Crisis and Reform of Intergovernmentalism Flashcards
Traditional global governance (via informal intergovernmentalism)
- Assumption
– Problem-solving depends on cooperation among states - Goal
– To constrain the behavior of states by making, monitoring, adjudicating, and enforcing international rules - Instruments
– Inter-governmental treaties and formal IGOs - Organizing principle
– Multilateralism
Limits of formal intergovernmentalism
- Inflexibility
– Power shifts and new problems emerge faster than treaties and formal IGOs can be reformed - Irrelevance
– Many global problems involve the activities of private actors, so aren’t easily addressed by inter-governmental solutions - Illegitimacy
– Public opinion is increasingly mistrustful of IGOs, and other stakeholders (NGOs, firms) aren’t included
UN based governance in crisis?
3 dimensions, 5 issue areas each.
- participation improving in all areas except trade
- inclusivity is improving in all five areas, and performance failing in all three
What are the four paradoxes of the multilateralism crisis?
- Increased need for global governance vs. declining legitimacy and effectiveness of institutions.
- Growing financial assistance vs. insufficient impact on economic inequality.
- Rising institutional activity vs. inadequate legitimacy and finances.
- Weak global institutions leading to minilateral solutions, hindering global reform.
– minilateral: coop within a small group of states, and harder for the larger groups to be reformed or fixed
What are the possible causes of the multilateralism crisis?
- Lack of hegemonic leadership.
- Power politics and resistance to institutional reform.
- Globalization and backlash against global institutions.
What is hegemonic stability theory?
- International cooperation requires a hegemon willing and able to act as
– Buyer-of-last-resort when global economy lacks sufficient demand.
– Lender-of-last-resort when global economy lacks sufficient financial liquidity.
– Enforcer of international rules, in case of non-compliance
Are we in a “Kindleberger moment”?
- Why did international cooperation collapse in the 1930s?
- Kindleberger’s answer: A lack of hegemonic leadership
– UK was willing but no longer able
– US was able but not yet willing
How does power politics affect global governance?
- G-7 states resist reform to reflect new wealth and power distributions.
- Emerging economies refuse to forfeit trade and climate privileges.
- Great power rivalry polarizes the UN system.
– unable to address contemporary challenges - Illegitimacy and disfunction of global governance institutions.
What is the globalization backlash?
Post-1945 international institutions -> unmanaged globalisation -> economic pain & cultural change -> anti-global backlash in national politics -> weakening of global governance
Evidence of globalization and backlash (Mansfield, Milner, Rudra)
- Evidence of globalization, approx. 1970-2007
– Trade openness (global imports + exports as % of global GDP): Sharp increase
– FDI: Steady increase
– Preferential trade agreements (PTAs): Steady increase in # of PTAs.
– Politics: Big drop in support for national autonomy in political parties’ election - Evidence of an anti-globalization backlash
– Global trade dropped sharply in 2007-2009, then stabilised (doesn’t rise)
– FDI dropped sharply after 2007
– Fewer new PTAs after 2010, except South-South
– Party platforms, worldwide: more pro-national autonomy after 2004
– Political parties commit to moving away from globalisation
New forms of global governance
New types of IO
- Informal intergovernmentalism
New roles for IOs
- Collaboration and orchestration
Temporary multilateralism
- Ad hoc coalitions
Sub-global multilateralism
- minilateralism
Informal intergovernmentalism (new forms of global governance) (characteristics of an informal IGO)
Felicity Vabulas and Duncan Snidal (2013)
Cooperation via informal IGOs without legal status or delegated authority
-Organizing principle
– Explicitly shared expectations
- Membership
– Explicit but non-legal
- Structure
– Regular meetings
– Rotating chair
– No secretariat
- Delegation of authority to IGO
– No
-Examples
– G7
– G20
– G77
– BRICS
New roles for IGOs (new forms of global governance)
IGOs have ambitious governance goals - to provide public goods and to regulate the behavior of state and non-state actors - but they often lack the material resources and authority needed to achieve their goals
- Gap between IGO goals and capabilities -> innovation (new roles for IGOs):
– Collaboration
– Orchestration
Collaboration (new roles for IGOs (new forms of global governance))
IGOs work directly with target actors to promote policy change and self-regulation
UN collaborates with states, to promote certain policy priorities (new roles for IGOs (new forms of global governance))
Example: Sustainable Development Goals
- 17 goals, 169 targets, 232 indicators negotiated and approved by states
- Achievement of the goals is voluntary, not legally-binding
- States are responsible for achieving the goals, mostly individually but also with support from others
UN collaborates with states and businesses, to promote policy goals (new roles for IGOs (new forms of global governance))
UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights
- 31 principles on states’ and businesses’ duty to protect human rights, and victims’ access to remedy for business-related abuses
- Now also promoted by other IGOs
- Lawyers are starting to use them in litigation against businesses
- France, Netherlands, other European states are adopting “human rights due diligence standards” for business
- UN is negotiating a binding international treaty, enforcement?
- aka. “the Ruggie Principle” because developed by political science professor John Ruggie
UN collaborates with private businesses, to promote self-regulation (new roles for IGOs (new forms of global governance))
Example: UN Global Compact
- A forum for dialogue among stakeholder, now 15,000 companies in 162 countries
- Based on 10 principles about corporate responsibility regarding human rights, labor, environment, and corruption
- Not a formal, regulatory body
Orchestration (new roles for IGOs (new forms of global governance))
Kenneth W. Abbott and Duncan Snidal (2010)
IGOs work indirectly (through intermediaries) to address target actors in pursuit of governance goals
- Orchestrator: an IGO
- Intermediaries: other IGOs, states, firms, NGOs, public-private partnerships
- Target: behavior of states, firms, persons
Managing states (forms and examples of IGO orchestration (new roles for IGOs (new forms of global governance)))
Enlisting intermediaries to shape state preferences, beliefs and behaviour in ways that promote state support for and compliance with IGO goals, policies, and rules
- European Commission works with networks of national regulators to draft legislation and lobby for support from member states
- UN OHCHR supports NGOs to monitor states’ human rights compliance
Bypassing states (forms and examples of IGO orchestration (new roles for IGOs (new forms of global governance)))
Enlisting intermediaries to influence the conduct of private actors or to supply public goods to private targets without involving states
- UNHCR enlists NGOs to provide humanitarian aid to conflict zones
- WHO facilitates private-private and public-private partnerships to fight disease
- CITES Secretariat works with NGOs to track trade in endangered species
Ad-hoc coalitions (temporary governance (new forms of global governance))
Yf Reykers et al. (2023)
Global governance increasingly involves ad-hoc coalitions: “autonomous arrangements with a task-specific mandate established at short notice for a limited period of time”
Ad-hoc coalitions key characteristic, other variables, and examples (temporary governance (new forms of global governance))
3 key characteristics:
- Task-specific mandate
– To achieve specific goals, not structural change
- Created on short notice
- Intended to function for a limited period of time
Other variables:
- Operate outside of existing IOs, but may cooperate with them
- May involve only states or a mix of states, IOs, and non-state actors
Examples:
- Refugees
- Piracy
- Access to vaccines
- Counter-terrorism
Advantages of ad-hoc coalitions (temporary governance (new forms of global governance))
- A functional option when national solutions can’t address the problem and existing IOs don’t work
- Less costly - no permanent bureaucracy
- Less constraining - no ongoing commitments
Disadvantages of ad-hoc coalitions (temporary governance (new forms of global governance))
- Easily blocked or manipulated by powerful states
- No accumulation of expertise
- Not well suited to promoting structural change over time (ending poverty, etc)
- Not well suited to promoting rule compliance over time
Minilateralism (sub-global multilateralism (new forms of global governance))
(Naim)
Cooperation among small groups of states with shared interests, with or without formal organization.
- Purpose: Responds to great power rivalries and dysfunction of global institutions.
- Definition (Naim 2009): “Bring to the table the smallest possible number of countries needed to have the largest possible impact on solving a particular problem.”
– Scale: Between bilateralism and global multilateralism.
– Scope: Can be single-issue or multi-issue.
– Basis: Shared interests, not values or ideology.
- Examples: Save Mangrove Forest Initiative. The Quad (USA, Japan, Australia, India). Shanghai Cooperation Organisation?
- Drawback: Small countries in these initiatives may prefer the UN for balanced power among 198 members.
- Usage: Term is more common among practitioners than scholars.
