Accountability in Global Economic Governance

2018 ◽  
pp. 452-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate MacDonald
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
Cultural Difference ◽  
Social Power ◽  
Multiple Scales ◽  
Political Authority ◽  
Theoretical Problem ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Empirical Inquiry ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
Global Economic Governance

Contemporary theoretical debates surrounding accountability in global economic governance have often adopted a problem-focused analytical lens—centred on real-world political controversies surrounding the accountability of global governing authorities. This chapter explores four distinctive problems of global accountability for which empirical inquiry has usefully informed normative analysis: first, the problem of unaccountable power within global governance processes; second, the problem of decentred political authority in global governance; third, problems establishing appropriate foundations of social power through which normatively desirable transnational accountabilities can be rendered practically effective at multiple scales; finally, problems associated with the need to traverse significant forms of social and cultural difference in negotiating appropriate normative terms of transnational accountability relationships. In relation to each, this chapter examines how systematic engagement between empirical and normative modes of analysis can both illuminate the theoretical problem and inform practical political strategies for strengthening accountability in global economic governance.

scholarly journals The New G20 Politics of Global Economic Governance

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-81
Author(s):  
Jonathan Luckhurst ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
Global Financial Crisis ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Relational Processes ◽  
Multilateral Cooperation ◽  
Networked Governance ◽  
Governance Networks ◽  
Transnational Actors ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
Global Economic Governance

This article demonstrates how the Group of Twenty (G20) constituted a new G20 politics following the 2008–09 global financial crisis through practices of networked global economic governance. This increased the influence of actors other than officials from leading wealthy states, especially developing- and non-state actors, thus augmenting global governance inclusivity and decentralizing authority. The G20 became the principal hub of global economic governance by influencing and engaging with diverse stakeholders on its broad policy agenda. These networked-governance processes expanded aspects of multilateral cooperation, including transversal approaches to policy issues such as sustainable development. This analysis builds on recent literature on transnational actors, governance networks, and the G20; contributes to emerging constructivist literature on the normative significance of practices and social-relational processes in international relations; and includes a significant discourse-analytic focus on repoliticization and legitimizing discourses. This study indicates, in particular, the political and normative consequences of G20 inclusivity practices for integrating global governance networks.

scholarly journals Global Economic Governance After the Crisis

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffry Frieden
Keyword(s):  
International Economic ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Public Goods ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Great Increase ◽  
National Level ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Economic Problems ◽  
International Public Goods ◽  
Global Economic Governance

Abstract It has become common to insist that contemporary international economic problems require a great increase in the extent of “global governance” of economic affairs. This desire, understandable as it may be, confronts a series of major obstacles. First, the normative case for global governance is more difficult to justify, and more complex, than is usually recognized, and requires consideration of both economic and political-economy principles. Second, in practice, the provision of governance at the supra-national level - that is, of international public goods - depends largely on support from powerful and concentrated interests. Third, this dynamic means that the types of international public goods provided, the way they are provided, and the governance structures erected around them are biased in favor of their strongest supporters, and are therefore likely to be a source of continuing controversy.

Global Environmental Governance

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
John S. Dryzek
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Global Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Challenges ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Global Economic Governance ◽  
Dynamic Criteria

Long subordinate to global economic governance, global environmental governance currently fails to produce responses that match the urgency and depth of global environmental challenges, as well as being short on justice and democracy. Environmental political theory can speak to this condition though the critique of the deficiencies of governance, scrutiny of reform proposals, and development of dynamic criteria to seek in improved governance. At issue here are not just institutions generally recognized as environmental, but the system of global governance in its entirety. In the Anthropocene, ecosystemic reflexivity can be recognized as properly the first virtue of global environmental governance.

Global energy institutions. Russia at the IEA can tip the scale, assuring enhanced governance

2012 ◽  
pp. 972-996
Author(s):  
Alberto Tita
Keyword(s):  
International Cooperation ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
International Energy Agency ◽  
Energy Regulation ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Energy Agency ◽  
Global Energy ◽  
Beneficial Effects ◽  
The Core ◽  
Global Economic Governance

International cooperation on energy had momentum in 2012. So far fragmented in multiple initiatives and agencies, the global dialogue about energy can now undergo some rationalization. Such innovation takes move from Russia action, as one of the key energy exporters, in multilateral venues. Last summer Moscow either entered the WTO, either got the pro-tempore Presidency of the G8/G20. Moreover, Russia is at the OECD doorstep for joining it as a full-fledged member, with a view to entering the OECD affiliate, the Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA). All these hubs of international cooperation are the core of global economic governance and hugely involved in energy regulation. For their strict interrelation, the role that Moscow can simultaneously play at the junction of such institutions will result essential to favour the centrality of the IEA. With beneficial effects over international energy regulation and, in the end, on global governance as well. … From Russia with … law?

scholarly journals Commons, Global (Economic) Governance, and Democracy: Which Way Forward for International Law?

2021 ◽  
pp. 68-88
Author(s):  
Samuel Cogolati ◽  
Jan Wouters
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
The Self ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Marginalized Populations ◽  
Democratic Practice ◽  
The Commons ◽  
Grazing Lands ◽  
Global Economic Governance

Millions of people have been depending on commons such as forests, pastures, grazing lands, and fisheries to meet their basic needs for centuries. Because these commons are often left unrecognized, they face the threat of enclosure, which risks depriving peoples in the Global South from their most basic access to essential resources. Legal scholars are therefore called upon to rethink the prevailing system of global governance. Very little has been said about the role that international law could play in the empowerment of communities in the self-management of their resources and in the resistance against enclosure. It remains unclear to what extent international law can require states to recognize the commons as a democratic practice of its own and protect marginalized populations from enclosure and dispossession. This chapter asks the question as to whether international law can be rethought as part of the solution in saving the commons from enclosure.

Varieties of cooperation: the domestic institutional roots of global governance

2010 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 561-589 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAVID BACH
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
Hedge Funds ◽  
Regulatory Agencies ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Institutional Diversity ◽  
International Organisations ◽  
Institutional Variables ◽  
Domain Names ◽  
Transgovernmental Networks ◽  
Global Economic Governance

AbstractThis article develops a domestic institutional explanation for the growing institutional diversity in global economic governance. Transgovernmental networks linking domestic regulatory agencies have emerged in a number of areas alongside more conventional cooperation based on international organisations and regimes. At the same time, the number and scope of private self-regulatory schemes at the international level has markedly increased. While rich literatures have developed around each of these three governance cluster, less attention has been paid to the critical questions why, where, and when we are most likely to see one type of governance as opposed to another. The article argues that broad observable patterns of global governance result from specific configurations of domestic institutional variables in leading markets against the backdrop of the dynamics of market globalisation. Empirical evidence from case studies of global governance in the fields of securities, Internet domain names, intellectual property, and hedge funds broadly support the argument.

scholarly journals China’s Challenge to the Institutions of Global Governance and US Soft Power

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-83
Author(s):  
Evan Oddleifson
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
World Trade Organisation ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
The Us ◽  
The International Monetary Fund ◽  
Global Economic Governance

China stands on the brink of surpassing the US in material capability and is pushing the world towards an increasingly multipolar order. This paper assesses the constraints on the growth of China's non-coercive influence in global politics. However, the constitutional groundings of global economic governance in US ideology and their institutional stickiness make China’s prospects of altering the mandates and structures of the IMF, WB, and WTO highly unlikely. Furthermore, by examining the outcomes of China's lending strategies in developing countries using Angola as a case study, this paper highlights China's inability to supplant growing IMF and WB agreements in developing countries and their failure to institutionalize their influence in partner countries. In sum, this paper concludes that liberal values, and by extension the non-coercive influence of the US, are likely to be upheld during China's rise by the institutions of global governance, namely the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and World Trade Organisation.

scholarly journals G20 Contributions to Global Economic Governance in the Post–Covid-19 Digital World

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 15-19
Author(s):  
Jonathan Fried ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
World Order ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Joint Work ◽  
Future Role ◽  
Digital World ◽  
The World ◽  
Global Economic Governance

The article investigates the future role of the G20 in a post-pandemic digital world. The transformation of the world order and global governance is interconnected with three main trends: fragmentation, digitalization and socialization. The author underlines that these trends pose challenges for states both at the national and global levels. To effectively solve the accumulated problems, the joint work of international institutions and non-state actors is required.

scholarly journals Contradictions of Formation of the Global Economic Governance System

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (10) ◽  
pp. 7-16
Author(s):  
Nikolay Eletsky
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
World Economic ◽  
And Control ◽  
Global Economic Governance

The reasons and the factors of the global economic governance formation became the urgent issues of modern economic theory and practice. Emerging mechanisms of global governance reflect the transitional nature of the present stage of civilization. Under modern conditions, global ownership only begins to form, which inevitably involves the use of the socio-economic shell of previous historical types of economic relations. This particularly reflected in the utilization of the worldwide ownership in private-sector interests and in the application of the mechanisms of global governance to achieve the goals of individual states, corporations, financial-oligarchic clans and other private entities. A contradiction of genesis and evolution of the global ownership and control mechanisms of the world economic system become the essential problem of the international political economy.

scholarly journals Between hyperglobalization and national policy. Is there a way to mitigate populist risks for global economic governance in the post-Covid-19 world?

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-156
Author(s):  
Marek Rewizorski ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Cooperation ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Fundamental Problem ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Economic Globalization ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Middle Way ◽  
The Right ◽  
Global Economic Governance

Some scholars of global governance advocate rebalancing from global to national governance. They underline the incompatibility of global economic governance with democracies, which have the right to protect their social arrangements. They discern the fact that global (economic) governance is under heavy fire from a new vox populi, underscoring the socio-economic and cultural sources of their resentment and opposition to the liberal international order. While pointing at the timeliness of such argumentation, this article examines the fundamental problem with a sovereignty-related solution to the populist challenge. It lies in the fact that reconstituting global economic steering with a stronger emphasis on sovereignty may open the door for pursuing distinct national policies, which have blossomed during the Covid-19 pandemic and which not only overlap with populism but dismantle the benefits of international cooperation in the post-Covid-19 world. By asking about the role of the fragmented system of economic governance in inspiring populist resentment, this article creates an opportunity not only to address the challenges to global economic governance, but more specifically to reflect upon: the justification of decisive shifts toward national governance; risks which remain hidden for those discontented with economic globalization; and drafting an alternative solution, namely taking the middle way between hyper globalization and a more national policy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document