BAES - Lecture 5 - Global Actors PDF

Global actors  Agenda From state actors to non-state actors Types of non-state actors: IGOs NGOs MNCs and financial actors Public versus private authority in global governance 2 1. States Permanent population A defined territory A government A capacity...

Global actors  Agenda From state actors to non-state actors Types of non-state actors: IGOs NGOs MNCs and financial actors Public versus private authority in global governance 2 1. States Permanent population A defined territory A government A capacity to enter in relationship with other states (Montevideo Convention 1933)  Sovereignty But some are more equal than others “Organizationally strong and weak states” under conditions of globalization (Cerny 2010) Size matters too – large vs small (Katzenstein 2003): size affects vulnerability and autonomy but also capacity to exercise leverage on other actors Hierarchy among states in global governance Focus on ‘big’ states, those that are militarily and economically stronger Why? These states tend to be associated with ‘policy-makers’ (especially in international negotiations), whereas ‘middle powers’ and small states are traditionally seen as ‘policy takers’ However small and middle economies are not powerless Their powers often lies in their ability to build alliances (with states and non-state actors) or to set the boundaries of what is ‘acceptable’ in public and policy debates) Examples ‘Rhetoricalentrapment’ (Schimmelfennig 2001): strategic use of ideas to influence supranational negotiations ‘Havens in a storm’ (Sharman 2006) 2. IOs Distinctive characteristics: Delegation, ‘contract’ (always imperfect!) Membership Permanent bureaucracy What functions do IOs perform? Typical of what IR scholars have highlighted: IOs lower transaction costs What are transaction costs? Transaction costs Transaction costs refer to the costs associated with making, maintaining, and enforcing agreements between states. In the context of international cooperation, transaction costs may arise from several factors, such as information asymmetry, mistrust between actors, enforcement difficulties, and the complexity of international negotiations. Types of transaction costs Negotiation Costs: Time and resources required to reach agreements, especially in multilateral settings where many actors are involved. Monitoring and Compliance Costs: Ensuring that states adhere to agreements can be resource-intensive, particularly in environments where transparency is limited or where incentives to cheat exist. Enforcement Costs: Once agreements are reached, ensuring that they are implemented and enforced often involves additional costs. Uncertainty and Information Costs: States may not have full information about other actors' intentions, capabilities, or compliance, leading to the need for costly information-gathering mechanisms. Role of International Organizations (IOs) in lowering transaction costs: International Organizations play a critical role in reducing these transaction costs, making cooperation between states more efficient. Here’s how: 1.Providing a Forum for Negotiation: IOs serve as platforms where states can negotiate agreements more easily. By providing a structured environment and established procedures, IOs reduce the time and resources needed for states to communicate and reach consensus.  Establishing Rules and Norms: IOs create shared rules, standards, and norms that govern state behavior, reducing the uncertainty and information costs associated with cooperation. When states operate under common frameworks, it is easier to predict other states' actions and build trust. Information Sharing and Transparency: Many IOs have mechanisms for information sharing and reporting, reducing the information asymmetry that can raise transaction costs. Organizations like the IMF monitor states’ economic policies.  Lowering Enforcement Costs: By monitoring compliance and offering technical assistance, IOs can reduce the costs of enforcement. In short International Organizations help lower transaction costs in IR by providing structured frameworks for negotiation, reducing uncertainty, monitoring compliance, and lowering enforcement costs. In issue areas as diverse trade, security, finance, and climate Theoretical Perspectives Neoliberal institutionalism: IOs as enablers of cooperation Realism: IOs as tools for states' interests Constructivism: IOs’ role in setting norms and framing problems Marxism: IOs reinforcing capitalist global structures Neoliberal institutionalism Key Idea: IOs enable cooperation between states by reducing transaction costs, providing information, and fostering trust. They are seen as platforms for achieving shared goals and addressing collective problems. IOs as Enablers of Cooperation: IOs function as forums for dialogue, helping states navigate conflicts and reach agreements. They provide public goods like international peace, economic stability, and environmental protection. Critique: Liberalism may overestimate the ability of IOs to foster cooperation, especially in a world where power asymmetries persist. Realism Key Idea: IOs are instruments of powerful states, used to pursue their own national interests. They are not independent actors but extensions of state power. IOs as Tools for State Interests:Realists view IOs as platforms for states to project power or achieve goals they could not through unilateral action. IOs reflect the underlying power dynamics of the international system. Example: The UNSC’s inability to act decisively on Syria due to vetoes by Russia and China demonstrates how IOs are constrained by great power politics. Critique: This perspective underestimates the agency of IOs in shaping outcomes or framing global agendas independently. Constructivism Key Idea: IOs shape global norms, frame international problems, and influence state behavior through ideational power rather than material resources. IOs as Norm Entrepreneurs:IOs do not merely implement state directives; they actively construct and spread norms that guide state actions. Their bureaucracies and internal cultures play a critical role in shaping how they interpret and address issues. Critique: Constructivists may overemphasize the autonomy of IOs, downplaying how member states can constrain their actions. Marxism Key Idea: IOs reinforce global capitalism by serving the interests of wealthy states and transnational elites. They perpetuate economic inequality and exploit developing countries. IOs as Reinforcers of Capitalist Structures:IOs are seen as tools for advancing the neoliberal economic order, which benefits powerful states and corporations at the expense of marginalized groups. Ios policies reflect the priorities of capital over people. Example: In the 1990s, IMF loans to developing countries often mandated privatization and trade liberalization, which critics argue deepened inequality and poverty. Critique: This perspective can downplay the ways IOs also promote development or protect vulnerable populations.  Traditionally, global governance has been seen as the domain of state actors and international organizations Over the past few decades, IR scholars have increasingly focused on the role of private actors in shaping the global system.  Private authority refers to the capacity of non-state actors (MNCs, market actors, NGOs) to create and enforce rules, provide governance functions, and shape policy outcomes. Main private actors MNCs Market actors NGOs 1. MNCs MNCs are firms that operate in multiple countries through subsidiaries, branches, or joint ventures, while maintaining a centralized management structure. They typically have headquarters in one country (the home country) and conduct business activities in one or more other countries (the host countries). MNCs play a pivotal role in the global economy, as they facilitate the flow of capital, technology, goods, and services across borders. MNCs and the linkage to money and finance Foreign Direct Investment (FDI): MNCs engage in FDI, where they invest capital in foreign economies by establishing or expanding their operations (factories, offices, supply chains) abroad Economic impact on host countries (1) Positive Impacts: Job Creation: MNCs create employment opportunities in host countries by establishing factories, offices, and other operations. Technology Transfer: MNCs bring advanced technologies, managerial practices, and expertise to the host country, potentially raising productivity. Capital Inflows: FDI from MNCs brings significant amounts of capital, which can stimulate economic growth and development. Global Integration: MNCs can help integrate local economies into the global market, providing access to international markets for host countries’ goods and services. Economic impact on host countries (2) Negative Impacts: Exploitation of Labor: In some cases, MNCs take advantage of lower labor standards or weak regulatory environments in host countries, leading to poor working conditions and wage suppression. Market Domination: MNCs can outcompete local firms, driving them out of business and reducing domestic entrepreneurship. Environmental Degradation: MNCs may exploit natural resources in host countries without regard to environmental sustainability, especially where environmental regulations are weak. Profit Repatriation: A significant portion of the profits generated by MNCs in host countries is often repatriated to their home countries, limiting the economic benefits for the host nation. 2. Market actors Very different actors, including banks, hedge funds and private equity firms, global asset managers What do they have in common? NGOs NGOs as non-state, non-profit actors:NGOs operate independently from states and prioritize public interest over profit-making Examples include Amnesty International (AI), Greenpeace, and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF).  Growth post-Cold War: After the Cold War, democratization, advances in communication technologies, and globalization propelled the rise of NGOs The number of international NGO increased dramatically, vastly outnumbering IGOs NGOs are particularly visible in transboundary issues like human rights, environmental protection, and humanitarian crises. Functions Agenda-setting and norm creation Collaboration w/IGOs Provision of Services and Humanitarian Aid  influence  Agenda-Setting and Norm Creation:NGOs play a significant role in raising awareness and shaping international norms by advocating for issues states may overlook Example: Amnesty International (AI): AI has been pivotal in promoting international human rights standards, such as campaigns against torture and for the abolition of the death penalty.  Collaboration with IGOs:NGOs often work with IGOs like the UN to amplify their influence and push for policy changes Example: Greenpeace: Greenpeace has worked with international conferences on climate change, lobbying governments and IGOs to adopt stricter environmental policies.  Provision of Services and Humanitarian Aid:NGOs deliver crucial aid and services in crises, sometimes operating where states and IGOs cannot. Example: Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF): MSF provides emergency medical assistance during conflicts and natural disasters, exemplifying NGOs' humanitarian function. Limits and criticisms 1. Power Asymmetries Among NGOs: Not all NGOs have equal influence; larger, well-funded organizations often dominate international policymaking. Smaller NGOs may struggle to compete, creating disparities in representation. 2. Sovereignty-Based Constraints:The international system, which prioritizes state sovereignty, limits NGOs’ ability to act independently or enforce their agendas Example: NGOs may face restrictions or hostility from governments wary of foreign interference. 3. Questions of Representation and Legitimacy:Critics argue that NGOs lack an official mandate, leading to concerns about their accountability and representativeness Some NGOs are accused of pursuing their own interests rather than genuinely representing civil society or affected populations. Are NGOs influential in global politics? How? Which strategies? International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and the Ottawa Treaty Overview The International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) is a global network of NGOs founded in 1992 to advocate for the prohibition of anti-personnel landmines. It played a pivotal role in shaping the Ottawa Treaty, formally known as the Mine Ban Treaty, signed in 1997. How the ICBL Shaped the Treaty Agenda-Setting: The ICBL raised awareness of the humanitarian crisis caused by landmines, highlighting the indiscriminate harm to civilians during and after conflicts. Through reports, testimonies, and public campaigns, it framed landmines as not only a security issue but also a moral and humanitarian one. Coalition Building: ICBL brought together over 1,000 NGOs worldwide, including groups like Human Rights Watch and Handicap International, to amplify its message and coordinate lobbying efforts. Collaboration with States and IGOs: The ICBL partnered with supportive states like Canada, Norway, and Belgium, creating a "core group" of countries committed to banning landmines. It worked closely with the United Nations to align its goals with broader international peace and security efforts. Advocacy at Diplomatic Conferences: ICBL representatives participated in international forums, advocating for a comprehensive ban. Their technical reports on landmine casualties and demining challenges shaped negotiations. Public Mobilization: The campaign used media and grassroots activism to pressure governments to commit to banning landmines, making it a widely discussed global issue. Outcome The Ottawa Treaty, signed by 122 countries in 1997, prohibits the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of anti-personnel landmines. It also obligates signatories to clear mined areas and assist victims. Significance ICBL's Role: This case exemplifies how an NGO can bridge the gap between grassroots activism and international diplomacy, demonstrating the power of civil society in shaping international law. Impact: The treaty has led to the destruction of millions of stockpiled landmines and significantly reduced their use globally. Public versus Private authority in global governance The debate over public and private authority in global governance revolves around the growing role of non-state actors, such as NGOs, multinational corporations (MNCs), and hybrid public-private partnerships, in shaping international norms, policies, and enforcement mechanisms. This shift challenges traditional state-centric notions of authority in international relations. Public Authority in Global Governance Private Authority in Global Governance Definition: Public authority refers to Definition: Private authority involves governance exercised by states and governance by non-state actors, including intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), NGOs, MNCs, and other private entities Legitimacy derives from state and political Legitimacy derives from expertise, moral dynamics, formal agreements, treaties, and authority, or market power. legal mandates. Tensions between public and private authority Legitimacy and Accountability: Public authority is accountable to states and, indirectly, to citizens via governments. Private actors, such as NGOs and MNCs, often face criticism for lacking democratic mandates, raising questions about whose interests they represent. Effectiveness: IGOs like the WTO or UN can be slow due to bureaucracy and state disagreements. NGOs and MNCs may act faster and innovate solutions, but they may also prioritize narrow agendas over collective interests. Power Asymmetries: Public institutions like the IMF are dominated by powerful states. Private authority reflects inequalities in resources and influence; large NGOs or MNCs can overshadow smaller actors or marginalized voices. To wrap-up From state to non-state actors Some major non-state actors (public and private) The debate between public and private authority in global governance www.unibo.it