Wicked problems are complex and dispersed challenges that go beyond the capacity of individual organizations and require a response by multiple actors, often in the form of transnational regimes. While research on regimes has provided insights into such collective responses, less is known about how such regimes may form barriers that hinder and block appropriate responses to addressing wicked problems. Exploring the problematic role of regime-level responses is timely given that many of today’s wicked problems are far from being alleviated and in many instances appear instead to be intensifying. We draw from complementary insights of regime theory and research on institutional barriers to explore our research question: How do regimes form barriers to addressing wicked problems, and which mechanisms sustain such barriers? We explore this question with a longitudinal case study of the transnational regime for refugee protection and its response to displacement in Rwanda. From our findings, we develop a model of dissociation that explains how actors move further away from addressing a wicked problem. We identify four dissociative mechanisms (discounting, delimiting, separating, and displaying) that each create a distinct regime-level barrier. These barriers are distributed and mutually reinforcing, which makes it increasingly hard for actors to find alternative ways of responding to an escalating problem. Our study provides insights for research on regimes and wicked problems as well as studies on institutional barriers. We conclude with policy implications for overcoming those barriers, in line with the wider concerns and motivations of this special issue.

棘手的问题是复杂而分散的挑战，超出了单个组织的能力，需要多方共同应对，通常采取跨国制度的形式。虽然对制度的研究提供了对这种集体反应的见解，但人们对这种制度如何形成障碍，阻碍和阻止解决棘手问题的适当反应知之甚少。鉴于当今许多棘手的问题远未得到缓解，而且在许多情况下似乎正在加剧，因此探索政权层面反应的问题作用是及时的。我们借鉴制度理论和制度障碍研究的互补见解来探索我们的研究问题：制度如何形成解决邪恶问题的障碍，哪些机制维持了这种障碍？我们通过对跨国难民保护制度及其对卢旺达流离失所问题的反应的纵向案例研究来探讨这个问题。根据我们的发现，我们开发了一个分离模型，该模型解释了参与者如何远离解决一个棘手的问题。我们确定了四种分离机制（折扣、定界、分离和展示），每一种机制都会产生不同的制度层面的障碍。这些障碍是分散的、相互加强的，这使得行为者越来越难以找到应对不断升级的问题的替代方法。我们的研究为制度和邪恶问题的研究以及制度障碍的研究提供了见解。我们总结了克服这些障碍的政策含义，