Economic Globalization, International Organizations and Crisis Management

2000 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Economic Globalization

Lessons in Failure

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidi Hardt
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
Research Design ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Institutional Memory ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Observed Behavior

Chapter 1 introduces the subject of institutional memory of strategic errors, discusses why it matters for international organizations (IOs) that engage in crisis management and reviews the book’s argument, competing explanations and methodological approach. One strategic error in the mandate or planning of an operation can increase the likelihood of casualties on the battlefield. Knowledge of past errors can help prevent future ones. The chapter explores an empirical puzzle; there remain key differences between how one expects IOs to learn and observed behavior. Moreover, scholars have largely treated institutional memory as a given without explaining how it develops. From relevant scholarship, the chapter identifies limitations of three potential explanations. The chapter then introduces a new argument for how IOs develop institutional memory. Subsequent sections describe research design and explain why NATO is selected as the domain of study. Last, the chapter identifies major contributions to literature and describes the book’s structure.

scholarly journals The politics of crisis management by regional and international organizations in fighting against a global pandemic: the member states at a crossroads

2021 ◽  
pp. 002085232098451
Author(s):  
Steven Van Hecke ◽  
Harald Fuhr ◽  
Wouter Wolfs
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Governance Structure ◽  
Added Value ◽  
World Health ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Global Pandemic ◽  
Turbulent Times ◽  
Health Organization

Despite new challenges like climate change and digitalization, global and regional organizations recently went through turbulent times due to a lack of support from several of their member states. Next to this crisis of multilateralism, the COVID-19 pandemic now seems to question the added value of international organizations for addressing global governance issues more specifically. This article analyses this double challenge that several organizations are facing and compares their ways of managing the crisis by looking at their institutional and political context, their governance structure, and their behaviour during the pandemic until June 2020. More specifically, it will explain the different and fragmented responses of the World Health Organization, the European Union and the International Monetary Fund/World Bank. With the aim of understanding the old and new problems that these international organizations are trying to solve, this article argues that the level of autonomy vis-a-vis the member states is crucial for understanding the politics of crisis management. Points for practitioners As intergovernmental bodies, international organizations require authorization by their member states. Since they also need funding for their operations, different degrees of autonomy also matter for reacting to emerging challenges, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The potential for international organizations is limited, though through proactive and bold initiatives, they can seize the opportunity of the crisis and partly overcome institutional and political constraints.

scholarly journals Ceticismo versus cosmopolitismo: uma análise das perspectivas de Robert Dahl e de David Held sobre o sentido da democracia no contexto da globalização / Skepticism versus Cosmopolitanism: An Analysis of Perspectives of Robert Dahl and David Held about Sense of Democracy in the Context of Globalization

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexsandro Eugenio Pereira
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Economic Globalization ◽  
The Other ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Cosmopolitan Citizenship

ABSTRACTThe purpose of this article is to compare two analytical perspectives that have interpreted the democratization of the international organizations (IOs) in the years 1990 and 2000. The first of this perspectives is supported by authors such as Robert Dahl and Philippe Schmitter who consider improbable to realize the democracy in the space outside the national States. They are 'skeptical', according to the term employed by Dahl to refer to their perspective. On the other hand, David Held sustained a more optimistic interpretation by advocating that the nature of contemporary democracy suffered changes as result of the economic globalization process. For this reason, Held considered possible the democratization of IOs as well as the development of a ‘cosmopolitan citizenship’, located above the limits of the States. To develop the counterpoint between this two perspectives, this article will carry out a literature review of the production of the two authors and will be divided into two main sections. The first one will examine the prospect 'skeptical' of Robert Dahl regarding the possibility of democratization of international organizations. The second section examines the cosmopolitan perspective from David Held. In concluding remarks, the article identifies the elements of reflection generated by two perspectives concerning the sense of democracy in the context of globalization.RESUMOO propósito deste artigo é comparar duas perspectivas analíticas que interpretaram as possibilidades de democra-tização das organizações internacionais (OIGs) nos anos 1990 e 2000. A primeira dessas perspectivas é sustentada por autores como Robert Dahl e Philippe Schmitter que consideram improvável a realização da democracia fora do espaço dos Estados nacionais. Eles seriam “céticos”, para empregar o termo utilizado por Dahl para se referir à sua perspectiva. De outro lado, David Held sustentou uma interpretação mais otimista ao defender que a natureza da democracia contemporâ-nea sofreu alterações resultantes do processo de globalização econômica. Por essa razão, Held considerou possível tanto a democratização das OIGs como o desenvolvimento de uma “cidadania cosmopolita”, situada acima dos limites dos Estados. Para desenvolver o contraponto entre estas duas perspectivas, este artigo realizará uma revisão bibliográfica da produção dos dois autores e estará dividido em duas seções principais. A primeira delas examinará a perspectiva “cética” de Robert Dahl com relação à possibilidade de democratização das organizações internacionais. A segunda seção examinará a pers-pectiva cosmopolita de David Held. Nas considerações finais, o artigo identificará os elementos de reflexão gerados pelas duas perspectivas a respeito do sentido da democracia no contexto da globalização.

Crises in World Politics

1982 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 380-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Brecher ◽  
Jonathan Wilkenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Economic Systems ◽  
International Crises ◽  
International Crisis ◽  
National Crisis ◽  
System Characteristics

In examining patterns in international crises, the authors offer one path to a cocerted attack on a central phenomenon in world politics. After surveying the releva literature, including competing definitions, they set forth a conceptual map of int national crisis variables: actor attributes (age, territory, regime, capability, values system characteristics (size, geography, structure, alliance configuration, stability); a the crisis dimensions they wish to explain (trigger, actor behavior, superpower activity, and the role of international organizations—that is, crisis management, of come, and consequences). From this taxonomy they have developed a research frar work on international crisis, and, as an illustration of more narrow explanatory devie a crisis management-outcome model. Three clusters of hypotheses on the substar and form of crisis outcomes, and the duration of crises, are then tested against I evidence from 185 cases for the period from 1945 to 1962. The ultimate aim is illuminate international crises over a 50-year period, 1930–1980, across all continer cultures, and political and economic systems in the contemporary era.

scholarly journals Countries' strategies in facing crisis and disasters during the Corona Virus pandemic - The case of the Kingdom of Bahrain -: استراتيجيات الدول في مواجهة الأزمات والكوارث أثناء جائحة كورونا  – دراسة حالة مملكة البحرين –

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Baligh Ali Hasan Beshr
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Analytical Approach ◽  
Research Problem ◽  
Environmental Crisis ◽  
International Economy ◽  
Corona Virus ◽  
The World ◽  
Selective Process

The aim of this research us to identify the most important mechanisms and tools used by countries in facing the crisis of Corona Virus Pandemic (case study of the Kingdom of Bahrain) to review the most important aspects of the crisis and the mechanisms to overcome it while this crisis transformed to be economical, social, and environmental crisis impacting the sociality. The research problem summarized in what are the strategies taken by the Kingdom of Bahrain in containing and facing the crisis which it gives back the international organizations praise. The methodology used in this research is the descriptive analytical approach to describe the phenomena, the reasons behind it and the mechanism used to face it. The most important results of this research are, the international economy has suffered huge losses reached 50 billion dollars. Western governments have been unable to manage the crisis and have turned basic rights to health and life into a selective process. The unemployment rate rose to 1.2 points. The number of infected cases in the world has increased to 6, 925, 880 cases to date. As well as Bahrain has a strong infrastructure to cope with crises at all levels. Finally, kingdom of Bahrain has taken careful procedures and measures steps to manage the crisis. The research has given recommendations to increase the attention to scientific research in the field of crisis management and to rely on other sources of income instead of oil so as not to be affected by economic fluctuations and crises, and to conduct more research in the mechanisms of facing the emergencies and crisis and the readiness of after COVID- 19 Corona Virus.

Research on the Mechanism of Tourism Industry Association-Oriented Crisis Management

2011 ◽  
Vol 250-253 ◽  
pp. 3988-3992
Author(s):  
Qian Wu ◽  
Xin Hu ◽  
Meng Wan
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
Economic Globalization ◽  
Tourism Industry ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Industry Association

With the deepening of economic globalization, China’s Tourism industry has been developing positively, but also accompanied with increasing amount of crisis. On the basic of the systematic analysis of tourism crisis and its characteristics, we treated the Tourism Industry Association as managing subject and put forward the mechanism of crisis management for the Tourism Industry Association in dealing with tourism crisis. Aiming to improve the tourism industry’ capability against risks and provide theoretical guidance for Tourism Industry Association better plays the role of assisting government and guiding enterprises.

Legal Status of Military Forces Abroad

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joop Voetelink
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The United States ◽  
Service Members ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
World War ◽  
Vast Number ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction

Today, states routinely deploy elements of their armed forces on the territory of other states within the framework of international military cooperation or international military operations carried out with the receiving state’s consent (crisis management operations). It is in the interest of the states sending their forces abroad (sending states), as well as the states receiving these foreign forces with their consent (host states), that the legal position of the visiting forces is abundantly clear. Absent a universal convention covering the status of visiting forces, states and international organizations regularly enter into specific agreements and arrangements setting out the rights and obligations of these forces. These international agreements are part of the international law on military operations and are typically referred to as Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs). Clearly, SOFAs will not be concluded where armed forces have entered another state’s territory without its consent, e.g., in an armed conflict situation. The legal status of the troops operating on hostile territory is then based on international humanitarian law, in particular the law of belligerent occupation. This specific field of law does not apply between allied states fighting a common enemy. Yet, the presence of a vast number of foreign troops has a marked impact on host states. Not surprisingly, the first set of bilateral agreements that today would qualify as SOFAs were concluded in World War I between a number of Allied states. Drawing from long-standing international practice, the agreements all focused on the exercise of criminal jurisdiction over the visiting forces and granted the sending states exclusive jurisdiction over their service members operating on the territory of other Allied states. During and after World War II, SOFAs evolved into more elaborate instruments covering a wider array of topics of interest to the states involved, such as claims and taxes. The core element of all these SOFAs, however, continued to be the exercise of criminal jurisdiction by either the host states or the sending states over service members of the visiting forces and over associated civilians, such as family members and contractors. States and international organizations in charge of crisis management operations regard SOFAs as an essential requirement to temporarily station armed forces abroad. Consequently, failure to come to an adequate agreement with host state authorities may hamper deployment of the troops or lead to termination of an ongoing operation, as happened in Iraq in 2011, when the United States and Iraq could not agree on the terms of a new SOFA for the US troops stationed in Iraq.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document