ABSTRACT
Once states start to negotiate a treaty to address a shared environmental problem, they face numerous choices about treaty design. Much scholarship investigates treaty design as a dependent variable, asking why treaty design varies. Differences in the characteristics of environmental problems, i.e. their “problem structure,” often lead states to find certain solutions particularly attractive and dictate that other solutions are not available or not seriously considered. States may make membership open to any state or may limit it to states within a region, states with interests at stake, or states with strong motivations to act. While problem structure makes certain design choices more likely than others, treaty negotiators always retain leeway in the who, what, when, where, and how of treaty design. Binding treaties that contain specific obligations, regularly monitor state behaviors, and hold states to account through review or sanction are claimed to wield greater influence than those lacking such traits.
