sign in sign up
<<
Home , Globality, Global citizenship, Global governance

Governing a more global world Jan AArt Scholte Professorial Research Fellow in the Centre for the Study of and Regionalization (CSGR) at the University of Warwick and Centennial Professor in the Centre for the Study of Global (CSGG) at the London School of Economics, has held previous appointments at the University of Sussex (1985–96) and the Institute of Social Studies, The Hague (1997–98). His main publications include: Globalization: A Critical Introduction (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2010, 3rd ed.); Global in Action? and Accountable , ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2010); The Encyclopaedia of Globalization, co-ed. (Routledge, 2006); Civil Society and Global Finance, ed. (Routledge, 2002); Contesting Global Governance, co-author (Cambridge University Press, 2000); and of (Open University Press, 1993). In 2005-9 he was co-editor of the journal Global Governance. He is currently coordinating a five-year action-oriented research program on ‘Building Global ’ with co-conveners across ten world regions: see www.buildingglobaldemocracy.org.

128-145_PAL.indd 128 19/11/09 19:35:20 Introduction of incompatibility, say, between efficiency and With global ; or between justice and ; or consciousness The rapid growth of global social relations is one between democracy and morality? of the principal developments of the late twenti- This, then, is the central concern of the pres- people are eth and early twenty-first centuries. Society of our ent essay: how to govern a more global world in aware that they times has acquired more pronounced global pro- the early twenty-first century. Such a short paper inhabit planetary portions: human beings are connected with one cannot develop full answers, but it can clarify the realms, and their another on a planetary scale to degrees not pre- broad issues. Concretely, what institutional frame- viously known. Even deep in Amazonia, people works are developing? Normatively, what imaginations take are aware that “globalization affects us deeply, perspectives should guide these processes? them anywhere touching on all the big questions” (Vieira 2005). In responding to these questions, the first on Earth. A number This more global circumstance has raised nu- part of the discussion below briefly elaborates of languages, merous headline issues for . How a conception of and globalization. This can we best address , financial preliminary step of definition is necessary since discourses, crises, infectious diseases, communi- ideas of the global are so multiple and divergent. symbols, and cations, arms proliferation, transborder produc- To limit confusion it is therefore advisable for each narratives have tion chains, and intercultural accommodation, commentator to specify the particular notion of global reach. to name but a few crucial global challenges? globalization that informs their understanding. As transplanetary interlinkages have become The second part of the paper describes gov- more significant in society, rules and regulatory ernance of the contemporary more global world processes have emerged to bring greater order, in terms of a “polycentric” mode of . stability, predictability, and control over global Polycentrism refers here to governance by means affairs. Like any other realm of social life, global of trans-scalar, trans-sectoral, diffuse, and over- relations are governed. lapping institutional arrangements. In a polycen- However, what form does this governance take? tric framework, global public policy is generated Is regulation of intensified global relations to be through complex networks that comprise offi- conducted, on older patterns, through territorial cial, market, civil society, and hybrid agencies. -states? Or is globalization prompting a These regulatory actors moreover operate across “scaling up” of the from national to global a mix of local, provincial, national, regional, and levels with the creation of a world ? global jurisdictions. With so many Or is increased globality the occasion for a return and measures involved, it can be difficult in con- of rule by ? Or is the intense globaliza- ditions of polycentrism to identify the sources tion of current times instead a moment to revive and trace the courses of governance in respect decentered governance arrangements on a medi- of global problems. This situation creates large eval pattern? Alternatively still, is a more global difficulties of coordination and accountability, world to be governed through institutional con- which largely explains why most governance of figurations that history has not previously seen? global affairs today suffers from major shortfalls Whatever the institutional shape of global gov- in effectiveness and legitimacy. ernance, what purpose should the rules serve? Is The third part of this paper then explores the the aim to maximize material welfare in a glob- normative frameworks that might be brought to al economy? Or is the objective to ensure global these polycentric governance processes. Differ- ecological integrity? Or is the goal to advance ent ideologies assign different relative priorities global with an equitable distribu- to the seven aforementioned values of economic tion of resources across humanity as a whole? productivity, ecological integrity, social justice, Or is the goal to secure peaceful settlement of peace, democracy, cultural vibrancy, and mo- global conflicts? Or is the target to foster demo- rality. The aim in this concluding section is to cratic processes in a context of global citizen- identify some of the key political choices that ship? Or is the end to promote creativity and every global citizen must take, rather than to wisdom in global culture? Or is the guiding vi- prescribe what those choices should be. sion to ensure moral decency in a global com- munity? Alternatively, if in fact the purpose of Globalization global governance encompasses several or even all of these core aims, which priorities should As elaborated elsewhere (Scholte 2005, ch. 2), prevail when different objectives clash with one globalization is a diversely understood and another? Which should take precedence in cases deeply contested concept. For example, some

Governing a more global world Jan Aart Scholte 129

128-145_PAL.indd 129 19/11/09 19:35:20 commentators define globalization as a process involves savings and credits circulating in plan- of internationalization that brings a substantial etary spaces. Global military affairs see armed growth of interactions and interdependencies forces operating across the Earth with, for exam- between countries. Others conceive of globaliza- ple, intercontinental missiles, surveillance satel- tion as liberalization and the reduction of state- lites, and long-range troop deployments. Global imposed restrictions on cross-border movements health issues arise in respect of various infec- (of goods, services, capital, and—in principle if tious diseases as well as global trade in drugs. not in practice—labor). Others identify global- Global ecological developments such as climate ization as universalization, whereby a host of change, loss, and depletion of strato- objects and experiences are spread to all cor- spheric ozone affect relations between human- ners of humanity. Still others define globaliza- ity and the rest of nature on a planetary scale. tion as deterritorialization, a process in which In addition to these many material forms, many social relations such as electronic finance globality also manifests itself ideationally. With glo- and websites (partly) transcend the geography bal consciousness people are aware that they in- of place, distance and borders. habit planetary realms, and their imaginations Globalization arguably can involve all four of take them anywhere on Earth. A number of lan- these trends and more. What is wanted, there- guages (e.g., English), discourses (e.g., ‘devel- fore, is a conception that not only encompasses opment’), symbols (e.g., the Nike insignia), and and integrates these related qualities, but at the narratives (e.g., the soap opera) have global same time also identifies the distinctive char- reach. Global spaces also host distinctive aes- acter of globalness. Such a notion is available thetics such as fusion cuisine, computer-aided if one defines globalization as the growth of design, Diaspora literature, and hybrid music transplanetary social connectivity. Globality forms. Meanwhile various non-territorial identi- is “transplanetary” in that it involves geograph- ties and associated solidarities stretch across ical spaces that can stretch to any location on the planet, with affective bonds based on caste, the Earth. Globality is “social” in that it involves clan, class, disability, faith, gender, generation, people living collectively—in this case on a plan- race, and sexuality. etary scale. Globality is “connectivity” in that it Taking this multitude of material and ide- links conditions, experiences, and destinies—in ational circumstances in sum, global connectivity this case at widely dispersed sites across the figures pervasively and deeply in contemporary so- Earth. Globalization by this definition is a process ciety. Most human beings in the early twenty-first whereby human society acquires more pronounced century encounter at least several global connec- planetary dimensions. tions every day. Indeed, many if not most social Transplanetary social connectivity is man- circumstances today involve a significant ele- ifested in a host of material circumstances. ment of globality. We inhabit a more global world. Through global communications, for instance, The historical periodization of globalization is people exchange messages between any points a matter of considerable controversy. Many com- on Earth. With global travel, people bodily move mentators rightly emphasize that transplanetary anywhere on the planet. Global organizations social relations are not new to the present era. encompass interconnected operations scattered Various earlier times also knew considerable in- across several continents: e.g., global business tercontinental trade and finance, long-distance corporations, global civil society associations, migration, world religions, transoceanic telegraph global governance institutions. Global apply cables, global epidemics, and more. As always, certain norms and standards across the planet, nothing in human history is ever completely new. including for example intellectual property rules However, contemporary greatly accelerated and principles. Global production sees globalization—unfolding since roughly the middle different stages of the creation of goods (cloth- of the twentieth century—has expanded trans- ing, electronics, etc.) performed at widely dis- planetary social connectivity to extents never pre- persed locations on the globe. Global markets viously witnessed. For one thing, the aggregate involve the distribution and sale of certain com- amount of all global links today dwarfs anything modities (e.g., natural gas and airline tickets) on known before. In addition, the scope and diver- a planetary scale. Global money forms (such as sity of types of transplanetary relations is far great- US dollars, Special Drawing Rights, and Visa er now than at any earlier time. The range of credit cards) are used in economic transac- people who are intimately involved in global spac- tions at all corners of the Earth. Global finance es is likewise much wider than ever, sweeping

130 THE MULTIPLE FACES OF GLOBALIZATION

128-145_PAL.indd 130 23/11/09 09:50:40 across all classes, countries, and cultures. Fur- The former assert that globalization is inherently thermore, individuals in today’s world tend to ex- damaging and that society should therefore be perience global connections much more often and “de-globalized” with fewer transplanetary links much more intensely than before. The speed of (Bello 2004). In contrast, alter-globalization transplanetary transactions has also reached his- perspectives maintain that the problem is not torically unprecedented heights, to the point that transplanetary social connectivity per se, but the many global communications are instantaneous. that are adopted towards a more global And the overall impacts of globality run far deep- world. Different policies, they say, could make er in contemporary society. Thus, while global globalization work better. Some alter-globaliza- relations certainly extend back far in time, their tion advocates prescribe relatively modest re- number, range, frequency, intensity, velocity, and forms (Stiglitz 2002), while others promote more consequence are today qualitatively higher. It ambitious agendas of change (Shiva 2005). therefore seems no accident that talk of “global- Yet, whatever political vision one embraces, it ization” has only arisen during the past fifty years, is clear that the speed and direction of globaliza- and not before. No language on Earth had this tion is largely a function of governance. To be sure, term before 1960, and today no major language some deep and powerful historical forces have is without an equivalent word. spurred the expansion of transplanetary spaces In spite of this striking historical turn, ana- in contemporary society (Scholte 2005, ch. 4). lysts must take care to avoid globalist exaggera- However, these forces do not predetermine the tions when commenting on contemporary society. precise nature and consequences of a more glob- Localities, countries, and regions retain distinct al world. Globalization develops in the particu- importance in today’s more global world. Amidst lar ways that it does because of policy choices. the hugely expanded global flows, territorial ge- To understand those policy choices it is neces- ography continues to have far-reaching impacts sary to examine how globalization is governed. on patterns of production, governance, and iden- tity. Globalization has not erased other scales Polycentric governance of social life. Rather, global domains interrelate in complex combinations with regional, country, A social space is always governed. Whenever a and local realms. Hence, as will be described in given arena of society acquires importance, peo- more detail presently, globalization is not gener- ple develop rules and regulatory institutions to ating a centralized , but a de- secure stability, predictability, order, and control centralized multilayered governance apparatus. within that realm. In earlier times, for example, Contemporary globalization has also been an the emergence of local settlements saw the cre- uneven process. For one thing, the trend has ation of governance apparatuses such as village not touched all people with the same intensity. councils, -states, baronies, and guilds. Lat- Some locales (e.g., so-called “global ”) er in history the growing importance of country and some social groups (e.g., corporate execu- domains was accompanied by the rise of na- tives) have been very heavily globalized, while tional states. More recently, regionalization of others such as pastoralists in the Sahel have economy and society has prompted the appear- been much less touched. Moreover, the benefits ance of regulatory frameworks such as the Eu- and harms of recent globalization have been un- ropean Union (EU) and the Southern African equally distributed. There have been gainers (in- Development Community (SADC). cluding some big winners, for example, among The same broad logic applies to globalization. fund managers) and losers (including some big As transplanetary connections have become casualties, for example, among AIDS sufferers). more numerous, pervasive, and influential in Such differential consequences have made society, particularly since the mid-twentieth cen- globalization a context of considerable political tury, governance arrangements have proliferated contention (Held and McGrew 2007). As will be and grown in respect of global spaces. Countless elaborated in the final part of this essay, cham- laws, norms, standards, and principles are now pions of prevailing approaches to globalization in place to frame the way that global social re- argue that current adversities and inequalities lations are handled. Highly sophisticated rules of a more global world are unavoidable and will have developed for global communications, glob- be overcome in the medium to long term (Bhag- al finance, global environmental issues, global wati 2004). Critics can be divided into “anti- arms control, and so on. As a result, society to- globalization” and “alter-globalization” camps. day has considerable global governance.

Governing a more global world Jan Aart Scholte 131

128-145_PAL.indd 131 19/11/09 19:35:20 Clearly this global governance has not taken For one thing, national states in today’s more form as global government, in the sense of a global world often deeply affect constituencies centralized authority that has the final word on beyond their territorial realm. Thus, for example, all issues across a jurisdiction that spans the the policies that a state adopts on global matters entire planet. Some analysts, such as world fed- such as currency exchange or greenhouse emis- eralists, have expected and indeed advocated sions or infectious diseases or trade flows can that globalization should involve a “scaling up” and often do have far-reaching repercussions for of the sovereign state from national to plane- people residing outside that state’s jurisdiction. tary proportions (Davis 1984). However, a shift Big states in particular can have profound im- of this kind has not happened and shows little pacts on the everyday lives of millions of people sign of occurring. Global affairs are today not who never set foot on their territories. These af- regulated—and may well never be governed— fected persons moreover have no formal say in through a world state. electing the “foreign” that deeply Yet there is no reason why global governance shape their livelihoods. should necessarily take shape as a state writ Although state electorates remain national, large. As already noted, human history has governments today often address their policies known many different modes of societal regu- to global constituencies in addition to, and in lation. The unitary centralized sovereign state is some cases even more than, domestic audienc- only one possible form of governance, and mea- es. For example, almost all states now adjust sured against the broad sweep of history such an their laws on investment, taxation, and employ- has not actually existed for very long. ment with a view to satisfying global capital as Indeed, in some territories a modern state has well as, or sometimes even ahead of, domes- never been fully operational. Thus it should hard- tic business. In an age of instantaneous and ly be surprising that global governance would pervasive transplanetary communications, most not adopt the form of a world state. But if not governments are also concerned to maintain a through a planetary government, how does con- positive image in the influential global mass me- temporary governance of global affairs operate? dia (CNN, The Financial Times, etc.) alongside It is crucial to emphasize from the outset that the national press. Many states today moreover global governance very much involves national take notable heed of global civil society actors states. Globalization and the territorial state have such as advocates, development co-existed quite comfortably in relations of mu- NGOs, environmental groups, and religious as- tual support. Thus, on the one hand, states have sociations. In these ways and more, states in greatly facilitated globalization, for instance, with the contemporary more global world serve more liberalization of trade and investment flows. Con- than national interests alone. currently, on the other hand, globalization has Globalization has also changed state behav- often reinforced the power of states, for example, ior in terms of the growth of transgovernmental through new surveillance technologies and inten- networks. In earlier times national states related sified intergovernmental collaborations. Hence it with each other almost exclusively through for- is by no means the case, as some analysts have eign ministries and diplomatic services. How- suggested, that globalization marks an end, or in- ever, deepened global connections have often deed even a decline, of the national state (Khan induced other departments of government to de- 1996; Strange 1996). Most territorial states are velop their own intense direct trans-state collab- today as large and robust as ever, and it is hard oration, outside traditional diplomatic channels to see how contemporary global challenges could (Slaughter 2004). Thus, for example, key offi- be adequately addressed without them. cials from central banks in different states main- Yet it is also not the case that contemporary tain regular exchanges and coordination with globalization has left the state unchanged. Due one another on global financial matters. Global in good part to the rise of transplanetary so- communications and travel also permit daily cial connectivity, the national territorial state of contacts and periodic face-to-face conferences the early twenty-first century operates in some among agricultural officials, education depart- qualitatively different ways than its forebear of a ments, environmental regulators, health minis- century ago. Like anything else in history, states tries, immigration services, customs and excise change over time, and globalization has been a offices, police forces, and many more parts of key occasion for transformations of the state in the state. Specific illustrations of transgovern- the current era. mentalism include the Group of Eight (G8), the

132 THE MULTIPLE FACES OF GLOBALIZATION

128-145_PAL.indd 132 19/11/09 19:35:21 Competition Policy Network, the Human Secu- tion, recent decades have witnessed the emer- In addition to rity Network, and the Nuclear Suppliers Group. gence of a new of regions, with promoting the The Organization for Economic Cooperation and interregional mechanisms such as the South At- Development (OECD) now convenes several thou- lantic Peace and Cooperation Zone and the Asia- development of sand transgovernmental committees and working Europe Meeting (ASEM) (Hänggi, Roloff, and intergovernmental groups per year. On many occasions in today’s Rüland 2006). Like global-scale intergovern- institutions with more global world, civil servants in a given min- mental bodies, the more mature regional gover- membership drawn istry have closer links with their counterparts in nance organizations have acquired a noteworthy other states than they do with officials in other degree of autonomy from their member states. from multiple departments of their own state. In this way con- Other governance of global matters has devel- continents, temporary states have become so interlocked oped through sub-state institutions. Thus local globalization has that it is often hard to say that a given public and provincial governments have taken steps since the middle of policy (e.g., an adjustment of interest rates or a in respect of, inter alia, global environmental disease prevention strategy) emanated from this concerns, global criminal networks, global trade, the twentieth or that individual government. Rather, the mea- and global investment. A number of sub-state century also sures emerge from a transgovernmental network. governments—especially in East Asia, Europe, encouraged an To catalogue these proliferating legal and North America—have built up their own unprecedented scholars have begun to develop a new field of foreign affairs departments, in some cases in- “global administrative ,” as distinct from the cluding permanent offices abroad. Sub-state proliferation traditional “international law” of customs and authorities have also institutionalized some of and growth of (Kingsbury and Krisch 2006). their own global collaborations, separately from regional In many cases the needs for collaboration national states, in organizations such as United governance among states in a more global world has led to Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) and the the establishment and subsequent expansion of Commonwealth Forum (CLGF). agencies. permanent intergovernmental agencies. To note Drawing upon official agencies with global, but three of the hundreds of such bodies that regional, national, provincial, and local remits, now operate, the Bank for International Settle- contemporary governance of global affairs has ments (BIS) handles rules for global finance, the a pronounced trans-scalar quality. Prior to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) mid-twentieth century societal regulation de- facilitates cooperation among governments of rived almost exclusively from, and was executed countries with a Muslim majority population, predominantly through, national institutions. In and the United (UN) addresses a full contrast, public policy today generally involves spectrum of global public policy issues. In con- multi-layered networks, where rules are formu- trast to transgovernmental networks, intergov- lated, administered and reviewed through com- ernmental organizations have their own offices, binations of supra-state, state and sub-state budget, staff, and legal personality, separate bodies. Thus governance of transplanetary rela- from those of the participating states. Over time tions generally involves: global institutions and these institutions have acquired a relative au- links amongst them; regional and interregion- tonomy from the states that first created them. al apparatuses; national and transgovernmen- Their influence on weaker member states can tal agencies; local and translocal arrangements; be especially pronounced, as the impact of the and communications and collaborations across International Monetary Fund (IMF) on govern- the different arenas. This situation has prompted ments in the global south illustrates. many analysts to speak of “multi-level” regula- In addition to promoting the development of tion (Enderlein, Wälti, and Zürn forthcoming). intergovernmental institutions with membership However, the notion of “trans-scalar” governance drawn from multiple continents, globalization perhaps better captures the dense interconnec- has since the middle of the twentieth century tions across—and thus blurred lines between— also encouraged an unprecedented prolifera- the various jurisdictions. tion and growth of regional governance agencies. The institutional complexity of global gover- Many national governments have seen advantage nance grows still further when its trans-sectoral in approaching matters such as global trade, qualities are considered. Many global affairs are global finance, global migration, and the like on a today regulated in part outside the public sector, regional basis through, for example, the EU, the for instance, by business associations and/or civ- Arab Monetary Fund (AMF), and the Association il society organizations. In this respect contem- of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN). In addi- porary globalization has witnessed substantial

Governing a more global world Jan Aart Scholte 133

128-145_PAL.indd 133 23/11/09 09:55:31 privatization of governance (Cutler, Haufler, and With its trans-scalar and trans-sectoral char- Porter 1999; Graz and Nölke 2008). For exam- acter, governance of global challenges is highly ple, various aspects of global finance are regu- diffuse. For each , regulatory initia- lated by industry-based bodies such as the tives occur at a multitude of sites: on and across International Capital Market Association (ICMA), global, regional, national, provincial, and local the Hedge Fund Standards Board (HFSB), and scales; and in and among official, commercial, the Wolfsberg Group (for guidelines against mon- and civil society sectors. Often the jurisdictions ey laundering). Self-regulation has also become of the various regulatory arrangements over- widespread in respect of global trade and invest- lap, and hierarchies among them are often not ment with voluntary codes of conduct for so- clear. For example, who rules the Internet: na- called “corporate social responsibility.” Important tion-states, the intergovernmental Internation- private-sector players in the governance of glob- al Telecommunication Union (ITU), the private al communications include the Internet Engi- initiative W3C, or the multi- forum neering Task Force (IETF) and the World Wide ICANN? Many are involved, no one is in charge. Web Consortium (W3C). The fair trade movement We might therefore speak of a transition, in is mainly governed through civil society-based the context of contemporary intense globalization, institutions such as the World Fair Trade Orga- from a “statist” to a “polycentric” mode of gov- nization (WFTO) and Fairtrade Labeling Organi- ernance (Scholte 2005, ch. 6). Statism is often zations International (FLO). Other civil society also termed the “Westphalian” condition, with initiatives operate nonofficial certification reference to the of 1648 that articulated schemes to further global ecological sustainabil- modern principles of sovereign statehood. In this ity, including the Forestry Stewardship Council circumstance, governance was highly central- (FSC) and the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). ized at one level (the national) and in one type In all of these cases and more, nongovernmental of actor (the state). In contrast, the more global actors have not waited for states to make global society of the twenty-first century is regulated in governance and have taken regulatory matters a more polycentric fashion, with many decision into their own hands. points and often-unclear hierarchies and poor In still other cases governance arrangements communication amongst them. While the reign- for global affairs have taken a hybrid form that ing metaphor for the statist mode of governance combines public and private elements. Such in- was a pyramid, with the central national govern- stitutions—sometimes called “multi-stakeholder ment as its peak, the more appropriate analogy forums”—are constructed as collaborations among today would be a crown of olive leaves or a donut, official circles, market players and civil society where many elements are woven loosely together actors. A few such constructions date back to the around a policy issue, but without a bonding and first half of the last century, including the Inter- coordinating middle point. national Labour Organization (ILO), the Berne Other analysts have preferred alternative vo- Union (to regulate export credits), and the Inter- cabulary to describe the contemporary situation national Organization for Standardization (ISO). of governance through trans-scalar, trans-sectoral, However, hybrid global governance mechanisms diffuse, and overlapping arrangements. Instead have multiplied since the late 1990s. Among of polycentrism, some commentators have spo- these new creations the Internet Corporation for ken of a “new medievalism,” noting that the Eu- Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) regulates ropean Middle Ages also knew multiple layers of Internet protocols and domain names worldwide. governance and a mix of both public and private ICANN is an incorporated business with consider- authority (Akihiko 2002; Friedrichs 2004). Oth- able civil society involvement and oversight by the ers have invoked labels such as “plurilateralism,” Department of Commerce. Mean- “networked governance,” “complex multilateral- while the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis ism,” “cosmocracy,” “complex ,” and and Malaria (GFATM) has a board with represen- “disaggregated world order” (Cerny 1993; Rein- tatives of multilateral and bilateral donors, re- icke 1999–2000; O’Brien et al. 2000; Keane cipient governments, foundations, the business 2003; Slaughter 2004; Grande and Pauly 2005). sector, Northern and Southern NGOs, and people Yet whatever terminology one chooses to char- living with the diseases. The Kimberley Process acterize post-statist governance, the condition brings together governments, business, and civil clearly involves major challenges in regard to society in joint efforts to stem trade in so-called coordination, accountability and democracy. “conflict diamonds.” Problems of coordination arise in a polycentric

134 THE MULTIPLE FACES OF GLOBALIZATION

128-145_PAL.indd 134 19/11/09 19:35:21 condition when, as often occurs, multiple and common destiny collectively, through open de- widely dispersed regulatory actors address (parts liberation, non-coercively, responsibly, and with of) a given global issue with little or no commu- equivalent possibilities for all affected to partici- nication and consultation amongst each other. pate (Scholte 2008). With distributive justice Difficulties around accountability arise when, as the benefits and harms of globalization would be frequently transpires, deficient and/or harmful fairly allocated, avoiding arbitrary inequalities policies cannot be traced back, through dense on lines of caste, class, country, culture, (dis) polycentric networks, to clearly identifiable de- ability, gender, generation, race, sexuality, and cision-takers. Troubles for democracy arise when, urban/rural divides. With ecological integrity gov- as regularly happens under current polycentric ernance of a more global world would nurture arrangements, affected people have little aware- conditions of nature in which human and other ness of, participation in or control over the policy species can thrive. With individual liberty rules processes that shape their lives. for transplanetary social relations would secure broad opportunities for each person to deter- Towards the global good mine her/his own course in life. With material well-being governance of a more global world Questions of democracy expand the discussion would deliver adequate nourishment, shelter, of governing a more global world from the de- sanitation, literacy, health care, employment, scriptive issue of mapping regulatory processes and leisure for all persons. With moral decency to the normative issue of ensuring that the insti- globalization would be regulated in ways that tutional arrangements advance the public good. recognized and respected the dignity and worth In a word, it is important to ask not only what of each human being. With solidarity governance forms global governance takes, but also what of today’s more global world would promote col- purposes it should serve. lective support, community, trust, and peace To assess whether or not global governance among people on planetary as well as regional, achieves positive results it is necessary to have national, and local scales. a vision of the good society against which exist- As indicated, these eight primary values are ing outcomes can be judged. Of course, people approached here as a set. In other words, they hold widely varying conceptions of what a good are regarded as mutually reinforcing aspects of a (more global) society should entail. In this vein single package, rather than as discrete elements liberalism, , fascism, religious revival- to be pursued separately and in some rank order. ism, radical feminism, deep ecology, and other In this way the suggested vision differs from lib- perspectives hold highly diverse views of what eralism, which tends to elevate the value of in- governance should be for. Moreover, ideologi- dividual freedom to first place and expect other cal predilections differ from one person to the values to be realized in its train. Similarly, this next depending on their historical moment, cul- normative frame differs from socialism, which tural context, material conditions, psychologi- can concentrate on distributive justice to the cal disposition and political struggles. Thus the neglect of other concerns. It also differs from following normative frame for evaluating global environmentalism, which can pursue ecological governance is not proffered as a definitive truth, integrity in a single-minded fashion, and from but as a stimulus to reflection and debate. religious revivalism, which can place all focus On this particular prescriptive vision, gov- on a particular reading of morality. Instead, the ernance of a more global world should aim to normative perspective adopted here suggests advance human livelihoods through the maximi- that a good (more global) society is achieved zation of a set of eight primary values: namely, when eight primary values are pursued in holis- cultural vibrancy, democracy, distributive justice, tic combination. ecological integrity, individual liberty, material To be sure, in practice tensions may arise well-being, moral decency, and solidarity. Tak- between these core values in certain contexts of ing these points briefly in turn, withcultural vi- global governance. For example, the pursuit brancy good global governance would promote of global economic welfare can in some cases sit creative development and expression of diverse uneasily with the promotion of global ecological life-worlds, as well as mutually enhancing inter- integrity. Likewise, democracy sometimes involves cultural exposure and learning amongst them. delicate balances of majority rule, minority rights With democracy people would, in a good more and individual liberty. Cultural diversity can on global society, take decisions that shape their occasion pose challenges to one and another

Governing a more global world Jan Aart Scholte 135

128-145_PAL.indd 135 19/11/09 19:35:21 moral code. At such points of tension delicate duce the greatest possible prosperity, democ- trade-offs should be decided by the affected par- racy, environmental sustainability, and peace ties through peaceful deliberation. (Legrain 2004; Wolf 2004). The neoliberalist Of course considerable ambiguity around frame generally has little to say about distribu- these core values needs to be worked through tive justice (“inequality is an unavoidable fact when governing global affairs. For example, the of life”), culture (“not a real issue”), solidarity of constructive global interculturality are (“people are driven by self-interest”), or moral- as yet poorly understood. Nor is it at all clear ity (“a personal matter”). what shape democracy should take when ap- By the late 1990s widespread disquiet had plied to global governance (BGD 2009). Gener- arisen about the actual consequences of neo- ally agreed precise criteria for fairness in global liberalist approaches to global governance. For social life are lacking, and policy instruments to one thing these prescriptions were often ap- achieve progressive global redistribution are un- plied selectively. For example, poor countries derdeveloped. Similarly, notions of “environmen- were enjoined to open their markets to global tal sustainability,” “human rights,” and “global transactions, while rich countries often kept key community” are far more easily pronounced than sectors closed. Meanwhile measures to liberal- specified. Definitions of well-being in a global ize global capital flows were not accompanied context are also anything but straightforward, with equivalent steps to liberalize global labor with contrasting measures including the Human movements. Such inconsistencies encouraged Development Index (HDI), Gross National Happi- skepticism that was in practice ness (GNH), and the Genuine Progress Indicator an ideological tool of the strong to promote their (GPI). Moral codes, too, are often hazy and con- already advantaged interests. tested on the question of what counts as right In addition, two decades of what was widely conduct in global relations. In short, much more called the “Washington Consensus” on neoliber- theoretical exploration and practical experimen- alism often did not deliver on promises. In spite tation is required to develop viable normative of pervasive “structural adjustment” and “flexi- frameworks to guide global social relations. bilization,” hundreds of millions of people across However, even ahead of such elaboration it the world remained in abject poverty at the turn of is eminently clear that currently prevailing con- the millennium. Concurrently, liberalized global ditions of a more global world fall far short of markets brought enormous wealth to a small mi- the suggested eightfold frame of a good soci- nority. Although multiparty elections of national ety. Contemporary global affairs are riven with legislatures did spread to more countries in the cultural destruction, authoritarian rule, struc- 1980s and 1990s, global governance as a whole tural inequality, ecological damage, repression had very weak democratic credentials. Far from of liberty, material impoverishment, affronts to providing sustainability, two decades of neolib- human dignity, and social disintegration. In gen- eralism saw global ecological destruction reach eral these “bads” exist on a global scale in ways unprecedented heights. Meanwhile neoliberal- and to degrees that would not be tolerated today ism promoted an ethos of “global competition” on a local or national scale. For this reason so- that arguably worked against solidarity, trust, and called “alter-globalization movements” argue peace. Indeed, as these years passed more and that other forms of transplanetary social con- more opponents of neoliberalism vented their nectivity are necessary—and possible (Fisher unhappiness on the streets. Even many business and Ponniah 2003). leaders who had previously expounded “free mar- Certainly so-called “neoliberalist” perspec- ket” solutions to planetary problems were by the tives that dominated the theory and practice of year 2000 conceding that unadulterated neolib- global governance in the late twentieth century eralism was deficient as a formula for the good are now largely discredited. This general policy society in a more global world. vision maintains that the principal if not sole In response, some critics of neoliberalism purpose of global regulation is to promote indi- have since the 1990s turned to neomercantil- vidual liberty in a marketplace of planetary pro- ist reactions against liberalized global markets. portions. To that end neoliberalism prescribes These skeptics have argued that globalization is a maximization of private initiative and a mini- inherently incompatible with cultural vibrancy mization of public intervention. The approach (“globalization is homogenization”), democra- assumes—implicitly if not explicitly—that a cy (“globalization is ”), distributive globalized “free market” will on its own pro- justice (“globalization increases inequality”),

138 THE MULTIPLE FACES OF GLOBALIZATION

128-145_PAL.indd 138 19/11/09 19:35:37 ecological integrity (“globalization destroys the of ecological changes, infectious diseases, and environment”), individual liberty (“globalization diasporas; (b) to end the capitalist relations that is oppressive”), material well-being (“globaliza- underpin global finance and global production tion causes poverty”), moral decency (“global- chains; (c) to suppress digital and other tech- ization shelters pedophiles and tax evaders”), nologies behind global communications; (d) to and solidarity (“globalization undermines com- disassemble the intricate polycentric governance munity”). If globalization is intrinsically bad, arrangements described above; and (e) to erase then the only answer, say the neomercantil- the global imaginations that now deeply infuse ists, is to restrict links with global spaces and consciousness of society for much if not most concentrate on regional, national, and/or local of humanity. This comprehensive removal of ex- spheres where a good society can be better re- isting social structures is so unlikely as to make alized. To this end neomercantilists advocate veritable de-globalization a non-starter. measures such as tight controls on global flows, However, as already noted, reactive delinkage preferences for domestic production, promo- is not the only available alternative to neoliberal- tion of local currencies, celebration of national ism as a policy frame for governing globalization. identities, and so on. Neomercantilist tenden- The options range much wider than the age-old cies have been evident, for example, in fail- binary debate of “” versus “protection- ures since 1999 to obtain further global trade ism.” For example, many who previously cham- liberalization through the World Trade Organi- pioned neoliberalism have over the past decade zation (WTO). Neomercantilism has also under- shifted their views in the direction of what might lain greater state restrictions on migration and be called a “global social market” paradigm. This initiatives to create regional monetary funds as “Post-” or “Augmented” Washington Consensus alternatives to the IMF. has argued that market-centered governance of Neomercantilism has rightly highlighted ma- globalization could in an amended form still de- jor shortfalls of neoliberalism, but this reactive liver a good society (Stiglitz 1998; Rodrik 2001). response has itself rested on at least four major Whereas neoliberalism suggests that “free mar- flawed assumptions. One key neomercantilist kets” can work magic unaided, a global social misconception is that globalization is synony- market approach sanctions policy interventions mous with liberalization, so that the only possible by official, business and civil society circles to corrective is to “de-globalize” with measures to correct market failures and omissions. Steps in obstruct transplanetary flows. However, a number line with global social market thinking include of other policy approaches to a more global world anti-corruption initiatives, social safety nets for are in fact also available, as will be elaborated macroeconomic adjustment programs, the “de- below. A second neomercantilist mistake is to cent work” agenda of the International Labour presume that local, national, and regional spaces Organization (ILO), proactive encouragement of are inherently more conducive to a good society girls’ literacy, charges, schemes for cor- than global realms. Experience has demonstrated porate social responsibility (CSR), stakehold- again and again that local, national, and regional er consultation, improved access to essential arenas can be very unhappy places with their medicines for low-income countries, and ideas own , inequalities, , of “global public goods” more generally. In all of and violence.There is no necessary correlation these cases public policy measures are “added between the geographical scale of society and on” to tame market-led globalization and steer the quality of life that it provides. A third fun- it clear of its potentials to do harm. damental error in neomercantilism is to assume Global social market approaches certainly that people necessarily define their communities have the advantage of confronting the realities in territorial terms. On the contrary for some peo- of globalization rather than seeking with a neo- ple solidarities can arise as much (or even more) mercantilist ostrich reaction to deny deepened from bonds of age, caste, clan, class, disability, transplanetary links that for the foreseeable fu- faith, gender, race, and sexuality that transcend ture are here to stay. Yet it is doubtful whether localities, countries, and regions. Finally, neo- these modest reforms go far enough. Ten years mercantilism rests on an untenable premise that after the proclamation of a “Post-Washington the past fifty to sixty years of hugely expanded Consensus,” globalization is still more or less as transplanetary social connectivity can be readily wracked as before with ecological degradation, unraveled. Such a turn of history would require financial instability, economic crisis, inequality, simultaneously: (a) to deny the deep global links oppression, armed violence, democratic deficits,

Governing a more global world Jan Aart Scholte 139

128-145_PAL.indd 139 19/11/09 19:35:38 In short, much and cultural sedation through mindless consum- of moral focus from the secular marketplace to more theoretical erism. It is hardly evident that market-based humanity’s relations with the spiritual and the reforms such as carbon trading can by them- divine. However diverse these transformational exploration selves provide a sufficient corrective to global visions of the good society may be, they all urge and practical warming. The laudable Millennium Development that globalization can and should be driven by experimentation Goals (MDGs) launched in 2000 show no signs forces other than capitalist markets. is required of being achieved with socially motivated market These proposals for a full-scale reinvention forces alone. Self-regulation through CSR has of globalization have their own shortcomings, of to develop not adequately checked the inordinate global course. For example, some such perspectives viable normative power of big capital. Large-scale promotion of replace the economism of current market-cen- frameworks “transparency” has not made global markets no- tered global governance with a “culturalism,” an to guide global ticeably more stable and equitable. “ecologism,” or a “moralism” whose uni-dimen- Indeed, the financial collapse of 2008 has sionality is arguably no less limiting. In addition, social relations. prompted many previous proponents of global these transformational visions generally have yet social market policies to wonder whether any to indicate in adequate detail both the nature of market-centered approach to global governance the alternative that they offer and the process can deliver a good society. Can an economistic by which the proposed change will be attained. vision ever adequately encompass the cultural, Without such specifications it is difficult to as- ecological, political, and psychological dimen- sess carefully the attractions and detractions sions of human livelihoods? Are there not inher- of the respective prescriptions. A sketchy and ent tensions between capitalism (with its logic uncertain path is also unlikely to attract a large of accumulation) and distributive justice that and lasting constituency. Indeed, the transfor- market forces cannot resolve, and on the con- mations envisioned for these post-capitalist fu- trary often exacerbate? Likewise, is there not an tures may be so far-reaching as to be beyond underlying inconsistency between ecological in- realization within the next generation. tegrity and capitalism’s subordination of nature If market-centrism is unacceptable, and if to surplus accumulation? Do liberty and democ- transformational formulae are for the long run, racy not entail more than freedom to choose in a more precisely plotted and more practicable a global marketplace? Does global solidarity not alternative for the medium term may lie in a involve more than an occasional charitable mon- paradigm of global social and ecological democ- etary donation to anonymous casualties? racy. Such a normative framework for global gov- Such searching questions have prompted ernance builds upon Western , some critics of market-centered globalization with its emphasis on maximizing justice within to adopt an anti-capitalist position (Bircham and capitalism through collectively determined pro- Charlton 2001; Broad 2002; Kingsnorth 2003). gressive redistribution (Held 2004). However, as For instance, global socialists have suggested envisioned here a global social and ecological that class-based emancipation struggles on a democracy for the twenty-first century subjects planetary scale could generate a post-capitalist traditional social democratic principles to an mode of production based on distributive justice ecological reinterpretation and an intercultural and solidarity. Radical feminists have similarly renegotiation. The resulting policy frame is more advocated reconstructing globalization on the holistic and has greater traction across the vari- basis of a care ethic (both towards “the other” ous world regions beyond the West. and towards nature) and logics of mutual giving. With a priority concern fairly to share the Other critics—variously called poststructural- fruits of globally operating capitalism, global ists, postmodernists, and postcolonialists—have social and ecological democracy would entail advocated a reorientation of globalization away substantial, systematic, and firmly institution- from economistic materialism towards greater alized measures of progressive redistribution of attention to the cultural of identity and global resources. To promote greater equity the knowledge. Deep ecologists, animal liberation current order of market-centrism has offered lit- movements, and aboriginal epistemologies have tle more than (limited) , (slow) in their several ways emphasized the need for a debt cancellation, and (belated) clampdowns comprehensive overhaul of society-nature rela- on offshore finance. With such a laissez faire tions at the heart of today’s more global world. approach, the global Gini co-efficient has re- Religious revivalists have urged that a good mained somewhere in the region of 65, higher (more global) society depends on a redirection than household inequality in every country on

140 THE MULTIPLE FACES OF GLOBALIZATION

128-145_PAL.indd 140 19/11/09 19:35:38 Earth except Namibia, and far higher than the together, these various steps would amount to range of 25–35 that prevails for most countries a far-reaching reconstruction of democracy for a in Europe (Sutcliffe 2002; Milanovic 2005; CIA more global world. 2009). To achieve a more even transplanetary Yet ambitious reforms in the areas of dis- allocation of benefits and opportunities would tributive justice and democracy would not by require a substantial reconstruction of existing themselves suffice to advance a good more glob- global rules (e.g., regarding credit access and al society in the decades to come. To remain intellectual property) and regulatory institutions standing, the stool of contemporary global gover- (e.g., the IMF and the WTO). It would in addi- nance needs a third ecological leg that has equal tion demand the introduction of new governance length and strength with the other two. National agencies such as a Global Investment Agency social democracy of the twentieth century must (inter alia to apply competition policies on a be reinvented as global social and ecological de- planetary scale) and a Global Mobility Organi- mocracy for the twenty-first century. Such a re- zation (to provide transparent and fair rules of orientation would entail, for example, that every intercontinental migration). Global distributive global public policy is thoroughly assessed on its justice would also be furthered with the applica- implications for conditions of life on Earth: in tion of progressive taxes on global activities that the atmosphere, the , the geosphere, have so far disproportionately benefited wealthy and the hydrosphere. Within national govern- circles, such as currency transactions, securi- ments ecology ministries would rise to a par of ties trade, air travel, and Internet use. Revenue priority and power with economy and finance from these charges, collected and distributed departments. In place of the small and margin- through a Global Tax Authority, could go particu- alized Environment Programme larly towards welfare enhancement in currently (UNEP), a Global Ecological Organization (GEO) disadvantaged quarters. would be created with equivalent stature to the Needless to say, extreme care would be need- IMF and the WTO. A GEO would inter alia fa- ed to ensure that this greater global distributive cilitate global strategies on matters such as cli- justice through expanded global regulatory in- mate change and biodiversity loss. It would also stitutions was achieved in democratic ways. Al- elevate renewable energy to a top global public ready current market-centered global governance policy priority and oversee the global disposal of suffers from severe shortfalls in democracy, and toxic wastes. Meanwhile various redistributive the introduction of new regulatory arrangements global taxes (e.g., on carbon emissions and trade should be an occasion to correct this situation, in forest products) would likewise be operated not make it worse. Greater democracy in global with the enhancement of ecological integrity as governance could be partly achieved through a foremost concern. better use of existing mechanisms for public A second headline quality that would distin- participation and control. Thus improvements guish global social and ecological democracy could be had in respect of information disclo- from its antecedents is constructive intercul- sure, parliamentary oversight, judicial processes, turality. The governance of global affairs de- journalistic enquiry, and civil society engage- veloped to date has been heavily centered on ment. Global democracy would also benefit from Western life-worlds. These frames of knowledge increased attention to citizen learning and public and action certainly have much to commend debate about globalization and its governance, them, but they far from exhaust the stores of so that affected people become better equipped human wisdom and innovation in regard to the to assess global circumstances and take more eight primary values of a good society set out informed decisions on global policy matters. In earlier. On the contrary, Western traditions ar- addition, of global governance guably could learn much from other life-worlds, would require substantial institutional reforms particularly on matters of ecological integrity, to ensure that all constituencies are equitably solidarity and intercultural ethics. Yet Western heard. On the one hand this would mean in- cultures have in the past often shown indiffer- creased say in global policy processes for smaller ence to otherness, with an aversion even to ac- and weaker countries. On the other hand it would knowledge, let alone explore, diversity. Instead also mean more voice for currently marginalized colonial and post-colonial Western intercultural circles that constitute themselves on non-nation- politics have tended towards imperialistic sup- al and non-territorial lines, such as Dalits, dis- pressions of non-Western life-worlds. Old-style abled persons, faith groups, and peasants. Taken social democracy, too, carries unhappy historical

Governing a more global world Jan Aart Scholte 141

128-145_PAL.indd 141 23/11/09 14:58:13 baggage in respect of intercultural relations, hav- ing the more global world of the twenty-first cen- ing more or less assumed that the “advanced” tury has raised in a new light age-old normative West would lead the route to human progress questions regarding the good society and how and “less developed” others should submissively maximally to promote such core values as cul- and gratefully follow. tural vibrancy, democracy, distributive justice, Global social and ecological democracy would ecological integrity, individual liberty, material provide an occasion to alter this long-standing well-being, moral decency, and solidarity. pattern of (often violent) Western unilateralism. Building effective and legitimate polycentric In this alternative path of globalization, prin- governance to further a good more global soci- ciples of social justice, ecological vibrancy, and ety has become an ever more urgent task. The democracy would evolve through intercultural cultural, ecological, economic, political, and practices marked by mutual recognition, dialogic psychological challenges of contemporary glo- communication, reciprocal learning, and respect- balization run very deep, to the point of creat- ful negotiation of differences. With such ethics of ing something akin to permanent and pervasive “pluriversality,” multiple life-worlds would peace- crisis. Global finance has fuelled continual eco- fully cohabit in a single global social arena. This nomic implosions since the 1980s. Global dis- constructive interculturality would not only gen- eases have provoked one panic after another over erate many sorely needed policy innovations, but the same period. Global scares of food shortages, also—by acknowledging, accommodating, and energy cut-offs, nuclear proliferation, and terror- promoting diversity—secure greater legitimacy ism have further embedded insecurity into the for global governance across the many affected heart of daily life. Global demographic trends communities. Thus, as envisioned here, global and global ecological changes are simmering social and ecological democracy would entail a crises of the longer term. full-scale recalibration of identity politics, where It is therefore imperative to understand how cultural diversity shifts from being a source of a more global world can be governed. This task division and fear to grounds for codependence is both analytical (in terms of mapping how with solidarity in a more global society. polycentric governance operates) and normative To be sure, the above ideas and instruments (in terms of elaborating value frames to guide of global social and ecological democracy re- global public policy). The further challenge is quire more elaboration than can be undertaken then to interlink analytical and normative knowl- in the present short essay. In addition, much edge in ways that promote effective and legiti- careful reflection is needed in respect of politi- mate global governance practice. This chapter cal strategies to realize the vision. Certainly this has suggested that none of the main policy par- ambitious reform agenda would face consider- adigms tried to date—neoliberalism, neomer- able skepticism, if not determined opposition, cantilism, and the global social market—has particularly from powerfully placed circles that come close to delivering a good society. More have drawn disproportionate benefit from the ambitious innovations of governance—in the past decades of market-centered globalization. direction of a global social and ecological de- These advantaged groups would need to be per- mocracy—are therefore required. suaded that global social and ecological democ- Cynics will of course dismiss such ambitions racy offered them a better society as well. The as “utopian” and “impracticable,” and certainly debate will (and must) continue. it would require a large-scale and extended po- litical struggle to realize them. Yet who in the Conclusion 1920s imagined that a comprehensive welfare state could be constructed by the 1940s? Who This essay has presented contemporary global- in the 1940s imagined that large-scale decolo- ization as an epochal transformation of social nization could occur across Asia and Africa by geography in which transplanetary connections the 1960s? Who in the 1960s imagined that the among people have become qualitatively more Cold could end in the 1980s? Who in the numerous, wide-ranging, frequent, speedy, in- 1980s imagined that the Internet would be so tense, and influential than ever before. This central to society twenty years later? On this re- far-reaching respatialization of social life has cord the construction of global social and eco- unfolded hand in hand with a major reconfigura- logical democracy over the medium term might tion of governance: away from statist regulation prove quite feasible once citizens are possessed and towards polycentric arrangements. Govern- of the need to act.

142 THE MULTIPLE FACES OF GLOBALIZATION

128-145_PAL.indd 142 23/11/09 14:58:13 BIBLIOGRAPHY Akihiko, T. The New Middle Ages: The World Keane, J. Global Civil Society? Cambridge: System in the 21st Century. : Inter- Cambridge University Press, 2003. national House of Japan, 2002. Khan, L.A. The of Nation-States: A Bello, W. : Ideas for a New World World without Borders. The Hague: Klu- Economy. 2nd ed. London: Zed, 2004. wer Law International, 1996. BGD. Website of the Building Global Democ- Kingsbury, B.W., and N. Krisch, eds. “Sym- racy program. Available at www.building posium on Global Governance and Global globaldemocracy.org, accessed on Sep- Administrative Law in the International tember 28, 2009. Legal Order,” European Journal of Inter- Bhagwati, J.N. In Defense of Globalization. national Law, vol. 17 (2006): 1–278. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Kingsnorth, P. One No, Many Yeses: A Jour- Bircham, E., and J. Charlton, eds. Anti-Cap- ney to the Heart of the Global Resistance italism: A Guide to the Movement. Lon- Movement. London: Free Press, 2003. don: Bookmarks, 2001. Legrain, P. Open World: The Truth about Glo- Broad, R., ed. Global Backlash: Citizen Initia- balization. Chicago: Dee, 2004. tives for a Just . Lanham, Milanovic, B. Worlds Apart: Measuring Global MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002. and . Princeton: Cerny, P.G. “Plurilateralism: Structural Dif- Princeton University Press, 2005. ferentiation and Functional Conflict in the O’Brien, R., A.M. Goetz, J.A. Scholte and M. Post-Cold War World Order,” Millennium, Williams. Contesting Global Governance: vol. 22, no. 1 (Spring 1993): 27–51. Multilateral Economic Institutions and CIA. ‘Distribution of Family Income—Gini In- Global Social Movements. Cambridge: dex’, in The World Factbook. Available at Cambridge University Press, 2000. www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world- Reinicke, W.H. “The Other World Wide Web: factbook/fields/2172.html, accessed on Global Public Policy Networks,” Foreign Pol- October 3, 2009. icy, no. 117 (Winter 1999–2000): 44–57. Cutler, A.C., V. Haufler, and T. Porter, eds. Rodrik, D. The Global Governance of Trade Private Authority in International Affairs. as if Development Really Mattered. New Albany, NY: State University of New York York: United Nations Development Pro- Press, 1999. gramme, 2001. Davis, G. World Government, Ready or Not! Scholte, J.A. Globalization: A Critical Intro- Sorrento, ME: Juniper Ledge, 1984. duction. 2nd ed., Basingstoke: Palgrave Enderlein, H., S. Wälti, and M. Zürn, eds. Macmillan, 2005. Handbook on Multilevel Governance. Chel- —. “Reconstructing Contemporary Democra- tenham: Elgar, forthcoming. cy,” Indiana Journal of Global Legal Stud- Fisher, W., and T. Ponniah, eds. Another World ies, vol. 15, no. 1 (Winter 2008): 305–50. Is Possible: Popular Alternatives to Global- Shiva, V. Earth Democracy: Justice, Sustain- ization at the . London: ability, and Peace. Cambridge, MA: South Zed, 2003. End Press, 2005. Friedrichs, J. “The Neomedieval Renaissance: Slaughter, A.-M. A New World Order. Princ- Global Governance and International Law eton: Princeton University Press, 2004. in the New Middle Ages,” in I. F. Dekker Stiglitz, J. Globalization and Its Discontents. and W. G. Wouter, eds., Governance and New York: Norton, 2002. International Legal Theory. Dordrecht: —. More Instruments and Broader Goals: Mov- Kluwer, 2004, 3–36. ing toward the Post-Washington Consen- Grande, E., and L.W. Pauly, eds. Complex sus. Helsinki: United Nations University, Sovereignty: Reconstituting Political Au- World Institute for Development Econom- thority in the Twenty-First Century. Toron- ics Research, 1998. to: University of Press, 2005. Strange, S. The Retreat of the State: The Diffu- Graz, J.-C. and A. Nölke, eds. Transnational sion of Power in the World Economy. Cam- Private Governance and Its Limits. Lon- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. don: Routledge, 2008. Sutcliffe, B. A More of Less Unequal World? Hänggi, H., R. Roloff and J. Rüland, eds. In- World Income Distribution in the 20th Cen- terregionalism and International Relations. tury. Bilbao: Universidad del Pais Vasco, London: Routledge, 2006. Hegoa, Working Paper No. 31, 2002. Held, D. Global Covenant: The Social Demo- Vieira, A. Interview by the author with Sec- cratic Alternative to the Washington Con- retary General of the Grupo de Trabalho sensus. Cambridge: Polity, 2004. Amazônico (Amazon Working Group), in ———., and A. McGrew. Globalization/Anti- Manaus, August 17, 2005. Globalization: Beyond the Great Divide. Wolf, M. Why Globalization Works. New Ha- 2nd ed., Cambridge: Polity, 2007. ven, CT: Press, 2004.

ANTONI MUNTADAS Ω ALMERÍA-BUDAPEST/ LISBOA-BOGOTÁ, 1998-2oo6

Governing a more global world Jan Aart Scholte 143

128-145_PAL.indd 143 19/11/09 19:35:39