Chapter 3. Ideology and Theories of International Institutions

In recent years, a number of powerful arguments have been given for thinking that there should be suprastate institutions, and that the current ones, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and United Nations Security Council, need to be radically reformed and new ones created. Two distinct kinds of argument have been advanced. One is instrumental and emphasizes the need for effective suprastate political institutions to realize some important substantive ideals (such as preventing dangerous climate change, eradicating poverty, promoting fair trade, and securing peace). The second is procedural and emphasizes the importance of political institutions that include all those subject to their power in as democratic a process as possible, and builds on this to call for democratically accountable international institutions. In this chapter, the author argues that the two approaches need not conflict, and that they can in fact lend support to each other.

Download Full-text

The value of ecosystem services

10.1093/oso/9780198808978.003.0003 ◽

2017 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Linus Blomqvist ◽

R. David Simpson

Keyword(s):

Ecosystem Services ◽

Random Sample ◽

International Institutions ◽

Evidence Base ◽

Conservation Strategy ◽

Critical Examination ◽

Opportunity Costs ◽

Monetary Value ◽

Pollution Treatment ◽

Diminishing Returns

This chapter investigates whether the growing enthusiasm for ecosystem services recently expressed by conservation NGOs and international institutions is supported by evidence. Ecosystem services—the benefits humans receive from nature—have become the darlings of conservation on the assumption that the valuation of selected services may justify protecting land. A critical examination of a random sample of monetary valuations for regulating ecosystem services such as pollution treatment, finds that only onethird can be considered reliable, and that only ten percent of monetary value estimates can be transferred to other contexts. This suggests that the overall evidence base for assigning monetary value to nature is limited. Furthermore, diminishing returns, high opportunity costs, and technological substitutes might limit the amount of conservation that can be justified on the basis financial assessments of ecosystem services. As such, this chapter concludes that ecosystem services as a conservation strategy should not be embraced uncritically.

Download Full-text

The Theoretical Model

10.1093/oso/9780198819974.003.0005 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Michael Zürn

Keyword(s):

Theoretical Model ◽

Global Governance ◽

International Institutions ◽

Historical Institutionalism ◽

Governance System ◽

State Consent

The authority–legitimation link states that international institutions exercising authority need to nurture the belief in their legitimacy. The authority–legitimation link points to fundamental challenges for the global governance system: with the rise of international authorities that are, at the same time, more intrusive, state consent is undermined and societies are affected directly. Consequently, legitimation problems arise, followed by processes of delegitimation, which then trigger responses by the challenged institutions. Using concepts of historical institutionalism, it is argued in this chapter that the authority–legitimation link produces reactive sequences either via the route of societal politicization or via counter-institutionalization by states. These reactive sequences may result in either a decline or a deepening of global governance depending on the responses of authority holders.

Download Full-text

Legitimation Problems

10.1093/oso/9780198819974.003.0004 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Michael Zürn

Keyword(s):

Global Governance ◽

International Institutions ◽

Governance System ◽

Social Purpose ◽

International Authority ◽

Legitimacy Beliefs

Political and epistemic authorities in the global governance system often restrain the freedom of constituent members and therefore need to be justified with reference to the impartial pursuit of a shared social purpose. An international authority must therefore develop a convincing legitimation narrative and display a sense of impartiality to be seen as legitimate. The thrust of the argument in this chapter is that the legitimacy of the global governance system is structurally precarious. Two legitimation problems can be identified: a technocratic bias in the justification of authority and the lack of impartiality in the exercise of authority. International institutions often have authority, but lack sufficient legitimacy beliefs.

Download Full-text