scholarly journals The theory of neoliberal institutionalism at the beginning of XXI century: International institutions and global governance

2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 247-261
Author(s):  
Dusan Prorokovic ◽  
Jelena Milicevic-Prorokovic
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Multinational Corporations ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
Self Help ◽  
Internal Policy ◽  
Neoliberal Institutionalism ◽  
Rules Of The Game

Neoliberal institutionalism represents the fourth phase in the development of the liberal institutionalism theory. Unlike the previous ones, at this stage of development, theorists focus on international institutions as independent actors in international relations, which are not only the means for the states to realize their national interests, but also influence internal policy in the countries. Ultimately, this leads to seeing the international relations outside the realistic ?self-help principle? as ones defining the behavior of states. The ambiguity in the further positioning of neoliberal institutionalism is regarding the phenomenon of global governance. The global governance is becoming reality. Because of this, states are often forced to act beyond their particular interests, giving priority to solving problems through international institutions. However, this largely does not happen due to state decisions, but thanks to the activities of non-state actors. Although the international politics stay state-centered, nongovernmental organizations and multinational corporations have more influence in overcoming anarchy through global governance and the establishment of rules of the game in certain areas of life. For neoliberal institutionalism, this presents somewhat a challenge. The development of the fourth phase of the liberal institutionalism will depend on future explanations regarding the relation to global governance.

The case against international cooperation

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Ian Hurd
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Cooperation ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Political Methodology ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Governmental Cooperation

Abstract The idea that international law and institutions represent cooperative means for resolving inter-state disputes is so common as to be almost taken for granted in International Relations scholarship. Global-governance scholars often use the terms international law and cooperation interchangeably and treat legalization as a subset of the broader category of inter-governmental cooperation. This paper highlights the methodological and substantive problems that follow from equating ‘global governance’ with ‘international cooperation’ and suggests an alternative. The traditional model applies liberal political theory to the study of international institutions and interprets global governance as the realization of shared interests. It deflects research away from questions about trade-offs and winners or losers. In place of cooperation theory, I outline an overtly political methodology that assumes that governance – global or otherwise – necessarily favors some interests over others. In scholarship, the difference is evident in research methods, normative interpretation, and policy recommendations, as research is reoriented toward understanding how international institutions redistribute inequalities of wealth and power.

scholarly journals GEOPOLITICAL TRANSFORMATION AND NEW TRENDS OF RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY IN THE CONDITIONS OF GLOBALIZATION

THE BULLETIN ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (390) ◽  
pp. 235-244
Author(s):  
S. V. Ryazantsev ◽  
L. S. Ruban
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Main Idea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
The World

The article analyzes the process of globalization and the role of the Russian Federation in this process. The relevance of considering the current stage of globalization is due to the strengthening of the inter-connectedness and interdependence of the world, which requires the improvement of interstate relations and mechanisms of global governance with the primacy of the economic aspect of the development of society in the conditions of the functioning of the global scale of production. The historiography presents the regulation of international relations from the Westphalian system (state-centrist model of the world) to the Vienna Congress and the attempt to create a system of collective security and regulation of international relations: to the League of Nations and the United Nations. The formation of global governance institutions is shown: the largest international intergovernmental organizations (UN, WTO, IMF, IBRD, G-8, G-20, etc.), the most important function of which is to determine the norms and rules of interstate interaction. The main idea of the authors of the article is to show the historical conditionality of the transition to a polycentric model of development, as it most fully meets the needs of society on a global scale. The main purpose of this work was to substantiate and confirm the characteristics of the role of Russia in the international arena at the present stage of development by empirical material obtained during international surveys of experts from sixteen APR countries (VIPs and decision-makers). Thus, among the current trends in global development, the authors highlight the dilemma globalism - sovereignty and the correlation of globalism - transregionalism, in particular, the concept of the Indian-Pacific region (Indo-Pacific) instead of the Asia-Pacific region, put forward by the United States, Japan, Australia and India and the concept of "One belt is one road ”, initiated by China. Another trans-regional structure, such as BRICS, remains largely insufficiently structured, institutionalized and little realized in the specific political and economic activities of the countries that gave the name to this abbreviation.

scholarly journals Defense Diplomacy Strategy in Global Governance to Face the Global Threats

2021 ◽  
Vol 04 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maharani Nurmala ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Dynamic Environment ◽  
The State ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Phenomenological Method ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Global Issues ◽  
Qualitative Phenomenological ◽  
Positive Effect

Global developments that are full of dynamics are marked by the emergence of interdependence between countries. Global developments are in line with the development of science and technology which causes countries to seem borderless. The blurring of boundaries between countries and the development of an increasingly dynamic environment are also accompanied by the development of increasingly broad and multidimensional threats. This global development is also marked by the emergence of new actors in international relations. The development of threats and increasing global issues that cannot be handled by the state alone have created a new phenomenon in the international relations order, namely global governance. Previously, the state was the sole actor in the order of international relations. However, with global governance, there is a new arrangement in the international relations system that accommodates all actors who play a role. This research will use a qualitative phenomenological method. The theory used in this research are global governance, defense diplomacy and international organization as a basis theory and concept, and also a security theory as supporting theory. In the end, we can see that the change of international order can bring the positive effect for countries in achieving their national goals and accomplish their national interests.

PENERAPAN PRINSIP PERSONA NON GRATA TERHADAP DUTA BESAR DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF HUKUM INTERNASIONAL (STUDI KASUS PENGANIAYAAN TKI OLEH DUTA BESAR ARAB SAUDI DI JERMAN)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-71
Author(s):  
Devi Yusvitasari
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Recipient Country ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The World ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
The Right

A country needs to make contact with each other based on the national interests of each country related to each other, including among others economic, social, cultural, legal, political, and so on. With constant and continuous association between the nations of the world, it is one of the conditions for the existence of the international community. One form of cooperation between countries in the world is in the form of international relations by placing diplomatic representation in various countries. These representatives have diplomatic immunity and diplomatic immunity privileges that are in accordance with the jurisdiction of the recipient country and civil and criminal immunity for witnesses. The writing of the article entitled "The Application of the Principle of Non-Grata Persona to the Ambassador Judging from the Perspective of International Law" describes how the law on the abuse of diplomatic immunity, how a country's actions against abuse of diplomatic immunity and how to analyze a case of abuse of diplomatic immunity. To answer the problem used normative juridical methods through the use of secondary data, such as books, laws, and research results related to this research topic. Based on the results of the study explained that cases of violations of diplomatic relations related to the personal immunity of diplomatic officials such as cases such as cases of persecution by the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia to Indonesian Workers in Germany are of serious concern. The existence of diplomatic immunity is considered as protection so that perpetrators are not punished. Actions against the abuse of recipient countries of diplomatic immunity may expel or non-grata persona to diplomatic officials, which is stipulated in the Vienna Convention in 1961, because of the right of immunity attached to each diplomatic representative.

Basic principles of Russian foreign policy under Vladimir Putin

Upravlenie ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 116-122
Author(s):  
Sadeghi Elham Mir Mohammad ◽  
Ahmad Vakhshitekh
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World Order ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Russian Foreign Policy ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Interstate Relations ◽  
The Moment

The article considers and analyses the basic principles and directions of Russian foreign policy activities during the presidency of V.V. Putin from the moment of his assumption of the post of head of state to the current presidential term. The authors determine the basic principles of Russia's foreign policy in the specified period and make the assessment to them. The study uses materials from publications of both Russian and foreign authors, experts in the field of political science, history and international relations, as well as documents regulating the foreign policy activities of the highest state authorities. The paper considers the process of forming the priorities of Russia's foreign policy both from the point of view of accumulated historical experience and continuity of the internal order, and in parallel with the processes of transformation of the entire system of international relations and the world order. The article notes the multi-vector nature of Russia's foreign policy strategy aimed at developing multilateral interstate relations, achieving peace and security in the interstate arena, actively countering modern challenges and threats to interstate security, as well as the formation of a multipolar world. The authors conclude that at present, Russia's foreign policy activity is aimed at strengthening Russia's prestige, supporting economic growth and competitiveness, ensuring security and implementing national interests. Internal political reforms contribute to strengthening the political power of the President of the Russian Federation and increasing the efficiency of foreign policy decision-making.

Conclusion

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Zürn
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Political System ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Causal Mechanisms

This chapter summarizes the argument of the book. It recapitulates the global governance as a political system founded on normative principles and reflexive authorities in order to identify the legitimation problems built into it; it points to the explanation of the rise of societal politicization and counter-institutionalization via causal mechanisms highlighting the endogenous dynamics of that global governance system; and, it sums up the conditions under which the subsequent processes of legitimation and delegitimation lead to the system’s decline or to a deepening of it. In addition, the conclusion submits that the arguments put forward in this book are in line with a newly emerging paradigm in International Relations. A “global politics paradigm” is increasingly complementing the “cooperation under anarchy paradigm” which has been dominant for around five decades. The chapter finishes with suggestions of areas for further research.

The Theoretical Model

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.

Legitimation Problems

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.

Reflexive Authorities

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Zürn
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Political Authority ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Loosely Coupled ◽  
State Actors

In this chapter, authority is developed as key concept for analyzing the global governance system. Max Weber’s foundational treatment is used to capture the paradox involved in the notion of “voluntary subordination.” Building on this foundation, the concept of reflexive authority is elaborated in contrast to two other concepts that have prevailed in international relations so far. The argument is laid out against the background of the global governance context, one in which the authority holders are in many respects weaker than most state actors. Two types of reflexive authority are identified: epistemic and political authority. Finally, the interplay between different authorities in global governance is analyzed to identify the major features of the global governance system. It is—to put it in the shortest possible form—a system of only loosely coupled spheres of authorities that is not coordinated by a meta-authority and lacks a proper separation of powers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document