lect 10 - crisis and reform of intergovernmentalism Flashcards
traditional model of global governance
formal intergovernmentalism
(last 70 years)
- assumption = problem-solving depends on cooperation among states
- goal = to constrain the behavior of states by making, monitoring, adjudicating (settling disputes) and enforcing international rules
- organizing principle = multilateralism
- instruments = intergovernmental treaties and formal organizations
multilateralism = institutional form which coordinates relations among 3 or more states on the basis of ‘generalized’ principles of conduct… without regard to the particularistic interests of the parties or strategic exigencies that may exist in any specific occurence
(Ruggie)
- two main elements: relations among 3 or more states + based on rules that apply equally to all
limits of formal intergovernmentalism
- inflexibility = power shifts and new problems are emerging faster than treaties and formal IGOs can be reformed
world is changing faster than the model can catch up - irrelevance = many global problems involve the activities of private actors, so aren’t easily addressed by inter-gov solutions
problems don’t only involve states, we need to include private actors to have more than limited relevance - illegitimacy = public opinion is increasingly mistrustful of IGOs, and other stakeholders (NGOs, firms) aren’t included
stakeholders that are involved in the consequences of global governance but don’t have a seat at the table
is UN-based governance in crisis?
multilateralism index
3 dimensions (participation, performance, inclusivity), 5 issue-areas (peace and security, human rights, climate action, public health)
2013-2023
- participation (by states in the UN system) is improving, except on trade
- inclusivity (NGOs, gender, geography) is improving in all 5 areas
- performance (fulfilling UN goals) is falling in all 5 areas
UN is underperforming
*picture in first slide
cartoon about Keohane’s argument that international institutions are necessary: states are interdependent -> interdependence requires international rules/institutions
4 paradoxes of the multilateralism crisis
- Global problems (e.g. covid, climate change) increase the need for global governance, but multilateral institutions (supposed to deliver global governance) are losing legitimacy and effectiveness.
= more need but losing effectiveness and legitimacy - Financial assistance via multilateral institutions is growing (redistribution of wealth), but not enough to address growing economic inequality.
= global inequality is growing faster than financial redistribution/assistance (it’s not keeping up with the pace of global inequality) - Multilateral institutions play a growing role in world politics but they lack the legitimacy and finances to be effective.
= they are active, but don’t have the legitimacy and finances to do their job - Weakness of global multilateral institutions increases demand for ‘minilateral’ solutions, which make reform of global institutions less likely.
= political energy going into minilateral solutions -> no one is gonna bother with fixing the big multilateral construction (mostly UNSC)
2023: bad year or sign of crisis?
78th UNGA (annual gathering heads of state and gov in New York) = important for UN itself + place where leaders talk on the sidelines
where are the leaders of the major powers?
*of the P5, only one showed up
- present: Brazil, Germany, Japan, Nigeria, South Africa, USA
- not present: China, France, India, Indonesia, Russia, UK
reactions: pessimistic view
- real political value is moving to other places… reform of the UN is blocked, so other political clubs inevitable become more important (International Crisis Group (NGO))
- UN will endure but will busy itself with second-tier issues as it did during the cold war (former UN deputy secretary general)
cold war: bipolar world makes primary issues impossible to work on
possible sources of the multilateralism crisis:
- lack of hegemonic leadership
- power politics
- globalization and backlash
possible source of multilateralism crisis
- lack of hegemonic leadership
*Kindleberger 1973
Hegemonic stability theory: International cooperation requires a hegemon willing and able to provide public goods by serving as:
(three things only a hegemon can do)
- buyer-of-last-resort: when world economy lacks sufficient demand (large market hegemon -> can use internal market to buy products from all over the world to boost demand)
- lender-of-last-resort: when world economy lacks financial liquidity (not enough money in the system -> trade can’t happen -> hegemon has enough money to pump it in the system to get the gears turning again)
- enforcer of rules: in case of non-compliance
Cooperation collapsed in the 1930s because the world lacked hegemonic leadership.
- UK was willing but no longer able.
- US was able but not yet willing.
now: US can’t be lender of last resort (gov is in debt), can’t be buyer of last resort (wealth is declining)
possible source of multilateralism crisis
- power politics
Jaldi (2023)
how is power politics causing the crisis?
- G-7 states resist reform of old institutions to fit new distributions of wealth and power.
- they are no longer big enough to run the world/system, but don’t allow to reform the system bc they like the privileges - Major ‘emerging and developing economies’ refuse to give up their special privileges in trade and climate negotiations.
- China, India, Brazil etc. have special status/privileges (don’t have to invest much in climate change e.g. bc they need time to develop) in UN as emerging and developing economies - Rivalry among great powers -> UN system is polarized and unable to address contemporary challenges.
- most obviously US-China (but not only)
-> Illegitimacy and disfunction of global governance institutions.
*power politics is just looking at what the major powers are (and aren’t) doing
possible source of multilateralism crisis
- globalization and backlash
Hale, Held, Young (2013): Gridlock (why global cooperation is failing when we need it most)
Why aren’t current intergovernmental institutions providing the effective global governance that the world needs?
- post-1945 international institutions
- unmanaged globalization: sum of decisions and actions and rules that created dynamic of unmanaged globalization accelerating since the 90s
- trade openness sharp increase
- FDI = increase in global flows
- preferential (free) trade agreements (PTA) = steady increase
- politics: drop in support for national autonomy in political parties’ election platforms - economic pain and cultural change
- anti-global backlash in national politics
- anti-global parties/politicians rising in popularity after 2004
- FDI drops sharply after 2007
- fewer new PTAs after 2010 (except South-South)
- global trade dropped 2007-9, since then stabilised but did not go up again - weakening of global governance
*evidence in bullet points 1970-2007 is from other article
new forms of intergovernmentalism:
- new roles for IGOs: collaboration and orchestration
- new types of IGO: informal intergovernmentalism
- sub-global multilateralism: minilateralism
- temporary multilateralism: ad hoc coalitions
new forms of intergovernmentalism:
- new roles for IGOs
Gap between the governance goals and capabilities of IGOs:
- Ambitious goals – IGOs aim to provide public goods and to regulate the behaviour of state & non-state actors.
e.g. fight climate change - Limited capabilities – IGOs often lack the material resources and authority needed to achieve their goals
governance gap -> innovation (new roles for IGOs)
- collaboration: IGOs work directly with target actors to promote policy change and self-regulation
- orchestration: IGOs work indirectly (through intermediaries) to address target actors in pursuit of governance goals
new forms of intergovernmentalism:
- informal intergovernmentalism
collaboration
= when IGOs work directly with target actors (actors they are trying to shape) to promote policy change and self-regulation.
UN collaborates with states to promote certain POLICY PRIORITIES (?help govs deliver on their own by basically pointing them in the right direction)
e.g. sustainable development goals:
- 17 goals, 169 targets, 232 indicators negotiated/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
e.g. UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (also known as the Ruggie principles)
- 31 principles on states’ and businesses’ duty to protect human rights, and victims’ access to remedy for business-related abuses. = UN tries to convince businesses to be more conscious of human rights, to follow the principles
- 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 businesses.
- UN is negotiating a binding int’l treaty, but how would it be enforced?
UN collaborates with private businesses, to promote SELF-REGULATION
Example: UN Global Compact
- A forum for dialogue among stakeholders – now 15,000 companies in 162 countries….
- based on 10 principles about corporate responsibility regarding human rights, labour, environment and corruption.
- !! Not a formal, regulatory body
new forms of intergovernmentalism:
- informal intergovernmentalism
orchestration
Abbott, Snidal (2010)
IGOs work indirectly (through intermediaries) to address target actors in pursuit of governance goals = they coordinate others
- orchestrator = IGO
- intermediaries = other IGOs, states, firms, NGOs, public-private partnerships
- targets = behavior of states, firms, persons
forms:
- managing states: Enlisting intermediaries to shape state preferences, beliefs and behaviour in ways that promote state support for and compliance with IGO goals, policies and rules
- e.g. European Commission works with networks of national regulators to draft legislation and lobby for support from member states
- e.g UN OHCHR (Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights) supports NGOs to monitor states’ human rights compliance - bypassing states: Enlisting intermediaries to influence the conduct of private actors or to supply public goods to private targets without involving state
* UNHCR enlists NGOs to provide humanitarian aid in conflict zones.
* WHO facilitates private-private & public-private partnerships to fight disease.
* CITES Secretariat works with NGOs to track trade in endangered species
new forms of intergovernmentalism:
- informal intergovernmentalism
Vabulas and Snidal
formal stuff is gridlocked -> interest to work through informal organisations
cooperation via informal IGOs without legal status or delegated authority
(see table formal vs informal from last week)
