Final answer:
The statement is false as integrative agreements focus on creating win-win scenarios and mutual benefits, which are different dimensions than those considered in distributive agreements.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement "The quality of integrative agreements is assessed along the same two dimensions as distributed agreements" is false. While distributed agreements focus on the division of fixed resources, where the gain of one party is often at the expense of the other (a win-lose scenario), integrative agreements aim at mutual benefit, exploring options where all parties can gain, often by expanding the resources or creating new options (a win-win scenario).
In the context of policy making and international relations, the integrative approach is important for resolving issues that affect multiple stakeholders. Collaborative strategies and problem-solving aim to address complex challenges, such as environmental governance, which require coordination and collective effort to create sustainable and effective outcomes, as mentioned in Steiner, Kimball, and Scanlon's reference to global governance for the environment.
Assessing integrative agreements involves evaluating how well they promote cooperative relations, enhance mutual interests, and lead to sustainable outcomes rather than just how resources are distributed.