Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
IOs, Globalization and Brexit (International Organizations and…
IOs, Globalization and Brexit
Globalization and the Nation State
Change in the nature of the competition between states
In the past: states competed for control over territory and wealth-creating resources within territories
Now: increasingly competing for market shares in world economy --> Territory no longer main basis for wealth-creation
Change in nature of states and their behavior
Consequence of new largely economic competition: industrial policy and trade policy becoming more important than defense and foreign policy
States need to seek commercial instead of military allies
State authority has leaked away
Share authority with other entities (e.g. TNCs, IOs, NGOs)
Accelerating technological change explains rapid internationalization of production in the world market economy (process which relaxes authority of the state over enterprises)
New problem: there is a world economy and a world society, but territorial states still claim a sovereignty they are not capable of exercising as they used to
Asymmetry of power between states has increased: most powerful are able to block/veto any exercise of authority in global issues of environment, financial regulation etc.
Brexit as Backlash against Globalization
Re-regulating the British economy in favour of finance and enriching the 1% while shrinking labour's share of income resulted in rising inequality and caused popular resentment
By voting Brexit people rejected mainstream, orthodox economics
Brexit vote is the latest manifestation of popular dissatisfaction with the economists' globalized, marketized society
International Organizations and Institutions
IOs have agency, agenda-setting influence and potentially important socializing influences
Can IOs be considered "actors"? 1970s study of "international regimes" demoted study of IOs as actors
International Institutions = a set of rules meant to govern international behavior
Example 1: Transnational NGOs can work with institutions to promote respect for norms, changing state behavior in sometimes profound ways (e.g. US compliance with environmental treaties)
Look at possible constraining effects international institutions can have on development of new institutions
International institutions can influence state behavior by acting through domestic political channels
Will particular kinds of actors regularly see an advantage in turning to the international level?
Certain domestic institutional actors may benefit from international level policy making (e.g. judiciary)
International law provides judiciary with an additional resource by which to pursue agendas --> sympathetic to international institutions
International institutions can create new opportunities for non-state actors, often with important consequences for policy
To be effective, institutions must provide a mechanism for resolving distributional conflict
Transnational Actors and World Politics
Little evidence that the transnational "society world" actually overtook the "state world"
Internal structure of transnational actors: formal organizations (e.g. INGOs) vs. more loose "networks"
Motivations of transnational actors: motivated by instrumental goals vs. motivated by promoting a perceived "common good" (for profit vs not for profit)
The very concept of
transnational
relations implies an international system composed of nation-states
Globalization and MNCs: "Global Players" as Sources of Policy Convergence
Ascribing an enormous influence of MNCs on LEDCs usually overstates their significance for local economies
"Convergence hypothesis"
Realist-inspired argument: the more TNAs and coalitions succeed in changing preferences/policies of most powerful states, the greater their impact in international affairs becomes