Security governance in regional and global governance – Japan and the EU

Introduction. Under the influence of globalization and regionalization; the world economic development is becoming more dynamic but contradictory at the same time; creating new challenges and threats for both individual countries and entire regions. This exacerbates the urgency of forming flexible systems of security cooperation and finding solutions to regional and global security problems. Purpose. The purpose of the paper is to systematize research on regional and global security governance and a review of the balance of geopolitical forces in Europe. Methods. The research was carried out using the following methods: analysis and synthesis – to characterize the modern mainstream of theoretical intelligence in the field of regional security; comparative analysis – to compare the structures of regional security management in different parts of the world; deductions and inductions – to form a conceptual model of global governance; tabular and visual methods – for visual presentation of the material. Results. The paper considers theoretical approaches to the interpretation of regional security. It is noted that regional security governance is a set of institutions and activities at three levels: global; regional and national. A nomenclature of different types of regional security governance structures is presented; which includes a regional balance of power and ad hoc (informal) alliances; regional coherence; regional cooperative security; regional collective defense; regional collective security; pluralistic security community. It has been recognized that regional security management is provided not only by highly specialized or formal structures; but also by multi-purpose regional organizations; which initially pursued a combination of economic and political goals with growing security targets. Conceptual options for regional security governance at the global and regional levels are systematized. Based on the analysis of the mechanisms of global management; own vision of the relationship between the subjects of global governance processes is presented. Discussion. The crisis of recent decades has shown that no single group of global governance actors can act effectively to minimize global risks; which are both a challenge for business leaders and politicians in any country. That is why it is undeniable that global issues require global governance (especially in the field of security); the main goal of which should be to ensure global stability and sustainable development.

Download Full-text

TTIP, CETA, and TiSA Behind Closed Doors

10.1093/oso/9780198808893.003.0010 ◽

2017 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Panagiotis Delimatsis

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

Global Governance ◽

Early Stage ◽

European Parliament ◽

Trade Negotiations ◽

The European Union ◽

The Us ◽

The Eu

Secrecy and informality rather than transparency traditionally reign trade negotiations at the bilateral, regional, and multilateral levels. Yet, transparency ranks among the most basic desiderata in the grammar of global governance and has been regarded as positively related to legitimacy. In the EU’s case, transparent trade diplomacy is quintessential for constitutional—but also for broader political—reasons. First, even if trade matters fall within the EU’s exclusive competence, the EU executive is bound by the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to inform the European Parliament, the EU co-legislator, in regular intervals. Second, transparency at an early stage is important to address public reluctance, suspicion, or even opposition regarding a particular trade deal. This chapter chronicles the quest for and turning moments relating to transparency during the EU trade negotiations with Canada (CETA); the US (TTIP), and various WTO members on services (TiSA).

Download Full-text