Pub Date : 2020-11-23DOI: 10.1163/19426720-02604004
Matthias Hofferberth, Daniel Lambach
This article contends that practices of, and reflections on, global governance are diversifying without any particular teleology. Therefore, it proposes a “postgovernance” perspective to capture and make sense of the multiplicity of concurrent developments. Just like post-punk followed punk rock and provided new energy, postgovernance provides opportunities to revitalize debates on world politics. Postgovernance allows both scholars and practitioners to consider the persistence of “traditional” forms of global governance as well as the simultaneous emergence of new approaches. This article thus proposes postgovernance as a mode of world politics in a postparadigmatic world that is dynamic yet inconsistent. We advance this argument by outlining what postgovernance entails, by taking stock of current debates from a postgovernance perspective, and by discussing how these can be advanced from a postgovernance point of view.
{"title":"“It’s the End of the World as We Know It”","authors":"Matthias Hofferberth, Daniel Lambach","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02604004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02604004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article contends that practices of, and reflections on, global governance are diversifying without any particular teleology. Therefore, it proposes a “postgovernance” perspective to capture and make sense of the multiplicity of concurrent developments. Just like post-punk followed punk rock and provided new energy, postgovernance provides opportunities to revitalize debates on world politics. Postgovernance allows both scholars and practitioners to consider the persistence of “traditional” forms of global governance as well as the simultaneous emergence of new approaches. This article thus proposes postgovernance as a mode of world politics in a postparadigmatic world that is dynamic yet inconsistent. We advance this argument by outlining what postgovernance entails, by taking stock of current debates from a postgovernance perspective, and by discussing how these can be advanced from a postgovernance point of view.","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":"26 1","pages":"553-576"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/19426720-02604004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46137496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-23DOI: 10.1163/19426720-02604008
Tine Hanrieder
The World Health Organization (WHO) is once more asked to reinvent itself and become more effective. This essay discusses recurrent reform proposals directed at the WHO which, in different ways, ask it to find a strategic focus and thereby its niche in the crowded global health arena. Looking back at decades of reform endeavors at the WHO, it exposes the contradictions and unresolved normative conflicts with regard to the WHO’s priorities. Ultimately, the WHO’s effectiveness hinges on Member State support for public authority in global health, and thus the political commitment to protect it against capture by special interests.
{"title":"Priorities, Partners, Politics","authors":"Tine Hanrieder","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02604008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02604008","url":null,"abstract":"The World Health Organization (WHO) is once more asked to reinvent itself and become more effective. This essay discusses recurrent reform proposals directed at the WHO which, in different ways, ask it to find a strategic focus and thereby its niche in the crowded global health arena. Looking back at decades of reform endeavors at the WHO, it exposes the contradictions and unresolved normative conflicts with regard to the WHO’s priorities. Ultimately, the WHO’s effectiveness hinges on Member State support for public authority in global health, and thus the political commitment to protect it against capture by special interests.","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":"26 1","pages":"534-543"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48001371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-23DOI: 10.1163/19426720-02604009
S. Lavenex
As process-oriented, inclusive, legally nonbinding frameworks deemed to promote cooperation in the pursuit of agreed objectives, the Global Compacts for Migration and Refugees adopted in December 2018 introduce modes of experimentalist governance in fields where states have hitherto opposed (new) multilateral commitments. This article retraces the introduction of experimentalist elements in the compacts’ architecture and critically discusses their potential and limits in such contested policy fields. It concludes that given the depth of normative and distributive conflicts, the compacts are unlikely to generate substantive innovation, as experimentalist theory would suggest. They may, however, help to counter the erosion of existing commitments.
{"title":"The UN Global Compacts on Migration and Refugees","authors":"S. Lavenex","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02604009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02604009","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 As process-oriented, inclusive, legally nonbinding frameworks deemed to promote cooperation in the pursuit of agreed objectives, the Global Compacts for Migration and Refugees adopted in December 2018 introduce modes of experimentalist governance in fields where states have hitherto opposed (new) multilateral commitments. This article retraces the introduction of experimentalist elements in the compacts’ architecture and critically discusses their potential and limits in such contested policy fields. It concludes that given the depth of normative and distributive conflicts, the compacts are unlikely to generate substantive innovation, as experimentalist theory would suggest. They may, however, help to counter the erosion of existing commitments.","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":"26 1","pages":"673-696"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/19426720-02604009","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44394419","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-23DOI: 10.1163/19426720-02604007
Colleen V. Thouez
Cities are fast becoming actors on issues of transnational import. This is also true in the field of migration governance where their scope of responsibility has traditionally been perceived as entirely domestic in nature. As mayors act and advocate transnationally on migration, they are supported by a growing web of intercity networks spanning knowledge sharing, to lobbying, to operational work. In parallel, cities’ agency is rising as they begin to acquire access and influence in interstate deliberations and decision-making fora. Their active presence impacts policy instruments like the UN Global Compact for Migration and Global Compact on Refugees, and policy frameworks like the Global Forum on Migration and Development. In turn, as cities provide more information on challenges faced locally, we may expect more pragmatic approaches to migration. This article outlines this expansion of cities’ agency and what it could mean for international migration governance.
{"title":"Cities as Emergent International Actors in the Field of Migration","authors":"Colleen V. Thouez","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02604007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02604007","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Cities are fast becoming actors on issues of transnational import. This is also true in the field of migration governance where their scope of responsibility has traditionally been perceived as entirely domestic in nature. As mayors act and advocate transnationally on migration, they are supported by a growing web of intercity networks spanning knowledge sharing, to lobbying, to operational work. In parallel, cities’ agency is rising as they begin to acquire access and influence in interstate deliberations and decision-making fora. Their active presence impacts policy instruments like the UN Global Compact for Migration and Global Compact on Refugees, and policy frameworks like the Global Forum on Migration and Development. In turn, as cities provide more information on challenges faced locally, we may expect more pragmatic approaches to migration. This article outlines this expansion of cities’ agency and what it could mean for international migration governance.","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":"26 1","pages":"650-672"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/19426720-02604007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42741170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-23DOI: 10.1163/19426720-02604003
Jörn Ege
The secretariats of international organizations (international public administrations [IPA s]) constitute the institutional grid of global governance. While recent research has provided valuable insights into the independent capacities of international organizations (IO s) and the influence of IPA s, we lack systematic knowledge of how scholars conceptualize the preferences of IO staff. This is lamentable because understanding the (unifying) motivations of “international civil servants” helps us to make sense of their behavior and influence during the adoption and application of IO policies. To review how IPA studies conceptualize the preferences of international bureaucrats, this article suggests a fourfold typology of ideal-typical bureaucratic behavior. It distinguishes between the underlying behavioral logic and dominant bureaucratic goal orientation. Applying the typology to thirty-nine journal articles allows us to map IPA preferences and behavior, and shows that the literature predominantly views IPA s as behaving responsibly and less self-centeredly than could be expected from economic accounts of bureaucracy.
{"title":"What International Bureaucrats (Really) Want","authors":"Jörn Ege","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02604003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02604003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The secretariats of international organizations (international public administrations [IPA s]) constitute the institutional grid of global governance. While recent research has provided valuable insights into the independent capacities of international organizations (IO s) and the influence of IPA s, we lack systematic knowledge of how scholars conceptualize the preferences of IO staff. This is lamentable because understanding the (unifying) motivations of “international civil servants” helps us to make sense of their behavior and influence during the adoption and application of IO policies. To review how IPA studies conceptualize the preferences of international bureaucrats, this article suggests a fourfold typology of ideal-typical bureaucratic behavior. It distinguishes between the underlying behavioral logic and dominant bureaucratic goal orientation. Applying the typology to thirty-nine journal articles allows us to map IPA preferences and behavior, and shows that the literature predominantly views IPA s as behaving responsibly and less self-centeredly than could be expected from economic accounts of bureaucracy.","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/19426720-02604003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44654628","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-22DOI: 10.1163/19426720-02604001
Eugénia C. Heldt, Laura C. Mahrenbach
Recent scholarship has highlighted the role of domestic pressures in determining state preferences toward the reform of international organizations (IO s). This article adds a new dimension by examining how partisanship and ministerial control affect state preferences toward IO empowerment. The article derives two expectations from the existing literature. First, partisan position will determine preferences toward IO empowerment. Second, when a government is constituted by multiple parties, the position of the party with the IO’s ministerial portfolio will determine the government’s position toward IO empowerment. The article illustrates this argument by examining the positions of four net donors (Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and two net recipients (Brazil and India) during the World Bank’s reforms. By bringing domestic politics back in, this article complements existing studies on the politics of IO reform and weighs in on central debates in comparative politics and international political economy.
{"title":"Reforming International Organizations","authors":"Eugénia C. Heldt, Laura C. Mahrenbach","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02604001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02604001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Recent scholarship has highlighted the role of domestic pressures in determining state preferences toward the reform of international organizations (IO s). This article adds a new dimension by examining how partisanship and ministerial control affect state preferences toward IO empowerment. The article derives two expectations from the existing literature. First, partisan position will determine preferences toward IO empowerment. Second, when a government is constituted by multiple parties, the position of the party with the IO’s ministerial portfolio will determine the government’s position toward IO empowerment. The article illustrates this argument by examining the positions of four net donors (Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and two net recipients (Brazil and India) during the World Bank’s reforms. By bringing domestic politics back in, this article complements existing studies on the politics of IO reform and weighs in on central debates in comparative politics and international political economy.","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":"26 1","pages":"601-627"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/19426720-02604001","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41392295","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-22DOI: 10.1163/19426720-02604002
D. Karp
This article uses snapshots, rather than the ongoing flows of diffusion/contestation typically emphasised by constructivists, to explore the exercise of power through normative change. Its case is a high-profile Human Rights Council initiative: the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). These UNGPs have successfully presented meanings as fixed, while actually stretching those meanings' boundaries. They re-conceptualise what it means to 'respect' and 'protect' human rights. This is surprising given that the Principles were framed as a conservative exercise at clarification; and under-noticed, due to the legal rather than conceptual focus of the existing critical literature. According to the UNGPs, to respect human rights, agents need to take costly positive action. Furthermore, 'protect' obligations come before 'respect'. These are significant innovations. On the other hand, two missed opportunities of the UNGPs are their thin harm-based foundation for respect obligations, and their state-centrism about who has duties to protect.
{"title":"Fixing Meanings in Global Governance?","authors":"D. Karp","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02604002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02604002","url":null,"abstract":"This article uses snapshots, rather than the ongoing flows of diffusion/contestation typically emphasised by constructivists, to explore the exercise of power through normative change. Its case is a high-profile Human Rights Council initiative: the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). These UNGPs have successfully presented meanings as fixed, while actually stretching those meanings' boundaries. They re-conceptualise what it means to 'respect' and 'protect' human rights. This is surprising given that the Principles were framed as a conservative exercise at clarification; and under-noticed, due to the legal rather than conceptual focus of the existing critical literature. According to the UNGPs, to respect human rights, agents need to take costly positive action. Furthermore, 'protect' obligations come before 'respect'. These are significant innovations. On the other hand, two missed opportunities of the UNGPs are their thin harm-based foundation for respect obligations, and their state-centrism about who has duties to protect.","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":"26 1","pages":"628-649"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/19426720-02604002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47106040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-17DOI: 10.1163/19426720-02603002
Catherine Gegout, Shogo Suzuki
Will the rise of China, an authoritarian, party-state with a poor record of protecting its citizens’ human rights, undermine humanitarian intervention? This question has been particularly pertinent since China’s “assertive turn” in foreign policy. Drawing on the case of Chinese reactions to the humanitarian crisis in Syria, this article argues that China’s attitude toward humanitarian intervention remains ambiguous and contradictory. While China has at times prevented the UN Security Council from threatening sanctions on Syria, it has not necessarily denied that a humanitarian crisis exists. The article shows that the People’s Republic of China is beginning to act more as a norm maker than norm taker, and is offering its own vision of humanitarian intervention, coined as “responsible protection.”
{"title":"China, Responsibility to Protect, and the Case of Syria","authors":"Catherine Gegout, Shogo Suzuki","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02603002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02603002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Will the rise of China, an authoritarian, party-state with a poor record of protecting its citizens’ human rights, undermine humanitarian intervention? This question has been particularly pertinent since China’s “assertive turn” in foreign policy. Drawing on the case of Chinese reactions to the humanitarian crisis in Syria, this article argues that China’s attitude toward humanitarian intervention remains ambiguous and contradictory. While China has at times prevented the UN Security Council from threatening sanctions on Syria, it has not necessarily denied that a humanitarian crisis exists. The article shows that the People’s Republic of China is beginning to act more as a norm maker than norm taker, and is offering its own vision of humanitarian intervention, coined as “responsible protection.”","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":"52 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/19426720-02603002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41281966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-17DOI: 10.1163/19426720-02603007
W. Heaston, Matthew C. Mitchell, Jeffrey A. Kappen
This article applies and expands on a typology of organizational corruption control to analyze the various mechanisms used to address corruption within the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). It uses case study evidence in tandem with insights from neo-institutional theory to construct a conceptual framework in which corruption control types are more completely examined within their broader institutional context. Using this framework, the article shows how the persistence of corruption in FIFA and its checkered reform process are attributable to an organizational filtering phenomenon that has limited the operation of internal and external corruption controls. Finally, it discusses some implications of this framework for transnational organizational governance reform.
{"title":"Institutional Reflections on Organizational Corruption Control","authors":"W. Heaston, Matthew C. Mitchell, Jeffrey A. Kappen","doi":"10.1163/19426720-02603007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02603007","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article applies and expands on a typology of organizational corruption control to analyze the various mechanisms used to address corruption within the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). It uses case study evidence in tandem with insights from neo-institutional theory to construct a conceptual framework in which corruption control types are more completely examined within their broader institutional context. Using this framework, the article shows how the persistence of corruption in FIFA and its checkered reform process are attributable to an organizational filtering phenomenon that has limited the operation of internal and external corruption controls. Finally, it discusses some implications of this framework for transnational organizational governance reform.","PeriodicalId":47262,"journal":{"name":"Global Governance","volume":"26 1","pages":"403-427"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/19426720-02603007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43661110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：