Participation and Subjectification in Global Governance: NGOs, Acceptable Subjectivities and the WTO

Millennium: Journal of International Studies

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 376-396

  Tucker, Karen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

global governance; NGOs; subjectification; subjectivity; traditional knowledge; WTO

Indexed keywords

EID: 84899531096     PISSN: 03058298     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0305829813518257     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. In this article, I use the term 'NGO' as an umbrella category to refer to the different kinds of private, non-profit-oriented organisations that are eligible to engage in dialogue and collaboration with intergovernmental organisations. In the context examined here, this includes international NGOs and think-tanks with offices and activities in more than one country, regional NGOs linking organisations across a particular geographical region, national NGOs with activities in one country, peasant and indigenous organisations with more direct links to local communities, trade unions and business associations, all of which carry out a mixture of research, networking and advocacy relevant to the WTO's activities. Although 'NGO' is a broad and potentially ambiguous category of analysis, its use is appropriate here, not only because of this empirical context, but also because the article aims, as discussed in more detail below, to explore how individuals representing the full range of NGOs just mentioned are affected by dominant discourses within the WTO.
2. For an overview of NGO interaction with different parts of the UN system, and a discussion of the 'pro-NGO norm' in global governance, see Kim D. Reimann, 'A View from the Top: International Politics, Norms and the Worldwide Growth of NGOs,' International Studies Quarterly 50, no. 1 (2006): 55-60.
3. For an overview of these critiques as well as interpretations of the significance of events in Seattle, see Stephen Gill, 'Toward a Postmodern Prince? The Battle in Seattle as a Moment in the New Politics of Globalisation,' Millennium: Journal of International Studies 29, no. 1 (2000): 131-40.
4. Fred Halliday, 'Getting Real about Seattle,' Millennium: Journal of International Studies 29, no. 1 (2000): 123-9.
5. Philip McMichael, 'Sleepless since Seattle: What Is the WTO about?,' Review of International Political Economy 7, no. 3 (2000): 466-74.
6. World Trade Organisation, World Trade Report 2007 (Geneva: WTO Publications, 2007), 342.
7. See, for example, Louise Amoore and Paul Langley, 'Ambiguities of Global Civil Society,' Review of International Studies 30, no. 1 (2004): 89-110.
8. Jens Bartelson, 'Making Sense of Global Civil Society,' European Journal of International Relations 12, no. 3 (2006): 371-95.
9. Hans-Martin Jaeger, '"Global Civil Society" and the Political Depoliticization of Global Governance,' International Political Sociology 1, no. 3 (2007): 257-77.
10. Hans-Martin Jaeger, '"World Opinion" and the Founding of the UN: Governmentalizing International Politics,' European Journal of International Relations 14, no. 4 (2008): 589-618.
11. Ole Jacob Sending and Iver B. Neumann, 'Governance to Governmentality: Analyzing NGOs, States, and Power,' International Studies Quarterly 50, no. 3 (2006): 651-72.
12. See, for example, Kenneth Anderson, 'The Ottawa Convention Banning Landmines, the Role of International Non-governmental Organisations and the Idea of International Civil Society,' European Journal of International Law 11, no. 1 (2000): 91-120.
13. Tanja Brühl, 'Representing the People? NGOs in International Negotiations,' in Evaluating Transnational NGOs: Legitimacy, Accountability, Representation, eds Jens Steffek and Kristina Hahn (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), 181-99.
14. Sangeeta Kamat, 'The Privatization of Public Interest: Theorizing NGO Discourse in a Neoliberal Era,' Review of International Political Economy 11, no. 1: 155-76.
15. Steve Charnovitz, 'The WTO and Cosmopolitics,' in Reforming the World Trading System: Legitimacy, Efficiency and Democratic Governance, eds Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann and James Harrison (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 442.
16. See, for example, Steve Charnovitz, 'Transparency and Participation in the World Trade Organization,' Rutgers Law Review 56, no. 4 (2003): 927-59.
17. Jeffrey L. Dunoff, 'Public Participation in the Trade Regime: Of Litigation, Frustration, Agitation and Legitimation,' Rutgers Law Review 56, no. 4 (2003): 961-70.
18. Patrizia Nanz and Jens Steffek, 'Global Governance, Participation and the Public Sphere,' Government and Opposition 39, no. 2 (2004): 314-35.
19. Elizabeth Smythe and Peter J. Smith, 'Legitimacy, Transparency and Information Technology: The World Trade Organisation in an Era of Contentious Trade Politics,' Global Governance 12, no. 1 (2006): 31-53.
20. Baogang He and Hannah Murphy, 'Global Social Justice at the WTO? The Role of NGOs in Constructing Global Social Contracts,' International Affairs 83, no. 4 (2007): 702-27.
21. See, for example, Elizabeth A. Bloodgood, 'The Interest Group Analogy: International Nongovernmental Advocacy Organisations in International Politics,' Review of International Studies 37, no. 1 (2011): 93-120.
22. Marie Törnquist-Chesnier, 'How the International Criminal Court Came to Life: The Role of Nongovernmental Organisations,' Global Society 21, no. 3 (2007): 449-65.
23. Jens Steffek and Maria Paola Ferretti, 'Accountability or "Good Decisions"? The Competing Goals of Civil Society Participation in International Governance,' Global Society 23, no. 1 (2009): 37-57.
24. See, for example, Ann Marie Clark, Diplomacy of Conscience: Amnesty International and Changing Human Rights Norms (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001).
25. Leon Gordenker and Thomas G. Weiss, 'Pluralising Global Governance: Analytical Approaches and Dimensions,' Third World Quarterly 16, no. 3 (1995): 357-87.
26. Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists beyond Borders (Ithaca, NY, and London: Cornell University Press, 1998).
27. Lisa Jordan and Peter van Tuijl, 'Political Responsibility in Transnational NGO Advocacy,' World Development 28, no. 12 (2000): 1051-65.
28. See, for example, Karin Bäckstrand, 'Democratizing Global Environmental Governance? Stakeholder Democracy after the World Summit on Sustainable Development,' European Journal of International Relations 12, no. 4 (2006): 467-98.
29. Magdalena Bexell, Jonas Tallberg and Anders Uhlin, 'Democracy in Global Governance: The Promises and Pitfalls of Transnational Actors,' Global Governance 16, no. 1 (2010): 81-101.
30. Rosa Sanchez Salgado, 'NGO Structural Adaptation to Funding Requirements and Prospects for Democracy: The Case of the European Union,' Global Society 24, no. 4 (2010): 507-27.
31. Jan Aart Scholte, 'Civil Society and Democratically Accountable Global Governance,' Government and Opposition 39, no. 2 (2004): 211-33.
32. Jan Selby, 'Engaging Foucault: Discourse, Liberal Governance and the Limits of Foucauldian IR,' International Relations 21, no. 3 (2007): 333.
33. Other terms used to describe this kind of knowledge include 'indigenous knowledge,' 'folklore,' 'indigenous intellectual property' and 'traditional ecological knowledge.' For a more detailed discussion, see Peter Drahos, 'Towards an International Framework for the Protection of Traditional Group Knowledge and Practice,' paper presented at the UNCTADCommonwealth Secretariat Workshop on Elements of National Sui Generis Systems for the Preservation, Protection and Promotion of Traditional Knowledge, Innovations and Practices and Options for an International Framework, Geneva, 4-6 February 2004, 6.
34. For an overview of TRIPS Council discussions of these issues and the different mandates, see WTO, 'TRIPS: Reviews, Article 27. 3(b) and Related Issues: Background and the Current Situation.' Available at: http://www. wto. org/english/tratopé/tripsé/art27_3b_backgroundé. htm.
35. For an overview of these debates and the issues they raise, see Margarita Flórez Alonso, 'Can We Protect Traditional Knowledge?,' in Another Knowledge Is Possible: Beyond Northern Epistemologies, ed. Boaventura de Sousa Santos (London and New York: Verso, 2007), 249-71.
36. Debora J. Halbert, Resisting Intellectual Property (London: Routledge, 2005), 135-63.
37. Christopher May and Susan K. Sell, Intellectual Property Rights: A Critical History (London and Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2006), 189-98.
38. Vandana Shiva, 'North-South Conflicts in Intellectual Property Rights,' Peace Review 12, no. 4 (2000): 501-8.
39. For an overview of the principles that guide multi-sited ethnographic research, see George E. Marcus, 'Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-sited Ethnography,' Annual Review of Anthropology 24 (1995): 105-13.
40. The World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), the World Health Organisation (WHO), the International Labour Office (ILO) and several United Nations specialist agencies are, for example, also based in Geneva.
41. See Conservation International (1998), 'Megadiversity: The 17 Biodiversity Superstars.' (available at: http://www. conservation. org/documentaries/Pages/megadiversity. aspx).
42. Convention on Biological Diversity (no date), 'Country Profile-Peru' (available at: http://www. cbd. int/countries/profile. shtml?country=pe#status).
43. Representatives of some national and community-based Peruvian NGOs have made it as far as Geneva in their attempts to understand and participate in global policy debates about intellectual property law, traditional knowledge and biodiversity, with representatives of one Peruvian NGO even participating in TRIPS Council meetings in the WTO. The Peruvian government has also made securing more effective international legal recognition and protection of traditional knowledge one of its foreign policy objectives.
44. Marcus, 'Ethnography in/of the World System,' 105.
45. Some of these organisations can also, following conventional definitions (e. g. Anna C. Vakil, 'Confronting the Classification Problem: Towards a Taxonomy of NGOs,' World Development 25, no. 12 (1997): 2064), be considered 'international NGOs' given the international focus of their work.
46. See WTO, 'NGO participation in Ministerial Conferences.' Available at: http://www. wto. org/english/forumsé/ngoé/ngoé. htm.
47. Interviews in Geneva were carried out in English and observation carried out in the WTO's three official languages of English, French and Spanish; interviews and observation in Peru were carried out in Spanish. All translations of interview material included in this article are my own.
48. Anna Selmeczi, '"... we are being left to burn because we do not count": Biopolitics, Abandonment, and Resistance,' Global Society 23, no. 4 (2009): 520.
49. Ivan Manokha, 'Foucault's Concept of Power and the Global Discourse of Human Rights,' Global Society 23, no. 4 (2009): 435.
50. Michel Foucault, 'Truth and Power,' in Power: Essential Works of Foucault 1954-1984, Volume 3, ed. James D. Faubion (London: Penguin Books, 2000), 120.
51. Rita Abrahamsen, 'The Power of Partnerships in Global Governance,' Third World Quarterly 25, no. 8 (2004): 1459.
52. Foucault, 'Truth and Power,' 131.
53. Michel Foucault, 'Subjectivity and Truth,' in Ethics: Essential Works of Foucault 1954-1984, Volume 1, ed. Paul Rabinow (London: Penguin Books, 1997), 88.
54. The translations of these terms, and the specific meanings attributed to them, are not consistent in the literature, with asujettissement sometimes translated into English as 'subjection' or 'subjugation' (both of which suggest a narrower meaning than asujettissement), and 'subjectification' sometimes used to translate subjectivation. In addition, some scholars use 'subjectification' as an umbrella term for both processes of subject formation, while others use 'subjectivation' as the umbrella term. My use of the two concepts builds, in particular, on Trent H. Hamann, 'Neoliberalism, Governmentality, and Ethics,' Foucault Studies 6 (2009): 37-59.
55. Mark G. E. Kelly, The Political Philosophy of Michel Foucault (New York and Abingdon: Routledge, 2009), chapter 4 'Subjectivity'.
56. Marcelo Otero, 'La sociologie de Michel Foucault: une critique de la raison impure,' Sociologie et sociétés 38, no. 2 (2006): 49-72.
57. Michel Foucault, 'Technologies of the Self,' in Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault, eds Luther H. Martin, Huck Gutman and Patrick H. Hutton (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1988), 18.
58. Trent H. Hamann, 'Neoliberalism, Governmentality, and Ethics,' Foucault Studies 6 (2009): 39.
59. Foucault, 'Technologies of the Self,' 18.
60. Michel Foucault, 'The Subject and Power,' in Power: Essential Works of Foucault 1954-1984, Volume 3, ed. James D. Faubion (London: Penguin Books, 2000), 326.
61. Foucault, 'The Subject and Power,' 327.
62. Frédéric Gros, 'Course Context,' in The Hermeneutics of the Subject: Lectures at the Collège de France 1981-1982, ed. Frédéric Gros (New York: Picador, 2005), 526.
63. The Information and External Relations Division was created in 2009 through the merging of the Information and Media Relations Division and the External Relations Division. Prior to 2009, the External Relations Division was responsible for managing the WTO's relations with NGOs and other external organisations.
64. Chris Dent, 'Not All Practices Are Equal: An Exploration of Discourses, Governmentality and Scale-Free Networks,' Social Semiotics 19, no. 3 (2009): 347.
65. A group of African countries that jointly develop and negotiate proposals in the WTO.
66. This comment follows on from an earlier point in our discussion, where she likened trying to converse with trade officials to talking to someone who only speaks Arabic or Chinese.
67. The Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and Peru and Colombia that was being negotiated at the time.
68. The organisations in question tend not to describe themselves in this way, but as prodevelopment or pro-environment.
69. Charnovitz, 'The WTO and Cosmopolitics,' 442.
70. Steffek and Ferretti, 'Accountability or "Good Decisions"?,' 38.
71. Something we might reasonably assume to be the case, if we believe that NGOs are able to bring neglected voices and perspectives to global governance.