scholarly journals Talking About Education: How Topics Vary Between International Organizations

2021 ◽  
pp. 239-266
Author(s):  
Michael Windzio ◽  
Raphael Heiberger

AbstractIn this chapter, Raphael Heiberger and Michael Windzio examine which topics are important for major education international organization (IOs). IOs in the field of education follow different ideological paradigms in the global education discourse. Yet, it is an open question as to whether different types of IOs focus on different topics and thereby support different paradigms of education. Based on more than 1000 documents with over 40 million words published by the World Bank, UNESCO, the ILO, the OECD, ISESCO, and SEAMEO, they explore education issues addressed in this sample. Using standardized methods of quantitative text analysis and topic modeling, Heiberger and Windzio reveal that major topics found in these documents do indeed differ between the different types of organizations.

2021 ◽  
pp. 127-161
Author(s):  
Dennis Niemann

AbstractIn Chap. 10.1007/978-3-030-78885-8_5, Dennis Niemann analyzes international organizations (IOs) and their education ideas. Different ideological paradigms dominated the global education discourse at different periods. Fundamentally, they revolve around two poles of an economic utilitarian view on education and on an interpretation that emphasizes the social and cultural value of education. Both leitmotifs were influenced by general developments in world politics, and they were also reflected within IOs. Niemann analyzes how global education IOs, specifically the World Bank, the OECD, UNESCO, and the ILO, influenced the global discourse on education. First, he argues that within the IOs, the antipodal views on education became more complementary over time. Second, he demonstrates the pattern of interaction between the IOs has also changed from competition to cooperation.


2021 ◽  
pp. 223386592110248
Author(s):  
Yooneui Kim ◽  
Youngwan Kim

Are international organizations autonomous actors in global politics? This paper investigates whether and how major powers influence the World Bank’s official development assistance policies. Despite the World Bank’s attempts to maintain independence from its member states, we argue that major powers are still influential. Testing this expectation with the data of official development assistance provisions between 1981 and 2017, we find that the World Bank provides a higher amount of official development assistance to the recipient countries that receive a higher amount of such assistance from the major powers such as the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Japan. In addition, the World Bank is prone to provide a higher amount of official development assistance to the recipients that have a similar preference to the major powers. This study sheds light on the relations between major powers and international organizations.


2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 717-745 ◽  
Author(s):  
THOMAS POGGE

Various human rights are widely recognized in codified and customary international law. These human rights promise all human beings protection against specific severe harms that might be inflicted on them domestically or by foreigners. Yet international law also establishes and maintains institutional structures that greatly contribute to violations of these human rights: fundamental components of international law systematically obstruct the aspirations of poor populations for democratic self-government, civil rights, and minimal economic sufficiency. And central international organizations, such as the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank, are designed so that they systematically contribute to the persistence of severe poverty.


2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 332-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Gallagher

This article explores norms as idealizations, in an attempt to grasp their significance as projects for international organizations. We can think about norms as ‘standards of proper behaviour’. In this sense they are somehow natural, things to be taken for granted, noticed only really when they are absent. We can also think about norms as ‘understandings about what is good and appropriate’. In this sense, norms embody a stronger sense of virtue and an ability to enable progress or improvement. Norms become ideal when they are able to conflate what is good with what is appropriate, standard, or proper. It is when the good becomes ‘natural’ that a norm appears immanent and non-contestable, and so acquires an idealized form.45Along with the other articles in this special issue, I will attempt to challenge some of the complacency surrounding the apparent naturalness and universality of norms employed in international relations.


2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 126-148
Author(s):  
Andrea E. Stumpf

This article suggests that the variety and complexity of international partnership programmes, especially those that contract major fund flows, can be sustained only if partners are able to allocate roles and responsibilities amongst themselves. The premise of this article is simple. Lest there be any doubt, agreed terms set forth in signed agreements and adopted partnership documents should be considered ‘rules of the organization’ under the ario, and should be recognized in allocating responsibility among international organizations and other partners in international development initiatives. A practical look at trust-funded partnership programmes involving the World Bank underscores the importance of lex specialis under the Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations, including with respect to claims by third parties. At stake is the viability of such collaborative international development initiatives, which rests on the ability of partners to legitimately set their own terms for acknowledgment by others.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document