The pragmatism of global and european governance: Emerging forms of the political beyond westphalia

Millennium: Journal of International Studies

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 453-471

  Albert, Mathias ^a,b   Kopp Malek, Tanja ^a  

^a BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b Faculty of Sciology   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746407519     PISSN: 03058298     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/03058298020310030501     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Ulrich Beck, Macht und Gegenmacht im globalen Zeitalter: Neue weltpolitische Öonomie (Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp, 2002).
2. Which Beck considers being appropriate in order to redress the fallacies of 'methodological nationalism'. 'From the perspective of methodological cosmopolitanism it suddenly becomes clear that not only can the national not be clearly separated from the international, but that homogenous entities also cannot be clearly distinguished from each other in this way'; Beck, Macht und Gegenmacht, 90, our translation.
3. On the generation of these discourses by meta-theoretical observation reflecting the co-constitutive and contingent relation between social structural and semantic shifts within the context of a theory of society in general, see the voluminous treatise by Niklas Luhmann, Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft, 2 vols. (Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp, 1997), particularly Chapter 5.
4. Which, strictly speaking, is a form of 'methodological statism'.
5. Although within a systematic portrayal of philosophical thought, it can and must be treated as such.
6. See Richard Rorty, Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), Chapter 1.
7. This notion is taken from Colin Elman and Miriam Fedius Elman,'How Not to Be Lakatos Intolerant: Appraising Progress in IR Research', International Studies Quarterly 46, no. 2 (2002): 233.
8. See Edmund Husserl, Grundprobleme der Phäomenologie 1910/11, ed. Iso Kern (Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, 1977), 15-45
9. for a similar account of the notion of 'world' and 'world society', see Rudolf Stichweh, Die Weltgesellschaft: Soziologische Analysen (Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp, 2000), 232-44.
10. Jacques Derrida, L'autre cap, suivi de La déomocratie ajournée (Paris: Minuit, 1991).
11. Yosef Lapid, 'Introduction: Identities, Borders, Orders: Nudging International Relations Theory in a New Direction', in Identities, Borders, Orders: Rethinking IR Theory, eds. Mathias Albert, David Jacobson and Yosef Lapid (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2001), 1-20.
12. See Aseem Prakash and Jeffrey A. Hart, 'Globalization and Governance: An Introduction', in Globalization and Governance, eds. Aseem Prakash and Jeffrey A. Hart (London: Routledge, 1999), 1-24.
13. For such a Foucauldian perspective, see Ian R. Douglas, 'Globalization as Governance: Toward an Archaeology of Contemporary Political Reason', in Globalization and Governance, 134-60; one might here explore possible links to the rich field of social anthropological studies on 'glocalisation'.
14. Beck, Macht und Gegenmacht, 14.
15. See Ulrich Beck, World Risk Society (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999)
16. and the recent debate hosted by Millennium: Mikkel Vedby Rasmussen, 'Reflexive Security: NATO and International Risk Society', Millennium: Journal of International Studies 30, no. 2 (2001): 285-309
17. and Shlomo Griner, 'Living in a World Risk Society: A Reply to Mikkel V. Rasmussen', Millennium: Journal of International Studies 31, no. 1 (2002): 149-60.
18. See, for example, James N. Rosenau, 'Toward an Ontology of Global Governance', in Approaches to Global Governance Theory, eds. Martin Hewson and Timothy Sinclair (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1999), 287-301.
19. For the related concept of 'discursive nodal points', see Thomas Diez, Die EU lesen: Diskursive Knotenpunkte in der britischen Enropadebatte (Opladen: Leske und Budrich, 1999).
20. Commission of the European Communities, European Governance: A White Paper, Brussels, 25 July 2001, COM (2001), 428final.
21. World Bank, Governance: Vie World Bank Experience (Washington, DC: World Bank, 1994);
22. UNDP, Governance for Sustainable Human Development (New York: UNDP, 1997);
23. and OECD, Participatory Development and Good Governance (Paris: OECD, 1995).
24. Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 2.
25. See Commission of the European Communities, European Governance: A White Paper, n. 1, n. 8.
26. See Jan Kooiman, 'Social-political Governance: Introduction', in Modern Governance: New Government-Society Interactions, ed. Jan Kooiman (London: Sage, 1993), 2.
27. Practically the entire literature on international regimes could be referred to here; but see, as a benchmark in the debates on global governance, James N. Rosenau and Ernst-Otto Czempiel, eds., Governance Without Government: Order and Change in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
28. See, for example, Paul F. Diehl, ed., The Politics of Global Governance: International Organizations in an Interdependent World, 2d ed. (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2001)
29. and Volker Rittberger, ed., Global Governance in the United Nations System (Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 2002).
30. See, for example, Claire Cutler, Virginia Haufler and Tony Porter, eds., Private Authority in International Affairs (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1999)
31. and John Braithwaite and Peter Drahos, Global Business Regulation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).
32. Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood, 4.
33. A claim prominently asserted by the so-called 'Stanford School'; see, for example, John Meyer, John Boli, George Thomas, and Francisco O. Ramirez, 'World Society and the Nation-state', American Journal of Sociology 103, no. 2 (1994): 144-81.
34. With regard to supranational governance and intergovernmental governance see, for example, Wayne Sandholtz and Alec Stone Sweet, European Integration and Supranational Governance (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998);
35. Ann P. Branch and Jakob C. Øhgaard, 'Trapped in the Supranational/Intergovernmental Dichotomy: A Response to Stone Sweet and Sandholtz', Journal of European Public Policy 6, no. 1 (1999): 123-43;
36. Wayne Sandholtz and Alec Stone Sweet, 'European Integration and Supranational Governance Revisited: Rejoinder to Branch and Øhrgaard', Journal of European Public Policy 6, no. 1 (1999): 144-54
37. For the concept of network governance, see Beate Kohler-Koch and Rainer Eising, eds., The Transformation of Governance in the European Union (London: Routledge, 1999);
38. for multi-level governance, see, inter alia, Gary Marks, Lisbet Hooghe, and Kermit Blank, 'European Integration from the 1980s: State-Centric vs. Multi-level Governance', Journal of Common Market Studies 34, no. 3 (1996): 341-78
39. and Andrew Jordan, "The European Union: An Evolving System of Multi-level Governance or Government?', Policy and Politics 29, no. 2 (2001): 193-208.
40. On this danger, see Markus Jachtenfuchs, Thomas Diez, and Sabine Jung, 'Which Europe? Conflicting Models of a Legitimate European Political Order', European Journal of International Relations 4, no. 4 (1998): 417.
41. Steve Smith and John Baylis, 'Introduction', in The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, eds. John Baylis and Steve Smith (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 2.
42. Ben Rosamond, Theories of European Integration (Basingstoke: MacMillan, 2000), 113.
43. The notion of 'private governance' tends to reproduce (rather than question) the plausibility of a private/public divide, and reserves the latter for the state. On private governance in world politics, see Rodney Bruce Hall and Thomas J. Biersteker, eds., The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)
44. and Tanja Brühl, Tobias Debiel, Brigitte Hamm, Hartwig Hummel, and Jens Martens, eds., Die Privatisierung der Weltpolitik: Entstaatlichung und Kommerzialisierung im Globalisierungsprozess (Bonn: J.H.W. Dietz, 2001).
45. Expressed, for example, in the works of the high-profile Commission of Global Governance [http://www.cgg.ch] (6 January 2003) or in ambitious concepts such as the project
46. Complex World Governing as promoted by Michael Zürn, Regieren jenseits des Nationalstaates (Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp, 1998).
47. See, for example, Richard Falk, Predatory Globalization: A Critique (Oxford: Polity, 2000);
48. Jan Aart Scholte, Globalization: A Critical Introduction (Houndmills: Palgrave, 2000);
49. Ulrich Brand, Achim Brunnengräber and Lutz Schrader, Global Governance: Alternative zur neoliberalen Globalisierung? (Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot, 2000);
50. and Robert O'Brien, Anne Marie Goetz, Jan Aart Scholte and Marc Williams, Contesting Global Governance: Multilateral Economic Institutions and Global Social Movements (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).
51. The latter touches the argument of the new raison d'Etat, whereby states bind themselves internationally to gain more leeway domestically; see, for example, Klaus Dieter Wolf, Die neue Staatsräson: Ztaischenstaatliche Kooperation als Demokratieproblem in der Weltgesellschaft (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2000).
52. This creates a number of difficulties for naming such a state-like entity which is not a global state. On this and some related issues, see Martin Shaw, Theory of the Global State: Globality as an Unfinished Revolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000);
53. Mathias Albert, Zur Politik der Weltgesellschaft: Identität und Recht im Kontext internationaler Vergesellschaftung (Weilerswist: Velbrück, 2002);
54. and Robert Jackson, Tlie Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
55. See Wolfgang Reinicke, Global Public Policy (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 1998).
56. See, for example, David Held, Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995);
57. on the notion of 'authority/ Herrschaft' in complex, multi-level settings of governance, see Jürgen Neyer, 'Politische Herrschaft in nicht-hierarchischen Mehrebenensystemen', Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 9, no. 1 (2002): 9-38.
58. This is a different way of pursuing the argument put forward inter alia by R.B.J. Walker, Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993)
59. and Chris Brown, Sovereignty, Rights and Justice: International Political Thought (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2002).
60. See Mathias Albert and Friedrich Kratochwil, 'Conclusion', in Identities, Borders, Orders, 280-83
61. and Joseph Margolis and Jacques Catudal, The Quarrel Between Invariance and Flux: A Guide for Philosophers and Other Players (University Park, PN: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2001).