{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02924791086350975, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011142061281337047, 'mean_word_length': 5.657407407407407, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
City Politics, Canada (review)

2004; Shaw 2005). More than ever, interpretive scholars need to explore ways that examine and describe the increasingly integrated and mutually reinforcing dimensions of environmental science-policy regimes. My suggestion for the next instalment (and hopefully there is one) is to expand on Section IV in order to reinforce the need for a nuanced and holistic discourse on Science-Policy Regimes in the International Environment that recognize science-policy as a bidirectional flow of information, ideas, practices, and knowledge. At this point, the question becomes; what are the implications of emerging and diverse science-policy regimes for international environmental cooperation?