Do domestic variables matter in a context of bilateral cooperation? What factors positively influence the decision-making process in the case of a policy harmonization between two countries? By studying both countries' institutional differences and governmental and non-governmental actors' preferences in the energy sector, this research analyzes the bilateral cooperation between Canada and the United States regarding the creation of the Electric Reliability Organization. Although domestic institutional constraints are important to consider, I argue that both physical and economic market integration and the use of a non-governmental organization by central governments have facilitated the success of the cooperation process. Those factors have favored the convergence of decisional actors' preferences and the inclusion of the majority of actors from all sectors of the industry into the process. The analysis uses a sequential model implying the division decision-making process over foreign policy into specific stages to show the importance of domestic variables. / Key words: Governmental cooperation, bilateral relations, actors' preferences, institution, energy sector, electricity, transmission network, reliability standards, market integration, restructured electricity market.

No description available.

no / Diplomatic representation, both as a concept and in terms of its structures and processes, does not receive the attention that it deserves. Th is is surprising given that it forms a central concern for both analysts and practitioners of diplomacy, with the latter confronting multiple challenges in adapting modes of representation to changes in their international and domestic political environments. One facet of this can be identifi ed in responses to factors that have assumed a signifi cant place in the development of diplomacy — namely distance and proximity. To the growth of proximity in both spatial and issue-oriented terms, the challenge of the ‘special relationship’ is added in specifi c contexts. Both factors come together in the case of Canada’s attempts to manage its policies towards the United States. Here, strategies have moved through distinct phases responding to domestic and international changes. Th e latest phase, which is associated with substantial rethinking of the role and structure of Foreign Aff airs Canada, assumes the form of what has been labelled the Enhanced Representation Initiative (ERI). Th e ERI is interesting not only in the Canadian-US context, but because it reveals more general problems for governments seeking to manage the pressures of proximity and a growing number of relationships that assume aspects of ‘specialness.

At the end of the nineteenth century, English-Canadians and Americans faced each other across the border with old animosities. Many Canadians adhered to familiar ideas of Loyalism, imperialism and anti-Americanism to differentiate the Dominion from the republic. In the United States, on the other hand, lingering notions of anglophobia and "Manifest Destiny" caused Americans to look upon the British colony to the north as a dangerous and unnatural entity. America's rise to world power status and the Anglo-American rapprochement, however, forced Americans and Canadians to adapt to the new international reality. Emphasizing their shared language, civilization, and forms of government, many English-speaking North Americans drew upon Anglo-Saxonism to find common ground. Indeed, Americans and Canadians often referred to each other as members of the same "family" sharing the same "blood," thus differentiating themselves from other races. As many of the events of the rapprochement had a North American context, Americans and English-Canadians often drew upon the common lexicon of Anglo-Saxon rhetoric to undermine the old rivalries and underscore their shared interests. Though the predominance of Anglo-Saxonism at the turn of the century proved short-lived, it left a legacy of Canadian-American goodwill, as both nations accepted their shared destiny on the continent and Canada as a key link in the North Atlantic Triangle.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Note:

Within the international relations literature, there is a large body of work dedicated to cooperation and conflict. More specifically, there are numerous theories of regime formation that attempt to explain how and why cooperation among several nation-states is possible. This paper addresses three of the dominant perspectives: conventional structural realism, modified structural realism, and the Grotian perspective (also often referred to as the Global Commons perspective). The goal of this paper is to analyze the rise of regimes to manage international environmental issues in light of these theories. Specifically, I analyze the case of the United States/Canadian water management regime for the Great Lakes first established by the 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty. I apply both a conventional structural realist framework and a modified structural realist framework (depicted in game theoretic terms) to the case study. Because neither of these frameworks is able to adequately explain the rise of the United States/Canadian regime, I employ a framework based on the Grotian perspective. Concentrating on Oran Young's hypotheses of institutional bargaining, I analyze the case study and point out similarities and discrepancies between the theory and the actual event. Finally, I discuss the role of epistemic communities in regime formation and maintenance. Based on the results of the application of each analytical framework, I conclude that the Grotian perspective (expressed in terms of the institutional bargaining approach) is best able to identify the causes of the formation of the water management regime between the United States and Canada. Because this is one of the most successful examples of an international environmental regime in terms of longevity, compliance, and progress, the factors involved in its creation should make a contribution to our understanding of the problems and possibilities associated with the construction of international environmental management regimes. I draw heavily from the work of notable regime theorists, such as Susan Strange, Stephen Krasner, Robert Keohane, and Ernst Haas, as well as theorists who have specifically addressed international environmental issues, such as Oran Young, Peter Haas, and Jessica Tuchman Mathews / Master of Arts