International Organizations and Global Governance

Global Actors

• Global actors range from state actors to non-state actors
• Non-state actors include IGOs, NGOs, MNCs and financial actors
• States need a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to relate with other states (Montevideo Convention 1933)
• Sovereignty is a key characteristic of states

Hierarchy among States

• Strong states, militarily and economically, focus on 'big' states
• These states are often seen as policy makers within international negotiations
• Middle and smaller states are seen as policy takers

However Small and Middle Economies are not Powerless

• Their strength lies in their ability to form alliances
• They can also influence public and policy debates

Examples

• Rhetorical entrapment is the strategic use of ideas to influence supranational negotiations
• Another example is 'Havens in a storm'

International Organizations (IOs)

• Delegation, "contract" (always imperfect), and permanent bureaucracy are distinctive characteristics
• IOs lower transaction costs; this is a major function scholars have highlighted.
• Transaction costs are the costs associated with making, maintaining, and enforcing agreements between states
• Negotiation Costs – Time and resources required to agree, important in multilateral settings
• Monitoring and Compliance Costs – Ensuring states follow agreements; important in contexts where transparency is limited
• Enforcement Costs – Ensuring agreements are implemented and enforced, involves additional costs
• Uncertainty and Information Costs – Limited knowledge of others' intentions or capabilities, necessitates costly information-gathering mechanisms

Role of International Organizations in lowering transaction costs

• IOs serve as forums for negotiations; a structured negotiating environment simplifies and reduces costs
• IOs establish shared rules and standards that guide state behavior, reduce uncertainty & information costs
• IOs facilitate information sharing and reporting; reducing transaction costs associated with asymmetry
• IOs reduce enforcement costs through monitoring compliance and assisting with technical assistance

Theoretical Perspectives

• Neoliberal Institutionalism - International Organizations are enablers of cooperation.
• Realism - International Organizations as tools for states’ interests.
• Constructivism - IOs setting norms and framing problems.
• Marxism - IOs reinforce capitalist global structures

Neoliberal Institutionalism

• IOs enable cooperation by reducing transaction costs, providing information, and building trust between states
• IOs facilitate the achievement of mutual goals and addressing collective problems
• IOs provide public goods, such as international peace, economic stability, and environmental protection.
• Critics say it may overestimate the ability of IOs to create cooperation

Realism

• IOs are instruments of powerful states used to pursue their national interests
• IOs are extensions of state power
• IOs are tools for states to project power and achieve goals beyond unilateral action
• IOs reflect the power dynamics within the international system
• The UN Security Council's ineffectiveness on Syria serves as an example
• This theory underestimates the agency of IOs in shaping agendas and outcomes independently

Constructivism

• IOs shape global norms, frame international problems, and influence state behavior through ideals
• IOs act as norm entrepreneurs by constructing and spreading norms that guide state actions
• Internal cultures and bureaucracies of IOs play a crucial role in shaping how they address problems
• Critique – This theory overemphasizes IO autonomy and underplays the constraints placed on them by member states

Marxism

• IOs strengthen global capitalism by supporting wealthy states and transnational elites
• IOs perpetuate economic inequalities and exploit developing countries
• IOs are tools that promote the neoliberal economic order, prioritizing capital over people
• IMF loans that required privatization and trade liberalization are an example
• Critics say this view underestimates the promotion of development by IOs

Public vs Private authority in global governance

• The increasing role of non-state actors, like NGOs, MNCs, and hybrid public-private partnerships, is changing this
• Traditionally, global governance was seen only as the responsibility of state actors and international organizations
• A shift towards private authority is challenging the traditional notions of authority within international relations

Main Private Actors

• MNCs, market actors, and NGOs

MNCs

• Operate through subsidiaries, branches, or joint ventures across multiple countries
• Typically have a centralized management structure
• Play a pivotal role in the global economy by facilitating the flow of capital, technology, goods, and services
• Engage in Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)

Economic Impact on Host Countries

• Positive Impacts include job creation, technology transfer, capital inflows, and globalization integration that can boost growth
• Negative Impacts include possible exploitation of labor, market domination, environmental degradation, and profit repatriation to home countries, potentially limiting economic benefits for the host nations.

Market Actors

• Actors include banks, hedge funds and private equity firms, and global asset managers

NGOs

• Operate independently from states, prioritize public interest over profit-making
• Examples include Amnesty International, Greenpeace, and Doctors without Borders
• Growth post-Cold War is driven by democratization, communication technologies, and globalization.
• NGOs are crucial in transboundary issues.

Functions of NGOs

• Agenda-Setting and Norm Creation – raising awareness and advocating for international norms
• Collaboration with IGOs – amplifying their influence and advocating for policy changes
• Provision of Services and Humanitarian Aid – delivering crucial aid and services during crises
• Influence – shaping global policy and advocacy.

Limits and Criticisms of NGOs

• Power Asymmetries – Larger, well-funded NGOs often have more influence
• Sovereignty-Based Constraints – NGOs may face limitations due to state sovereignty concerns
• Questions of Representation and Legitimacy – Concerns about accountability and representativeness

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and the Ottawa Treaty

• A global network of NGOs advocating for the prohibition of anti-personnel mines.
• A key role in shaping the Ottawa Treaty signed in 1997.
• The ICBL raised awareness, built coalitions, collaborated with states and IGOs, advocated at conferences, and undertook public mobilization to achieve the outcome.
• The treaty significantly reduced the use of landmines globally.

Additional Notes – IOs (International Organizations)**