC_3_ENGLISH.pdf.
88.
United Nations Environment Programme. (2012). Global environment outlook 5 – Environment for the future we want. Nairobi, Kenya: Author. Retrieved from www.unep.org/geo/geo5.asp.
89.
VictorD. G.RaustialaK.SkolnikoffE. B. (1998) The implementation and effectiveness of international environmental commitments: Theory and practice, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
90.
WeinthalE.ParagY. (2003) Two steps forward, one step backward: Societal capacity and Israel’s implementation of the Barcelona convention and the Mediterranean action plan. Global Environmental Politic3(1): 51–71.
91.
WilliamsS. J.JonesJ. P. G.ClubbeC.SharrockS.GibbonsJ. M. (2012) Why are some biodiversity policies implemented and others ignored? Lessons from the uptake of the global strategy for plant conservation by botanic gardens. Biodiversity and Conservation21: 175–187.
92.
YoungO. R. (1999) Regime effectiveness: Taking stock. In: YoungO. R. (eds) The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Causal connections and behavioral mechanisms, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 249–279.
