Esta pesquisa avaliou a discussão científica acerca das supostas alterações climáticas globais de origem antrópica sob o embate das correntes cética e aquecimentista, evidenciando que o chamado consenso acerca do tema não existe. Tal análise serviu de base para a avaliação de alguns dos mais importantes tratados ambientais internacionais voltados à proteção climática que originaram diversas regulamentações ambientais nacionais também em função da causa climática. Essa análise, baseada nas verificações prévias, evidenciou que diversas regulamentações nacionais não se sustentam cientificamente e, dessa forma, legalmente, uma vez que partem de um pressuposto inverídico, além do fato de que estas se apresentam danosas aos países em desenvolvimento uma vez que obstam seu desenvolvimento quando apontam como caminho a ideologia ambientalista. / This research evaluated the scientific discussion about the alleged global climate change of anthropogenic origin in the clash of currents global warmers and skepticals, showing that the so-called consensus about the topic does not exist. This analysis formed the basis for the assessment of some of the most important international environmental treaties aimed at climate protection that arose several environmental regulations also due to the climate cause. This analysis, based on previous findings, showed that different national regulations do not hold up scientifically and thus legally, since they start from an assumption untrue, besides the fact that they present themselves harmful to developing countries since they prevent its development indicating the environmentalist ideology as the right path.

This study attempts to systematically analyze the determinants of state participation in International Environmental Agreements (IEAs). The study focuses on two core elements: (i) IEA characteristics; and (ii) state characteristics. Hypotheses for state participation in IEAs are formulated based on the two main International Relations theories dealing with cooperation – Realism and Liberalism. The study presents five different models for state participation in IEAs. The first model analyzes the influence of treaty variables, while the remaining four focus on state variables. The second and third models analyze the influence of Realist and Liberal variables respectively. The fourth model specifically focuses on variables which reflect the various socio-economic, political and logistical constraints of developing countries. The fifth model presents an integrated analysis of participation based on the previous models. Results of the study show that participation can be understood in terms of both the Realist and Liberal variables, and that there can be no rarefied partitioning of those factors on participation. More specifically, the study empirically demonstrates that state participation in IEAs is influenced by the following four main factors: (i) the impact of domestic and international institutions (ii) human development; (iii) power motivations; and (iv) IEA design. Policies proposed to increase participation in IEAs therefore have to enhance any positive influence exerted by these parameters, and mitigate their negative influences, if any.

This study attempts to systematically analyze the determinants of state participation in International Environmental Agreements (IEAs). The study focuses on two core elements: (i) IEA characteristics; and (ii) state characteristics. Hypotheses for state participation in IEAs are formulated based on the two main International Relations theories dealing with cooperation – Realism and Liberalism. The study presents five different models for state participation in IEAs. The first model analyzes the influence of treaty variables, while the remaining four focus on state variables. The second and third models analyze the influence of Realist and Liberal variables respectively. The fourth model specifically focuses on variables which reflect the various socio-economic, political and logistical constraints of developing countries. The fifth model presents an integrated analysis of participation based on the previous models. Results of the study show that participation can be understood in terms of both the Realist and Liberal variables, and that there can be no rarefied partitioning of those factors on participation. More specifically, the study empirically demonstrates that state participation in IEAs is influenced by the following four main factors: (i) the impact of domestic and international institutions (ii) human development; (iii) power motivations; and (iv) IEA design. Policies proposed to increase participation in IEAs therefore have to enhance any positive influence exerted by these parameters, and mitigate their negative influences, if any.

Esta pesquisa avaliou a discussão científica acerca das supostas alterações climáticas globais de origem antrópica sob o embate das correntes cética e aquecimentista, evidenciando que o chamado consenso acerca do tema não existe. Tal análise serviu de base para a avaliação de alguns dos mais importantes tratados ambientais internacionais voltados à proteção climática que originaram diversas regulamentações ambientais nacionais também em função da causa climática. Essa análise, baseada nas verificações prévias, evidenciou que diversas regulamentações nacionais não se sustentam cientificamente e, dessa forma, legalmente, uma vez que partem de um pressuposto inverídico, além do fato de que estas se apresentam danosas aos países em desenvolvimento uma vez que obstam seu desenvolvimento quando apontam como caminho a ideologia ambientalista. / This research evaluated the scientific discussion about the alleged global climate change of anthropogenic origin in the clash of currents global warmers and skepticals, showing that the so-called consensus about the topic does not exist. This analysis formed the basis for the assessment of some of the most important international environmental treaties aimed at climate protection that arose several environmental regulations also due to the climate cause. This analysis, based on previous findings, showed that different national regulations do not hold up scientifically and thus legally, since they start from an assumption untrue, besides the fact that they present themselves harmful to developing countries since they prevent its development indicating the environmentalist ideology as the right path.