16 Globalization and Global Governance

Michael Zürn

INTRODUCTION and globalization research. On the one hand, the notion of globalization differs from that The literatures on interdependence in the of interdependence in that it refers to qualita• 1970s and more recently on globalization tively different conditions. Whereas the reveal remarkable similarities, of which two notion of interdependence refers to a grow• are especially striking.' The first is that the ing sensitivity and vulnerability between interest in both interdependence and globali• separate units, globalization refers to the zation can be seen as an expression of a merging of units (Section 2). This also affects "poorly understood but widespread feeling the causal mechanisms which lead to politi• that the very nature of world politics is cal change (Section 3). Therefore, a reassess• changing" (Keohane and Nye, Jr., 2000: ment of those propositions about political 104). The second is that both concepts never effects made by both interdependence and reached the status of a sound theory of world globalization literature is called for (Section 4). politics. While most users of these concepts On the other hand, to the extent that the realize that they challenge conventional theo• notion of globalization refers to much more ries of world politics and in a sense created than just interdependence between distinct new research agendas in International Rela• units, the propositions about change in world tions, endeavors to formulate an interdepend• politics go much further in the current debate ence or globalization theory of international on global governance (Section 5). They indi• relations have so far not succeeded. cate the need for a theory of world politics Not least because of these commonalities, that re-evaluates the notion of distinct territo• the more recent literature on globalization is rial units - be they ontologically given as confronted with questions such as "What's in Realism or socially constructed as in New?". In this contribution, I want to emphasize Constructivism - as theoretical buildings two differences between interdependence blocks (Section 6). 402 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

THE INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: Globalization and societal DIFFERENT FORMS OF denationalization INTERCONNECTEDNESS AND SOCIAL SPACES Globalization goes further than interdepend• ence. Richard Cooper (1986: 1) argues that Interdependence "the internationalized economy of the 1960s was characterized by a sensitivity of eco• Dependence, in its most general form, can nomic transactions between two or more be described as a situation in which a nations to economic developments within system is contingent upon external forces. those nations". By contrast, the process of Interdependence in the social sciences economic globalization describes a move• describes a situation of mutual dependence ment towards one integrated world market in between social actors. Thus defined, inter• which "buyers and sellers are in such free dependence relates to specific kinds of intercourse with one another that the prices actions in specific issue-areas (see Morse, of the same goods tend to equality easily and 1976:118). Based on the distinction between quickly" (Cooper, 1986: 71). This distinction the types of social actors that figure as between an internationalized economy and external forces, interdependence in interna• the global integration of markets can be tional relations can be due to two factors. taken pars pro toto. When generalized to all On the one hand, nation states and national societal relations, it points to the most impor• societies are dependent upon the activities tant difference between interdependence and of other states (state interdependence). In globalization. Globalization thus describes a this sense, states have been dependent upon process in which the world moves toward an each other at least since the Westphalian integrated global society and the significance system of states emerged (Bull, 1977). of national borders decreases. It thus calls National security has always been depend• into question the distinction between domes• ent upon the decisions of governments in tic and foreign relations. In this view, the neighboring states - for instance, whether living conditions of people and local com• or not to wage war. On the other hand, the munities have changed through globaliza• effects of given actions by a government tion; distant events of all sorts have immediate may depend on societal developments that consequences not only for states but for indi• take place outside of its jurisdiction (soci• viduals' daily lives (Rosenau, 1990: 78; etal interdependence). For instance, the Holm and S0rensen, 1995: 4-5; Hirst and development of national economies cannot Thompson, 1996: 7; Held et al., 1999: ch. 1). be understood without taking into account This notion of globalization refers to a meas• what happens elsewhere. Social intercon- urable process of social change which, in nectedness can lead to quite different forms turn, may or may not have causal effects on of societal interdependence. While there political developments. Globalization is thus are countless distinctions made in the lit• neither identical with nor does it necessarily erature (see, e.g., Baldwin, 1980; Caporaso, lead to the extension of political space and 1978; Senghaas, 1994; De Wilde, 1991), global governance. Nor does it necessitate the most consequential distinction is the the formation of a world society2 or trans• one between "sensitivity interdependence", national identities.3 defined in terms of mutual effects, and As opposed to globalization, the term "vulnerability interdependence", defined in "interdependence" refers to a condition. In terms of the opportunity costs of disrupting this context, it is helpful to contrast the terms the relationship (Keohane and Nye, Jr., "interdependence" and "globalism" (Keohane 1977: 12-15), and Nye, Jr., 2000: 104). The data however GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 403 does not justify the use of the term globalism. relative to transactions that take place within Globalism may only be appropriate to sketch a national territory (see Deutsch and Eck• some exceptional cases such as the financial stein, 1961; Rosecrance and Stein, 1973; markets and some global dangers, but it is Rosecrance et al., 1977; Katzenstein, 1975; inappropriate for most other fields. Moreover, Hirst and Thompson, 1996; Garrett, 1998b; in some areas a process toward globalism, that Reinicke, 1998; Beisheim et al., 1999; Held is, globalization as a process leading to global et al., 1999). In the words of K.W. Deutsch societal spaces, does not seem to be taking (1969: 99), borders of national societies dis• place at all. Most importantly, regionalization solve when there is no more critical reduc• under the umbrella of American dominance is tion in the frequency of social transactions. a process running in parallel to globalization The objection raised now and again by (Katzenstein, 2005). Generally speaking, the economists to this approach to measurement context of globalization has fostered regionali• is that by observing these transactions, little zation mainly as a result of new regional agree• can be said about real interdependence or, for ments such as the European Single Market, the that matter, globalization. For instance, North American Free Trade Agreement changes in flow values may be due to market (NAFTA), and the establishment of the ASEAN volatility, that is, changes in the attractive• charter (Mansfield and Milner, 1997). ness of economic locations, and perfectly Against this background, the term "soci• integrated spaces may even be characterized by etal denationalization" (Habermas, 1998; lower flow values (see Garrett, 1998a: ch. 3). Sassen, 1998; Ztirn, 1995) seems to be more For this reason, economists often propose the appropriate. The question is then whether analysis of transaction costs and convergent intensified transboundary societal interac• prices, which they claim more closely tions at an already relatively high level sig• approximate the theoretical conception of nify a further decline in the importance of integrated spaces (Frankel, 1993; Garrett, nationally defined borders. The condition of 1998a). For instance, average prices for air a society can be described as denationalized travel with American airlines dropped from when transactions within national borders are around 45 cents in 1929, to about 14 cents in no denser than transnational transactions.4 The 1960 to about 4 cents per mile in 2009 (http:// term societal denationalization - as a pro• www.airlines.org/economics/finance/ cess - thus has the advantage that it defines a PaPricesYield.htm); international telecom• starting point (national society) of the pro• munication costs have sunk by about 8% per cess but leaves the end point indeterminate. year since the late 1960s (Zacher with Sutton, Moreover, if cases can be singled out that 1996: 129). show a clear trend toward globalization, Nevertheless, direct measurement of trans• there is no problem in interpreting them as actions is necessary in order to determine the special instances of a more general trend level of globalization from a political science toward societal denationalization. Seen thus, point of view. First, it is by no means certain the transboundary pollution of the Rhine is that low transaction costs are a more reliable just as much a phenomenon of societal dena• indication of integrated social spaces than the tionalization as global wanning, although intensification of transactions. A reduction in only the latter is genuinely global.5 the price of international phone calls, for instance, tells us much less about trans• boundary communication than an actual Measurement increase in phone calls. It is not the technical facilitation of communication, but communi• The interconnectedness of societies can be mea• cation itself that constitutes the relevant sured by the rise of transboundary transactions social action. Second, the argument that 404 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

perfectly integrated spaces do not necessarily other capital flows, but also human mobility, the show evidence of increased transactions is volume of transborder information and commu• theoretically correct, yet of little practical nication, and the exchange of cultural products significance. There are in effect no perfect, (Beisheim et al., 1999: 39-320). This surge led to the use of the term globalization. In most areas, totally stable markets, but only approxima• the level of Interconnectedness today clearly tions. Real-world approximations such as surpasses the levels of 1914. national markets are indeed characterized • Many social transactions today transcend by extremely high transaction flows. national borders, but neither are they global Furthermore, if transaction flows are monito• nor can a general tendency toward glebality red over longer periods, temporary volatili• be observed. Rather, boundaries of new social ties should be negligible as random noise spaces are becoming visible at the periphery of created by periodic political events and spas• the OECD world. This Is particularly evident in modic competitive shifts. Third, the meas• the economic sphere. Transborder trade primarily urement of transaction costs is technically takes place within the three large trade blocks of the EU/EFTA, NAFTA, and ASEAN. This is fol• very problematic, especially if specific lowed by trade between the large trade blocks, national differences are taken into considera• with only a small share finally left for the rest of tion. As a result, when it comes to operation- the world. Communication flows indicate a simi• alization, researchers who for theoretical lar concentration on a relatively small number., reasons opt for measuring transaction costs of countries (see, e.g., http://www. internetworld ultimately have to resort to measuring the stats.com/stats.htm). transactions themselves. As Keohane and • Substantial cross-national differences in market Milner (1996: 4), for example, put it: "An integration remain even in the OECD-world (see exogenous reduction in the costs of interna• Garrett, 1998b). The levels of market integration tional transactions (...) can be empirically are significantly higher in smaller countries than measured by the growth in the proportion of in larger ones. Moreover, a comparison of larger international economic flows relative to economies (G7), which takes into account more domestic ones." than just economic indicators, reveals that the integration of the British and American society Against this background, empirical studies into world society is higher for most Indicators on levels of interdependence and globaliza• than in other G8 countries (see, e.g., http://www. tion can be summarized as follows (see atkearney.com/index.php/Publications/globaliza also http://globalization.kof.ethz.ch/, and tlon-index.html). Baldwin, 2006). • The level of globalization varies also signifi• cantly between different fields and Issues. While • Early propositions about decreasing interde• the proportion of transborder postal deliveries, pendence among highly industrialized countries cross-border phone calls, and foreign direct (Deutsch and Eckstein, 1961) and between great investments, to name but a few indicators, is still powers (Waltz, 1979) proved, at least in their below 10% in all G7 countries, the share of for• generalized versions, to be wrong. While it is eign trade, foreign air travel, foreign e-mails, and, correct that levels of economic interdependence the consumption of foreign culture is often above were lower in the 1950s and 1960s than in the 50% (Beisheim et al., 1999: 39-320). decades prior to 1929, economic interdepend• • A new development is the common transbound- ence grew again in the industrialized world in ary production of goods and bads (as opposed the decades after World War If (Katzenstein, to transboundary exchange of goods), which 1975; Rosecrance and Stein, 1973; Rosecrance took off in the mid-1980s. The Internet, interna• et al., 1977). tional crime, global climate change, and other • The latter part of the 1980s and most of the global environmental dangers as well as the 1990s brought a sharp Increase transborder global financial markets can be seen as such phe• transactions (any activity of social actors reach• nomena. In these cases, transborder exchanges , ing beyond national boundaries) in many areas become so dense and in effect produce a new such as trade, foreign direct Investments and quality in the global space, so that references . GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 405

to de-territorialization or even de-borderization UN-registered international agreements grew (Agnew and Duncan, 1989; Harvey, 1989; Brock from a total of 8,776 treaties in 1960 to and Albert, 1995; Appadurai, 1996; Albert, 1996) 63,419 as of March 25, 2010. If we consider are most pertinent. only the most important multilateral agree• ments officially drawn up and countersigned WHAT DO INTERDEPENDENCE AND in the UN, then we obtain a comparable level of growth, namely, from 484 such agree• GLOBALIZATION EXPLAIN? ments in 1969 to 1873 in 2010. The increase in international agreements is accompanied Having described the changes in the inde• by a growing intensity of transgovernmental pendent variables and the discussion of the relations (Slaughter, 1997). The rise of inter• causal mechanisms, the question now arises national agreements and more intense trans- which effects really take place. In this sec• governmental relations are the components tion, I shall discuss two hypothesized effects of a second strategy for peace emphasized (dependent variables) that are ascribed to by interdependence theorists: "peace through both growing interdependence and globaliza• international organization." tion (as independent variables). The current globalization literature is remarkably tacit on the issue of international Peace and cooperation peace and security. Relevant statements are mostly of a very general nature. By empha• The promise of early interdependence theo• sizing the pressures that globalization puts on rists was nothing less than "peace." Sir authoritarian states to foster liberalization, Norman Angell (1969) and Ramsey Muir however, some writers - more implicitly than (1932) emphasized the reduction of differ• explicitly - have also connected globaliza• ence and the convergence of interests as tion with the third peace strategy identified mechanisms through which rising interde• by Czempiel (1986): the 'democratization' of pendence would directly, though uninten• authoritarian societies ("peace through tionally, change world politics (see De Wilde, democracy"; see especially the literature on 1991). Czempiel (1986) elegantly framed diffusion of Western norms, e.g., Simmons this kind of thinking in terms of "peace et al. 2006 and Chapter 18 by Gilardi in this through trade" as one of the three most volume). In this sense, globalization may be important peace strategies at hand. Empirical helpful in supporting three processes that studies have shown, however, that the pacify• are conducive to the absence of war between ing effects of trade depend on the symmetry states. These are the direct effects of the and the extent of the ensuing interdepen• reduction of difference (a diminished role for dence and other factors (Barbieri, 1996; the armed forces) and convergence of inter• Dorussen, 1999; Polachek et al„ 1999; Reu- ests (economic interests in maintaining rela• veny and Kang, 1998; Gartzke, 2007; see tionships), that is, peace through trade; a also Chapter 23 by Jack Levy and Chapter 29 liberalization of society brought about by the by Helen Milner in this volume). pressure to improve efficiency (peace through The role of international institutions has democracy); and the strengthening of interna• been enhanced over the past three decades tional institutions as a political response (peace more or less in parallel to the rise of interde• through international organization) (Russett pendence. While the number of international and Oneal, 2001; see also Chapter 23 by Levy organizations, which is only a very rough in this volume). The evolving patterns resem• measure of the development of international ble what Karl Deutsch once described as the governance, has remained more or less con• conditions and the processes leading to a plu• stant since the 1990s (see Shanks et al., 1996; ralistic security community (Deutsch et al., Pevehouse et al., 2004), the number of 1957; Adler and Barnett, 1998). 406 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

The association of peace with globaliza• interdependence. With the growing interde• tion must be qualified for several reasons. pendence of national markets, so the argu• First, it applies only to those areas in the ment goes, growing numbers of national world in which interconnectedness is highly policies no longer work. Empirical studies on prevalent and in which the effect of smaller the effect of economic interdependence, differences is accompanied by the rise of however, did not support this expectation. On international institutions and liberal socie• the contrary, work on the national adaptation ties. Second, only figures in the category of to external economic challenge's demon• "interstate wars" have clearly declined, while strated convincingly that domestic structures intra-state or civil wars have been trans• are decisive for an understanding of national formed (see also Chapter 26 by Walter in this political responses (see Cameron, 1978; volume). The number of intrastate conflicts Gourevitch, 1978; Katzenstein, 1978/1985). has risen steadily since the beginning of Quite contrary to the original hypothesis, the Cold War, coming to a peak in the mid- this literature was instrumental in bringing 1990s. Since then, civil wars have also the state back into (Anglo-Saxon) political declined significantly (Human Security science (Evans et al., 1985). Centre, 2005; Chojnacki, 2006). While the Nevertheless, Cooper's analysis has expe• rise of societal interdependence and new rienced a revival in the age of globalization, social spaces may indeed have reduced the Most of the early literature on the effects capacity of the nation state to mobilize people of globalization took up the argument and for interstate wars, this does not imply a diagnosed "the end of the social democratic decline in general willingness to participate era" (Scharpf, 1987), the "retreat of the state" in instances of organized collective violence. (Strange, 1996), a "race to the bottom" as Societal denationalization has also created well as the "competition of the obsessed" new opportunities for organized collective (Krugman, 1995), a "competition state" violence. Most importantly, the rise of trans• (Hirsch, 1995), a "Schumpeterian work- national economies of violence which keep fare" state (Jessop, 1994), or a "residual civil wars alive (Pugh and Cooper, 2004; state" (Cerny, 1996). Common to these early Le Billon and Nicholls, 2007), transnational studies is the notion that efficiency pressures, terrorism (Enders and Sandler, 2006; congruence problems and, above all, problems Scnneckener, 2006), and transnational net• of competitiveness induce a rapid deteriora• works of weapons proliferation (Corera, tion in the effectiveness of national regula• 2006) have created new opportunities and tions. As a result, the state retreats and gives lead to the introduction of a new concept to way to economic and social deregulation. understand collective violence in the age of A number of prominent contributions globalization: "new wars" (Kaldor, 1999/ claimed, however, that the often-feared race 2006). Partially as a response to new wars, a to the bottom did not materialize for several growing willingness of the international com• reasons. First, higher levels of economic munity most often authorized by the United openness increase the demand for policies Nations Security Council to intervene in such to buffer the less desirable effects of world wars can be observed (Zangl and Ziirn, market integration. According to this com• 2003). pensation hypothesis, social policies and state interventions should be seen not only as cost-intensive burdens for efficient produc• Deregulation and convergence tion, but also as a form of risk insurance in the face of increased economic openness The growing ineffectiveness of national poli• (Garrett, 1998a; Rieger and Leibfried, 1997; cies was the major theme of Richard Cooper's Rodrik, 1997). Moreover, new growth theory (1968) contribution on the economics of suggested that many state interventions are GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 407 economically efficient, even and especially cannot be equated with an absence of con• in times of global competition (Krugman, straints. Case studies on current political 1994; Barro, 1996). In addition, it was argued processes in many welfare states show that that under certain circumstances, integrated constraints imposed on social policies are markets may even trigger a race to the top strongly felt and translate into difficult com• (Vogel, 1995) and hence higher levels of promises (Seeleib-Kaiser, 2000). For exam• economic interdependence and globalization ple, it can be shown that tax competition did may well lead to more rather than less state not cause a decrease in tax revenue but led to intervention, Finally, political scientists held important changes in the structure of national that the way external challenges are politi• tax systems. In general, the tax burden was cally mediated is still the single most impor• shifted from mobile to immobile businesses tant factor for understanding national policies. and from capital to labor and consumption The mediation process is determined by a (Genschel, 2002; Ganghof, 2006; Rixen and number of different, mainly institutional Rohlfing, 2007; Swank, 2006). factors (Kitschelt et al., 1999; Vogel, 1996; At the same time, some movements toward Weiss, 1998). Therefore, different varieties deregulation have been shown. Studies focus• of capitalism may choose different strategies ing on specific policy areas demonstrated a of adaption and in this even lead to a further strong convergent trend toward deregulation. divergence of regulation (Hall and Soskice, Deregulation in the postal and telecommuni• 2001). The evidence produced in these first cation services is a strong case in point. It waves of studies clearly demonstrated that thus seems necessary to focus much more on prominent convergence or deregulation trends issue-area differences in order to understand did not exist in the 1990s. The level of state the dynamics triggered by globalization (see expenditures did not go down in parallel to Bernauer, 2000: ch. 8; Scharpf, 1999: ch. 3; the rise of economic interdependence and Lee and Strang 2006; Hopner and Schafer, globalization, nor could clear convergence 2007). Moreover, globalization has led to a processes be observed (see Bernauer, 2000 general and significant increase of inequality for an excellent overview). within developed market economies. If the These findings have, however, also been distribution of wealth is looked at from a subject to criticism, and newer studies cast global perspective, however, inequality did doubt on these early conclusions for a number not increase (Atkinson and Brandolini, 2010; of reasons. First, the 1990s studies looked at Bergh and Nilsson, 2008; Dreher and Gaston, a relative short time period after the new 2006), largely due to the rise of income in thrust of globalization set in. More recent China (Wade, 2004). studies show that that state expenditures have In sum, more recent studies on the effects indeed gone down to some extent (Busemeyer, of globalization have shown that a trend 2009; Elkins et al., 2006; Höpner and Schäfer, toward convergent deregulation has taken 2007; but see also Bergh and Karlsson, 2010; place to some extent, yet much less clear Dreher et al., 2008). Second, it has been than originally expected and very much con• convincingly argued that looking at actual ditional on a number of scope conditions. expenditure levels is a bad indicator. The Nevertheless, the competitive pressure on more relevant indicator would be individual nation state policy can hardly be overlooked entitlements for social benefits. While, for and shows some effects. Additional evidence instance, the level of unemployment expen• in that respect is provided by studies that diture did grow, the amount of money examine how societal denationalization received by the individual beneficiaries affects political processes as opposed to dropped in almost all G7 countries (Pierson, political outcomes. Such an examination of 1996; Anderson and Pontusson, 2001). More• "the politics of denationalization" looks at over, the absence of convergence processes the changes of those political institutions and 408 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS struggles that produce national policies rather denationalized problems or providing tran• than at the policies itself (see Burgoon, 2009; snational common goods. The entirety of Quinn and Toyoda, 2007; Ziirn and Walter, regulations includes the processes by which 2005). norms, rules, and programs are monitored, Research with a focus on peace and coop• enforced, and adapted, as well as the struc• eration or on convergence and deregulation tures in which they work. Governance activi• as functions of increasing societal denation• ties are justified with reference to the common alization - with the possible exception on the good, but they do not necessarily serve literature of new wars - never fundamentally it. Global governance points to those sets challenged the theory of international rela• of regulation which address denationalized tions. It essentially builds on given assump• problems.that is, problems which reach tions, for instance, that national societies beyond national borders. are separable units and that state executives This concept of global governance has are agents who act rationally in the name two important implications. To begin with, of their principals. In this sense, they were by distinguishing governance structure from never intended to culminate in a globaliza• contents and actors, it becomes obvious that tion theory (writ large) of world politics. governance beyond the nation-state is possi• They did, however, have a theoretical impact ble, although a central authority or a 'world in that they constituted a serious challenge state' equipped with a legitimate monopoly to Realism on a number of counts. Since the of the use of force is currently lacking emergence of interdependence, research in (Rosenau, 1992). Moreover, by requiring international politics can no longer be reduced a common goods-oriented justification of to the study of security and military issues, of norms and rules, the concept of global gov• peace and war. World politics today is much ernance also refers to a certain quality of more than that. Moreover, interdependence international regulation. Accordingly, inter• research brought nonstate actors and, above national cooperation includes more than just all, international institutions to the fore. simple coordination between states to achieve a modus vivendi of interaction. Rather, inter• national regulation often aims actively at achieving normatively laden political goals GLOBAL GOVERNANCE: THE DEEPER in handling common problems of the interna• EFFECTS OF GLOBALIZATION tional community. In this sense, governance presupposes some common interests and There is hardly a modern political institution goal orientations beyond the nation-state, at which is not allegedly challenged, trans• least in a rudimentary form, without - of formed, or undermined by globalization. course - denying the persistence of funda• Globalization is not only said to be curbing mental conflicts. the autonomy of nation states and enforcing In addition to the study of international a convergence of national policies, but also cooperation, the analysis of global govern• disabling democracy and with it the legiti• ance thus also raises issues such as trans• macy of national political systems, altering national participation and transnational the nature of sovereignty and thus ultimately networks as well as the merging and inter• transforming the fundamental structures of play of political institutions that once were international politics from an anarchic to a conceived as separable units (Keohane and global governance system (see Rosenau, Nye, Jr., 2000; see also Chapters by Adler, 1997; Zürn, 1998; see also Chapter 10 by Snidal, Risse, and Simmons and Martin in Biersteker in this volume). Global govern• this volume). In this contribution, I want to ance refers to the entirety of regulations put focus therefore on supra- and transnationali- forward with reference to solving specific zation of governance beyond the nation-state, GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 409

the emergence of global multi-level govern• 1998: 67; Hawkins et al., 2006). The author• ance, and the ensuing transformation of ity of international institutions thus points to statehood and its impact on the notion of another feature than the autonomy of interna• democracy as well as critical responses to tional organizations. these developments. So far, none of these To the extent that societal denationaliza• fields of debate and research have come up tion increases, demands for strong interna• with conclusive results, but they do highlight tional institutions on the level beyond the interesting fields of research for the future. nation-state that are able to act even in the presence veto players grow as well. Moreover, to the extent that the density and scope of Supranationalization, international governance grow, demands for transnationalization, and supranationalization and transnationalization decentralization arise. As international governance covers more and more issue-areas, overlaps and col• Supranational and transnational governance lisions between the jurisdictions of interna• undermine the notion of a sovereign state tional regulations and other international in the so-called Westphalian constellation. or national regulations become more likely. Supranationalization describes a process in Supranational bodies are a logical response which international institutions develop pro• to avoid such collisions. Moreover, the more cedures that contradict the consensus princi• international regimes address behind-the- ple and the principle of nonintervention. In border issues (Kahler, 1995), which are espe• this way, some international norms and rules cially difficult to monitor and have significant create obligations for national governments impacts on societal actors, the more the ques• to take measures even when they have not tion of credibility arises. A logical way to agreed to do so. As a result, political author• increase the credibility of commitments is ity shifts partially toward the international to develop supranational bodies that are able level (Kahler and Lake, 2009: 246; see also to decide even when complete consensus Barnett and Finnemore, 2004: 5; Hurd, 2007; does not exist and that monitor regulations Rittberger et al„ 2008: 3; Ruggie, 1998). and resolve conflicts (see Ziirn, 2004). International Institutions have authority when As a result, international institutions states recognize in principle or in practice, possess a new, authority-generating quality their ability to make [...] binding decisions which shows at every stage of the policy on matters relating to a state's domestic juris• cycle. diction, even if those decisions are contrary to a state's own policies and preferences." • First, an increase of majoritarian decision making (Cooper etal., 2008: 505). in international institutions can be observed. Political authority beyond the nation-state Today, roughly two-thirds of all international does not necessarily require autonomous organizations with the participation of at least international organizations. Both, interna• one great power have the possibility to decide tional institutions with an international by a majority of votes by states (see Blake and organization that has been delegated autono• Payton, 2008). This implies that some member mous power to make decisions (e.g., the states in an international institution can be over• International Criminal Court) and interna• ruled. Even if decision by majority is employed far less often than it is formally available for use, tional institutions without such a formal del• it however exerts pressure on veto players and egation of power (e.g., majority decisions in increases their readiness to seek compromise. the UN Security Council) can possess author• • Secondly, monitoring and verification of inter• ity in the defined sense. In the former case, national rules are, likewise, increasingly carried one can speak of delegated authority; the out by actors who are not directly under the latter is a case of pooled authority (Moravcsik, control of states, In this way, the growing need 410 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

for independent actors who process and make communities refers to transnational expertise available information on treaty compliance is networks that shape international negotiations, met. Such information could be provided by especially in the area of environmental politics contracting organizations established as part (see Haas, 1992 and the chapter by Mitchell of a treaty regime's safeguard. Equally Impor• in this volume). Moreover, the set of organiza• tant in this regard is the growing significance tions that evaluate the effectiveness of existing of transnational nongovernmental organizations regulations and place new problem areas on the (NGOs). For example, the monitoring of inter• international agenda has widened in accordance nationally standardized human rights has long with the extent to which the addressees of Inter• been transferred informally to human rights national regulation have become societal actors organizations such as Human Rights Watch (see (Haas and Stevens, 2009). Simmons, 2009 and the chapter by Risse in this volume). The proliferation of transnational NGOs accredited by the United Nation's Economic and In addition, transnational institutions, which Social Council can thus be taken as an indicator are able to partially escape the control of for this development (see http://esango.un.org/ nation-states, have gained in importance. paperless/content/E2009INF4.pdf). Transnationalization of governance refers to • Thirdly, regarding disputed cases of rule interpre• a process in which transnational nonstate tation, we find that there has been a significant actors develop political regulations and activ• increase in international judicial bodies. In 1960, ities without being formally authorized by there were worldwide only 27 quasi-judicial states (Djelic and Sahlin-Andersson, 2009; bodies; by 2004, this number had grown to 97. Pattberg, 2007; see Chapter 17 by Risse in If we narrow the definition and include only this volume). Such regulations are based on those bodies that meet all of the prerequisites for formal judicial proceedings, then only five such the principle of self-governance and create bodies existed worldwide in 1960, climbing to private authority (vgl. Cutler et al., 1999; 28 by 2004 (see http://www.pict-pcti.org/matrix/ Biersteker and Hall, 2002). matrixintro.html; see also Alter, 2009). The rise Overall, a dense network of international of such bodies also Indicates a broader process and transnational institutions has developed of legalization of international institutions (see in recent decades. Many of these institutions Abbott et al., 2000; Zùrn and Joerges, 2005 and are far more intrusive than conventional the chapter by Simmons in this volume). international institutions. With the - most • Concerning rule enforcement, we can observe often consensual - decision to install interna• an increased readiness to levy material sanc• tional institutions, state parties become sub• tions against violators, Jus cogens (independent ject to a law other than their own, to which and binding international law, not requiring the consent of states) in the meantime reaches they either have not agreed upon (mission beyond the prohibition of wars of aggression creep) or do not agree with any more (costly and includes inter alia the prohibition of crimes exit option). Given the extent of the intrusion against humanity, genocide, and apartheid. of these new international institutions into Furthermore, especially since 1989, the Inter• the affairs of national societies, the notion of national community has begun to respond to "delegated, and therefore controlled author• cases of gross violation of human rights increas• ity" in the principal-and-agent sense no ingly with military force and economic sanctions longer holds.6 At least in some issue-areas, (Finnemore, 2003; Holzgrefe and Keohane, 2003; the global level has achieved a certain degree Binder, 200.9: 340). After 1989, in some cases of authority and has thus partially replaced (like Kosovo or East Timor) the United Nations the consensus principle of the traditional even set up transitional administrations with international system. far-reaching executive, legislative, and judicial powers (Caplan, 2004). In parallel to the rise of political authority • Finally, other actors have begun to compete beyond the nation-state, processes of decen• with states in the field of policy evaluation and tralization, that is, the shifting of political related agenda setting. The concept of epistemic authority to decentralized levels within the GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 411 nation-state, can be observed. It is no longer political demands, the nation-state remains in only the political actions of the nation-state this respect the default option. Nation-states that provoke regionalist responses, but also still aggregate territorial interests and put the undermining of some of its traditional them forward in international negotiations. functions through globalization and political The concept of multi-level governance internationalization. In an increasingly com• promises to better grasp the complex arrange• petitive world market, rich regions want to ments of governing institutions than the rid themselves of their national commit• notion of sovereign states.7 In such a multi• ments, while at the same time the develop• level constellation, nation-states will not ment of market-enhancing international relinquish their resources such as monopoly institutions has reduced the risks of secession on the use of force or the right to extract and even increased the incentives to organize taxes in a given territory. Nevertheless, while regionally in order to be eligible for suprana• the nation-state will play a significant role in tional resources. The evolving complexity of multi-level governance, it will no longer be governance beyond the nation-state in turn the paramount political institution being able creates desires to emphasize cultural differ• to perform all functions, but only one among ences at the regional level and to represent others carrying out some of these tasks regional interests directly, no longer via the (Leibfried and Ztirn, 2005). The nation-state nation-state. Against this background, it does has lost its monopoly for political authority. not come as a surprise that in parallel to the At least fully consolidated states in the OECD growing importance of international institu• world remain pivotal, however, playing tions, we see a clear and strong tendency increasingly the role of an authority manager towards decentralization within the nation- (Genschel and Zangl, 2008) orchestrating state (Hooghe and Marks, 2010). An index of global governance (Abbott/Snidal 2010). regional authority in 42 democracies and Each of the levels constituting global gov• semi-democracies reveals that 29 countries ernance thus exercises authority; that is, it have regionalized, and only two have become can meet decisions and take measures in a more centralized since 1950 (Marks et al, given issue-area, which cannot be unilater• 2008). ally reversed by other levels without violat• ing accepted procedures. If, however, more than one level exhibits authority, there is a The new role of the state "need to coordinate decisions between differ• and multi-level governance ent levels," and one can speak of multi-level governance (Benz, 2004). The rise of political authority beyond and Global multi-level governance is different below the nation-state should, however, by from both unitary federal political systems no means be read as an indication of the (Scharpf et al., 1976) and the European demise of the nation-state, First, the develop• multi-level system (Marks et al., 1996; ments described here apply only to certain Jachtenfuchs and Kohler-Koch, 1996). All denationalized issue-areas. Secondly, it is these three types of multi-level governance hard to see how governance goals can be systems are characterized by a two-staged achieved without the nation-state even in implementation process. In all these cases, strongly denationalized issue-areas. Thirdly, norms and rules developed by the higher the nation-state remains with respect to many level will be mostly implemented by decen• issues the first address for political demands, tralized units. The first important difference even in highly denationalized issue-areas. refers to legitimation processes. In a unitary Whereas transnational NGOs and even tradi• federal system, there is a direct relationship tional interest groups increasingly address between the societal addressees of a regula• international institutions directly with their tion and the central decision-making units. 412 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

The government and the parliament are provide for some policy coordination as an directly accountable to the citizens. They are expression of some minimal sense of a polity elected by the citizens and address them (Hooghe and Marks, 2010). By .contrast, directly when justifying laws and measures. global multi-level governance describes a Here, we can speak of a direct, or one-staged, complex and fluid patchwork of overlapping legitimation process. In the European multi• jurisdictions. In these cases, each issue area level system, the direct contacts between the has developed its own norms and rules, and central decision units and the citizens are the membership varies from issue-area to limited. Whereas elections to the European issue-area. Debates and discourses take place parliament constitute a direct relationship, almost exclusively within sectoral publics other - more important - decision units such which do not address the side effects of certain as the Commission and the Council are as measures for other issue-areas. In addition, a collective not directly accountable. This is there are no constitutionalized mechanisms even less so when it comes to international for the coordination of different issue- institutions. area-specific regimes; at best, informal In addition, global multi-level governance mechanisms exist. Thus, global multi-level differs with respect to the coordination of governance stands out by a very loose cou• different policies. Since regulations always pling of different issue areas (see Table 16.1); produce effects in other issue-areas than the one to which it is directed, governance also involves the coordination of different poli• Structural problems of global cies which have been formulated at the same Multi-level governance level or at different levels. In unitary federal• ism, coordination takes place via formal These specific features of global multi-level procedures on the side of central decision governance point to their most important makers, for instance, via cabinet rules or deficiencies which are discussed in the litera• supreme courts, and through public debate ture (see Ziirn, 2010). on the side of the addressees of a regulation. In this respect, the EU can be described Compliance as a multi-issue arrangement with a limited Global multi-level governance systems are number of nonoverlapping jurisdictional permanently confronted with a significant boundaries and some built-in coordination likelihood of noncompliance (see Borzel mechanisms such as the Commission and the et al., 2010; Downs et al„ 1996). While many Council, Such a governance structure follows consider the legitimate monopoly on the use a system-wide architecture which is rela• of force as a necessary prerequisite for com• tively stable and clearly public in character. pliance, the case of the European Union Whereas broad public debate is possible, demonstrates that alternative mechanisms such debates occur most frequently at the such as legitimacy, legalization, and nonhier- constituent-member level and are there• archical enforcement can be used to success• fore often fragmented. They nevertheless fully induce a sufficient level of compliance

Table 16.1 Types of Multi-Level Governance

Types MLG Features Unitary Federalism EU MLG System Global Governance Implementation Two-staged Two-staged Two-staged Legitimation One-staged 0ne-staged/T wo-staged Two-staged Coordination Centralized Decentralized Missing/Rudimentary GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 413

(Tallberg, 2002; Ziirn and Joerges, 2005). seem to contradict each other. Also, the All of the alternatives mentioned for ensur• G 8/20 seem to define themselves as central ing compliance depend, however, on specific coordinators by giving other international scope conditions which are not regularly institutions a sense of direction and by taking given on the global level. The appeal to up those pressing issues which are not suffi• legitimacy grounded in law-like procedures ciently dealt with by existing international depends on the willingness of a noncompli- institutions. The rise of transnational and ant actor to be responsive to good reason and national dispute settlement bodies points as concerns of legitimacy. In cases of nonhierar- well to the lack of coordination in global chical enforcement mechanisms, the enforc• multi-level governance. While such adjudica• ing actors need to be willing to bear the costs tory bodies still rarely mediate between dif• of enforcement, and the addressees of sanc• ferent issue-areas - with the exception of the tioning and blaming need to be vulnerable to WTO-DSB - they play an important role in such strategies. Obviously, these conditions the coordination between the global and the do not always hold on the global level. While national levels. The quantitative rise of such some of these mechanisms work under some dispute settlement bodies indicates the grow• conditions effectively on the global level as ing autonomy of the global level, but also the well (see Breitmeier et al., 2006; Chayes lack of coordination between different sec• and Chayes, 1995; Simmons, 2009), global tors of the global level. All these attempts, multi-level governance is inherently selective however, have remained limited. Moreover, vis-a-vis the implementation of norms and they generate resistance from many other rules. actors, because membership in these institu• tions is not only restricted, but also highly Coordination exclusive. The members of these institutions The lack of a central place for the coordina• are self-nominated in the role as coordinators tion of different policies points to a further and lack authorization to act in this function. deficiency in the global multi-level govern• Moreover, these institutions were in the first ance system. Global Governance does not place not created for the purpose of coordina• know a central government which is respon• tion. They are probably the most emergent sible for the coordination of different poli• elements of an emergent order. cies. Moreover, one of the major functions of a broad public - namely, to decide in cases of Legitimacy goal conflicts between different sectors such In addition, global multi-level governance as growth and clean environment, or security produces specific legitimation problems. As and freedom - cannot be fulfilled by sectoral long as the intergovernmental level was publics which, by definition, are tied exclu• restricted to merely developing a modus Viv• sively to either growth, environmental pro• endi of interaction, requiring the consent of tection, security, or freedom. In this sense, each member state, the two-staged process of the fragmentation of international regulation legitimation was sufficient. The decisions constitutes a serious defect of global govern• taken at the level beyond the constituent ance (Benvenisti and Downs, 2007). members were legitimated through the legiti• Against this background, the global multi• macy of their representatives. With the rise level governance system has - again infor• of a multi-level system and the authority of mally - produced some substitute institutions international institutions undermining the which sometimes seem to assume such a consensus principle, this has changed. There coordinating role. The UN Security Council is an increasing need for direct accountability in particular has aspired to such a role by (Grant and Keohane, 2005). deciding on all those issues in which the goal There are two strands of thought among of peace and the protection of human rights those who identify a democratic deficit in the 414 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS way international institutions work. One to have had the decision imposed on it by strand points to institutional deficits of inter• others. Congruence between the space for national institutions that can be adjusted which regulations are valid and the.bounda• through reforms, provided there is the right ries of the relevant social transactions - that political will. Another strand considers these is, output incongruence - is also significant suggestions as naïve and even questions the for democratic legitimacy. In a denational• mere possibility of democratic processes ized world ruled by a system of formally beyond the nation-state because the EU and independent nation-states, there is a danger other international institutions cannot meet that political communities will not reagh a the social prerequisites for democracy. desired goal due to conditions outside their According to skeptics, democratic legitimacy jurisdiction. The "emergence of denational• is only possible within the framework of a ized governance structures" (Joerges, 1996) political community with the potential for helps to bring all those who are affected by a democratic self-governance as expressed in the political decision into the decision-maldng concept of the modern nation (Kielmansegg, system, thus observing the principle of "no 1976; Miller, 1995). Beyond the nation-state, taxation without representation." What is the social prerequisites for a democratic more, international institutions help to political community - the political space - is increase the factual freedom of political com• missing. Hence, the connection between munities. Governance beyond the nation- nation and democracy is not a historical coin• state can therefore improve both social cidence but systematic and indissoluble. A welfare and democracy in the face of societal political community as exemplified in the denationalization. In this sense, international modern nation-state requires some degree of institutions are not the problem, but part of homogeneity, and without it there can be no the solution to the problems of modern democracy (Scharpf, 1998; Greven, 2000). democracy. To the extent that for pragmatic reasons The rising number and importance of skeptics accept the need for decisions through transnational NGOs - that is, societal groups international institutions, globalization leads influencing international decisions directly to the uncomfortable choice between "effec• by arguing mainly in terms of the global tive problem-solving through international common good (as opposed to member inter• institutions" or "democratic political proc• ests) - can be seen as an institutional response esses" (Dahl, 1994). This is, however, not a to the deficits of the two-staged legitimation particularly convincing theoretical perspec• process. NGOs are an important element of tive (Zürn, 2000). In democratic terms, inter• sectoral publics, which help to connect the national institutions are a sensible response global level of regulation directly with the to the problems facing democracy in times societal addressees of the regulations. In this of societal denationalization, as they help way, the two-staged legitimation process gets to secure some of the constitutional prerequi• informally complemented with a direct link sites of democracy (Keohane et al., 2009) (see Chapter 17 by Risse in this volume). and redress the incongruence between social and political spaces (Held, 1995). For the Politicization and fragmentation purposes of democracy, spatial congruence These three deficiencies of global multi-level is necessary at two critical points, First, con• governance are reflected in an increased gruence between the people who are affected politicization of international institutions. by a decision and their representatives in the The growing need to legitimate international decision-making system (input congruence) affairs is evidenced by the unwillingness of is required, If there is no input congruence, national publics, parliaments, and transnational then a group affected by a decision but not civil society to accept without further ado the participating in its making can be considered important outcomes of major international GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 415

negotiations as urgently necessary achieve• The extent of this politicization today is ments of international cooperation. The out• considerable. The increasing politicization of come of international negotiations is no international institutions is apparent in both longer greeted merely because a result has individual attitudes (e.g. Mau, 2007; Ecker- been attained. The procedures for obtaining Ehrhardt and Wessels, 2010) and in the results in international political processes behavior of societal and political actors (e.g. and their content, and above all the concomi• Rucht, 2010; Gronau et al., 2009; Hooghe tant subsystemic assignment of powers, and Marks, 2008; Grande and Kriesi, 2010). require justification. It is called for by numer• Although the political debate on cross-border ous, so-called antiglobalization groups such problems and the mandate and decisions of as Attac and other social movements acting international institutions is not omnipresent, in the transnational sphere (see della Porta it is becoming increasingly broad. Politicizers and Tarrow, 2005; della Porta and Caiani, range from local action groups and a multi• 2009; Rucht, 2004; Tarrow, 2001). plicity of civil society organizations, compa• Resistance against international authority nies, associations, and parties to governments. organized at the national level against the They politicize in the media, in the street, undermining of democratic sovereignty and in the forums of political institutions became more visible as well in the last themselves. decades. A good case in point are the référen• This level of politicization can be explained dums on European integration and a growing by the deficiencies of global multi-level gov• skepticism against European integration ernance (see also Cox, 1997; Habermas, (Hooghe and Marks, 2004). More generally, 2007). On the one hand, there is a growing an ominous factor accompanying the decline demand for legitimation of international of public confidence in traditional political institutions exercising authority. The politici• authority in many OECD countries is a resur• zation of international institutions arises here gence of right-wing extremism. In a similar as a consequence of their political authority vein, anti-modernist movements have gained and the ensuing need for legitimation (see strength in parallel to globalization outside of Ztirn et al., 2007), In the course of this track the OECD world, too. of politicization, oriented to begin with on . However, such activities are not alone in the material policy itself, the thrust of the focusing attention on international institu• process often changes direction: decision• tions and treaties. Only part of the current making procedures and the institutional set• discussion on international institutions is ting as such become the focus of criticism, concerned with opposition, Many transna• What is criticized is the lacking representa• tional NGOs and social movements are call• tiveness, transparency, and accountability of ing for stronger international and transnational decision-making processes and bodies in organizations to satisfy the need for regu• international institutions - the lack of legiti• lation. For example, many environmental mation on the "input side" (cf. Ecker-Ehrhardt groups advocate a central world environmen• and Wessels, 2010; Scharpf, 1997). Greater tal organization and the drastic intensification public access is accordingly demanded, espe• of climate policy measures at the interna• cially for NGOs and direct stakeholders. Sel• tional level, or the strengthening of interna• dom is the shift of decision-making powers tional development policy. Many societal to international institutions as a whole called groupings hence demand stronger interna• into question (cf. also della Porta and Caiani, tional institutions. This double movement of 2009). growing protest against international institu• On the other hand, politicization can emerge tions and their more intensive utilization can as a consequence of the perceived need for be described as politicization, that is, making regulation. Numerous economic, social, and previously unpolitical matters political. cultural problems have meanwhile been 416 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS denationalized in the sense that contexts the traditional notion of state sovereignty in of action have been established that reach the national constellation. Governments and beyond national borders, In this situation, other political organizations do not merely sit criticism that certain problems have been back and watch globalization and the decline dealt with inadequately can also point to the in the effectiveness of unilateral policies. As overly narrow mandate of existing institu• a result, global governance has emerged, tions. International institutions are now not leading to both political mobilization beyond only accorded greater importance in the the nation-state and resistance to it, The political process in connection with more and national constellation, that is the convergence more problems, but they are also increasingly of resources, recognition, and the realization regarded as necessary and desirable. Such a of governance goals in one political organi• politicized lack of efficient and assertive zation - the nation state - seems thus to be institutions is also apparent, for example, in in a process of transformation into a post- financial regulation and trade regulation, national constellation (Ztirn and Leibfried, where a number of experts and NGOs demand 2005). The nation-state is no longer the only stricter regulation of markets. This is also the site of authority, political contestation, and case in the field of security policy. Societal the normativity that accompanies it. campaigns have pilloried regulatory deficien• Globalization and global governance stud• cies in relation to the production, spread, and ies, however, so far hardly constitute a theory use of certain types of weapon (small arms, of world politics. In many ways, both these landmines) and the behavior of companies in literatures speculate and hypothesize about crisis areas, successfully drawing public the political effects of increasing societal attention to these topics. In these cases, the interconnectedness using already existing state of affairs is not simply described as theories. In a very subtle sense, though, this deficient and hence declared a "political research has structured the theoretical debate problem" in a general sense (Binder, 2010; in IR over the last three decades. Waltz' Deitelhoff and Wolf, 2010); campaigns (1979) theory of international politics and regularly point to the lack of international other Realist writings can be seen as a delib• standards and viable institutions capable erate attempt to rescue IR as an independent of regulating the behavior of countries and discipline from the logic of interdependence, companies and - where rules have been con• In Realist thinking, it was possible not only travened - able to impose severe sanctions. to understand IR without taking domestic Politicization processes can accordingly be politics and international institutions into provoked not only by a lack of legitimacy in consideration and, moreover, the notion was decision-making by strong international reconfirmed that national societies and their institutions but also by a lack of effective respective states can be conceptualized as institutions. utterly separate entities. Thus, the interaction of those entities was declared a field of the discipline of International Relations. This reconfirmation put interdependence writers CONCLUSION: METHODOLICAL in the defensive. Their counterattack was NATIONALISM AT BAY? directed at a different target: to show that nation states have good reasons to establish Societal denationalization over the past two international institutions. In this way, they or three decades has led to a rise in interna• indirectly reconfirmed the strict notions of tional institutions that in effect may change distinctly separate national societies and tra• the constitution of world politics. The shape ditional notions of sovereignty. In a sense, of more recent inter-, trans-, and suprana• the debate as a whole accepted the analytical tional institutions is hardly compatible with shackles of "methodological nationalism"; GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 417

The study of global governance needs to go or world federalism. It seems more promis• beyond methodological nationalism. ing to recall the tradition of historical macro- Methodological nationalism considers sociology upheld by Stein Rokkan, Charles nation-states as the basic unit of all politics. Tilly, and others. As early as the 1960s and It assumes that humankind is naturally dis• 1970s, they aimed at overcoming the domi• tributed among a limited number of nations, nant approach of treating nation-states as which organize themselves internally as logically independent cases. Instead, they nation-states and delimit themselves exter• advocated a more complete map of one inter• nally from other nation-states (see Smith, dependent system (Tilly, 1984: 129). 1979; Beck, 2000). In addition, it assumes In this contribution, it has been argued that the external delimitation and the subse• that the recent research on globalization and quent competition between nation-states are global governance shows that a transforma• the most fundamental concepts of political tion of world politics takes place requiring organization. Methodological nationalism is research approaches that move beyond meth• distinct from normative nationalism, accord• odological nationalism. The outcome of this ing to which each nation has the inalienable transformation, however, is open, and it is right to organize itself in its own, culturally certainly not possible to predict it by just specific way. Methodological nationalism extrapolating some of the trends discussed sees national self-determination as ontologi- above. Most international institutions were cally given and as the most important cleav• created by Western powers, sometimes before age in the political sphere. This double developing countries had emerged from premise predetermines empirical observa• colonialism. These institutions will have to tions, as can be seen, for example, in the case respond to the rise of new powers that have a of aggregate statistics, which are almost claim for greater influence based both on exclusively categorized in national terms. It distributive and legitimacy grounds. More• locates and restricts the political sphere to the over, some of these new powers have tradi• national level. tions of political authority and legitimation Governance beyond the nation-state different from the experience of the estab• extends the realm of the political beyond lished democratic states. They also empha• national borders and sovereign states, We size different justifications for political must therefore develop a notion of a global authority at an international level (see Ziirn polity which cannot only be seen as substitu• and Stephen, 2010). tive to nation-states at a higher level. All The ensuing emphasis on the principle of forms of governance beyond the nation-state nonintervention by almost all new powers currently lack a central authority or a "world (and the United States) thus seems to be state" equipped with a legitimate monopoly a huge obstacle for further strengthening of the use of force, In the absence of a world international institutions and making global state or an empire with global reach, govern• governance more effective, A closer look, ance beyond the nation-state cannot take the however, reveals significant ambiguities, One form of governance by government; rather, it the one hand, most newly emerging powers, needs to be a form of governance with gov• sometimes including China, often demand ernments such as we see in international more international regulation and stronger institutions, or governance without govern• international institutions as, for instance, ments8 as in transnational institutions, or in indicated by the positions taken with respect supranational governance. The interplay of to the economic and financial crisis in the different forms of governance beyond the G20 negotiations. The emerging powers seem nation-state produces polities of a new qual• not to aim at overhauling the existing interna• ity. Such conceptualizations do not need to tional institutions, rather they want to be rely on Utopian thinking about a world state co-opted and to reform them from the inside. 418 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

On the other hand, there is an ongoing suspi• total of) globally oriented practices and patterns of cion that stronger international institutions thought as well as the epochal transformation which is constituted by them (Albrow, 1996: 89). These are instruments of Western dominance and general notions of de-territorialization underestimate help to prolong an unequal distribution of the extent to which politics is spatially bound. Politics benefits. This tension explains the wide• tends to be more particularistic than, for example, spread emphasis on broader and more equal economics, since, as Michael Walzer (1983: 50) writes, "communities must have boundaries". state participation as a prerequisite for 4 The denationalized condition is stilT rare. stronger international institutions. The Helliwell (1998) demonstrates that even between demand for more societal participation there• the US and Canada, the national border still has an fore does not rank as the newly emerging impact on reducing trade between cities and pro- powers' highest priority. Such demands stem vences in North America. from (mainly Western) NGOs and thus will 5 In the remainder I usethe terms globalization and societal denationalization interchangeably. The play out to some extent independent of the term denationalization goes back to the classic works relations between new and old state powers. of Karl W. Deutsch (1969) and Eric Hobsbawm The double demand of newly emerging (1992) on nationalism, according to which a nation is powers for more equal state participation and a political community for which dense societal trans• NGOs for more societal involvement in inter• actions within the national territory and a sharp reduction in the frequency of social transactions at national decision making may be the driving the borders are constitututive components. In this forces in the development of global govern• view, a nation stands in a mutually constitutive rela• ance in the next decades. Political authority tionship to the nation state. Consequently, societal beyond the nation-state as any political denationalization is an indication of the weakening link between "nation states and [their] correspond• authority requires legitimacy to be effective. ing national societies" (Beck, 1997: 44). In any case, these struggles about the shape 6 See also Haftel and Thompson (2008), who of international authority will focus increas• define the independence of international organiza• ingly on legitimacy of international and tions as the absence of complete control by other transnational institutions as a bone of conten• actors and consider autonomy, together with neu• tion. It will need a new International Relations trality and delegation of authority, as constitutive elements theory moving beyond methodological 7 Arguably, the arrangement is - given the paral• nationalism to understand these processes. lel process of supranationalization and transnation- alization - better described as multi-level and multi-actor governance, since on each of the levels, different actors - public ones and privates ones - independent of each other are relevant, In this con• NOTES tribution, the conceptual focus is on the interplay of different levels (each of them consisting of more 1 I want to thank the editors of the handbook as than one actor) which makes it possible to use the well as Martin Binder, Monika Heupel, and Thomas simpler, yet still not very elegant term multi-level Rixen for their helpful comments. governance. 2 This, of course, depends on the notion of world 8 The meaning of this term differs from Rosenau society. I use a definition that requires more than just (1992: 5) governance without government, which transactions. For major contributions to the question refers to all politics without a central authority. of world society see Luhmann (1971), the contribu• tions to Beck (1998) and Albert et al. (2000). 3 Thus, globalization is not defined here as an all-encompassing process of epochal proportions. REFERENCES According to this latter understanding, globalization not only implies a growth in transnational interac• Abbott, Kenneth W., Keohane, Robert 0., Moravcsik, tions, but also comprises political processes and "the stretching and deepening of social relations and Andrew, Slaughter, Anne-Marie, and Snidal, Duncan institutions across space and time" (see e.g. Giddens, (2000) "The Concept of Legalization," International 1990; Held and McGrew, 1993: 263; Held, 1995: 20; Organization, 54 (3): 401-419. Elkins, 1995; Rosenau, 1997). Globalization thus Abbott, Kenneth W. and Snidal, Duncan (2010) understood denotes all (individual as well as the sum "International Regulation without International GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 419

Government: Improving I0 Performance through Barro, Robert J. (1996) Getting it Right: Markets and Orchestration," The Review of International Choices in a Free Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Organizations, 5(4), 315-344. Beck, Ulrich (1997) Was ist Globalisierung? Irrtümer Adler, Emanuel and Bamett, Michael N. (eds.) (1998) des Globalismus - Antworten auf Globalisierung. Security Communities. Cambridge, New York, NY: Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. Cambridge University Press. Beck, Ulrich (ed.) (1998) Politik der Globalisierung. Agnew, John A. and Duncan, James S. (eds.) (1989) Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. The Power of Place: Bringing Together Geographical Beck, Ulrich (2000) Translegale Herrschaft. Frankfurt and Sociological Imaginations. Boston: Unwin a.M.: Suhrkamp. Hyman. Beisheim, Marianne, Dreher, Sabine, Walter, Gregor, Albert, Mathias (1996) Fallen der (Welt-)Ordnung. Zangl, Bernhard, and Zürn, Michael (1999) Im Internationale Beziehungen und ihre Theorien Zeitalter der Globalisierung? Thesen und Daten zur zwischen Moderne und Postmoderne. Opladen: gesellschaftlichen und politischen Denationalisierung. Leske & Budrich. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Albert, Mathias, Brock, Lothar, and Wolf, Klaus-Dieter Benvenisti, Eyal and Downs, George W. (2007) "The (eds.) (2000) Civilizing World Politics: Society and Empire's New Clothes: Political Economy and the Community beyond the State. Lanham, MD: Rowman Fragmentation of International Law," Stanford Law & Littlefield. Review, 60 (2): 595-632. Albrow, Martin (1996) The Global Age. State Benz, Arthur (ed.) (2004) Governance - Regieren and Society beyond Modernity. Cambridge: Polity in komplexen Regelsystemen. Eine Einführung. Press. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag. Alter, Karen J. (2009) The European Court's Political Bergh, Andreas and Karlsson, Martin (2010) "Govern• Power. Selected Essays. Oxford: Oxford University ment Size and Growth: Accounting for Economic Press. Freedom and Globalization," Public Choice, 142 (1): Anderson, Christopher J. and Pontusson, Jonas (2001) 195-213. "Weifare States and Employment Insecurity: A Cross- Bergh, Andreas and Nilsson, Therese (2008) "Do National Analysis of 15 OECD Countries," paper Economic Liberalization and Globalization Increase presented at 2001 Annual Meeting of the American Income Inequality?," Working Paper 2008:12, Lund Political Science Association, San Francisco, CA. University, Department of Economics: Lund. Angell, Robert C. (1969) Peace on the March: Bernauer, Thomas (2000) Staaten im Weltmarkt. Zur Transnational Participation (New Perspectives in Handlungsfähigkeit von Staaten trotz wirtschaftli• Political Science). New York: Van Nostrand cher Globalisierung. Opladen: Leske und Budrich. Reinhold. Biersteker, Thomas J. and Hall, John A. (eds.) (2002) Appadurai, Arjun (1996) Modernity at Large, Cultural The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis: University Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University of Minnesota Press. Press. Atkinson, Anthony B. and Brandolini, Andrea (2010) Binder, Martin (2009) "Humanitarian Crises and the "On Analyzing the World Distribution of Income," International Politics of Selectivity," Human Rights World Bank Economic Review, 24 (1): 1-37. Review, 10 (3): 327-348. Baldwin, David A. (1980) "Interdependence and Power. Binder, Martin (2010) "Die Politisierung internationaler A Conceptual Analysis," International Organization, Sicherheitsinstitutionen? Der UN-Sicherheitsrat und 34 (4) 471-506. NGOs," in Michael Zürn and Matthias Ecker- Baldwin, Richard (2006) "Globalization: the great Ehrhardt (eds.), Gesellschaftliche Politisierung und unbundling(s)," available at: http://appli8.hec.fr/ Internationale Institutionen. Frankfurt a.M.: map/files/globalisationthegreatunbundling%28 Suhrkamp. s%29.pdf. (19/April/2010). Blake, Daniel and Payton, Autumn (2008) "Voting Barbiefi, Katherine (1996) "Economic Interdependence: Rules in International Organizations: Reflections A Path to Peace or a Source of Interstate Conflict?," of Power or Facilitators of Cooperation?," paper Journal of Peace Research, 33 (1): 29-49. presented at ISA's 49th Annual Convention, Barnett, Michael N. and Finnemore, Martha (2004) San Francisco, CA. Rules for the World. International Organizations InBörzel , Tanja, Hofmann, Tobias, Panke, Diana and Global Politics. Ithaca, NY/London: Cornell University Sprungk, Carina (2010) "Obstinate and Inefficient. Press. Why Member States Do Not Comply with European 420 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Law," Comparative Political Studies, 43 (11); Corera, Gordon (2006) Shopping for Bombs: Nuclear 1363-1390. Proliferation, Global Insecurity, and the Rise and Fall Breltmeler, Helmut, Young, Oran R„ and Zürn, Michael oftheA.Q. Khan Network. Oxford: Oxford University (2006) Analyzing International Environmental Press. Regimes, From Case Study to Database. Cambridge, Cox, Robert W. (1997) "Democracy In Hard Times.. MA/London, England: MIT Press. Economic Globalization and the Limits to Liberal Brock, Lothar and Albert, Matthias (1995) "Entgrenzung Democracy," in Anthony McGrew (ed.), The der Staatenwelt. Zur Analyse weltgesellschaftlicher Transformation of Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Entwicklungstendenzen," Zeitschrift für Interna• Press. 49-72. tionale Beziehungen, 2 (2): 259-285. Cutler, A. Claire, Haufler, Virginia, and Porter, Tony Bull, Hedley (1977) The Anarchical Society; A Study of (eds.) (1999) Private Authority and International Order in World Politics. Basingstoke/London: Affairs. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Macmillan. Czemplel, Ernst-Otto (1986) Friedensstrategien. Burgoon, Brian (2009) "Globalization and Backlash: Systemwandel durch internationale Organisationen, Polanyi's Revenge?," Review of International Demokratisierung und Wirtschaft. Paderborn; Political Economy, 15 (2): 145-178. Schönlngh. Busemeyer, Marius R. (2009) "From Myth to Reality: Dahl, Robert A. (1994) "A Democratic Dilemma: Globalization and Public Spending in OECD Countries System Effectiveness versus Citizen Participation," Revisited," European Journal of Political Research, Political Science Quarterly, 109 (1): 23-34. 48 (4): 455-482. De Wilde, Jaap (1991) Saved from Oblivion: Cameron, David R. (1978) "The Expansion of the Interdependence Theory in the First Half of the 20th Public Economy: A Comparative Analysis," Century. A Study on the Causality between War and American Political Science Review, 72 (4): Complex Interdependence. Aldershot: Dartmouth. • 1243-1261. Deitelhoff, Nicole and Wolf, Klaus D. (2010) "Wirt- Caplan, Richard (2004) "International Authority and schaftsunternehmen in Konflikten: Das Wechselspiel State Building: The Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina," staatlicher und gesellschaftlicher (Ent-)Politisierung Global Governance, 10: 53-65. privater Sicherheitsleistungen," in Michael Zürn and Caporaso, James A. (1978) "Dependence, Dependency, Matthias Ecker-Ehrhardt (eds.), Gesellschaftliche and Power in the Global System. A Structural and Politisierung und internationale Institutionen. Behavioral Analysis," International Organization, Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. 32: 13-43. della Porta, Donatella and Caiani, Manuela (2009) Cerny, Philip G. (1996) "What Next for the State?," in Social Movements and Europeanization. Oxford: Eleonore Kofman and Gillian Youngs (eds.), Oxford University Press. Globalization: Theory and Practice. London: Pinter. della Porta, Donatella and Tarrow, Sidney (eds.) (2005) 123-137. Transnational Protest and Global Activism. Lanharn: Chayes, Abram and Chayes, Antonia H. (1995) The Rowman & Littlefield. New Sovereignty. Compliance with International Deutsch, Karl W. (1969) Nationalism and Its Alternatives. Regulatory Agreements. Cambridge, MA/London, New York, NY: Knopf. England: Harvard University Press. Deutsch, Karl W., Burreil, Sidney A., Kann, Robert A., Chojnacki, Sven (2006) "Anything New or More of the Lee, Maurice, Jr., Lichtermann, Martin, Lindgren, Same? Wars and Military Interventions in the Raymond E., Loewenhelm, Francis L, and Wagenen, International System, 1946-2003," Global Society, Richard W. v. (1957) Political Community and the 20 (1): 25-46. North Atlantic Area : International Organization in Cooper, Richard N. (1986) Economic Policy in an the Light of Historical Experience. Princeton, NJ; Interdependent World: Essays in World Economics. Princeton University Press. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Deutsch, Karl W. and Eckstein, Alexander (1961) Cooper, Richard N, (1968) The Economics of "National Industrialization and the Declining Share Interdependence. New York, NY: McGraw Hill. of the International Economic Sector 1890-1959," Cooper, Scott, Hawkins, Darren G., Jacoby, Wade, and World Politics, 13 (2): 267-272. Nielson, Daniel (2008) "Yielding Sovereignty to Djelic, Marie-Laure and Sahlin-Andersson, Kerstin International Institutions: Bringing System Structure (2009) "Governance and Its Transnational Dynamics: Back In," International Studies Review, 10 (3) Towards a Re-ordering of our World?, " in Christopher 501-524. Chapman, David Cooper, and Peter Miller (eds.), GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 421

Accounting, Organizations and Institutions. Oxford: Gartzke, Erik (2007) "The Capitalist Peace," American Oxford University Press. 175-204. Journal of Political Science, 51 (1): 166-191. Dorussen, Han (1999) "Balance of Power Revisited: Genschel, Philipp (2002) "Globalization, Tax Com• A Multi-Country Model of Trade and Conflict," petition, and the Welfare State," Politics and Society, Journal of Peace Research, 36 (4): 443-462. 30 (2): 245-275. Downs, George W., Rocke, David M„ and Barsoom, Genschel, Philipp and Zangl, Bernhard (2008) Peter N. (1996) "Is the Good News about Compliance "Metamorphosen des Staates - vom Herrschafts• Good News About Cooperation?," International monopolisten zum Herrschaftsmanager," Leviathan, Organization, 50 (3): 379-406. 36 (3): 430-454. Dreher, Axel and Gaston, Noel (2006) "Has Giddens, Anthony (1990) The Consequences of Globalisation Increased Inequality?," KOF Working Modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Papers No. 140, KOF Swiss Economic Institute. Gourevitch, Peter A. (1978) "The Second Image Dreher, Axel, Sturm, Jan-Egbert, and Ursprung, Heinrich Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic W. (2008) "The Impact of Globalization on the Politics," International Organization, 32 (4): Composition of Government Expenditures: Evidence 881-912. from Panel Data," Public Choice, 134 (3-4): Grande, Edgar and Kriesi, Hanspeter (2010) "Das 263-292. Doppelgesicht der Politisierung. Zur Transformation Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias and Wessels, Bernhard (2010) politischer Konfliktstrukturen im Prozess der "Input-oder Output-Politisierung internationaler Globalisierung," in Michael Zürn and Matthias Organisationen? Der kritische Blick der Bürger auf Ecker-Ehrhardt (eds.), Gesellschaftliche Politisierung Demokratie und Leistung," in Michael Zürn and und internationale Institutionen. Frankfurt a.M.: Matthias Ecker-Ehrhardt (eds.), Gesellschaftliche Suhrkamp Politisierung und internationale Institutionen. Grant, Ruth W. and Keohane, Robert O. (2005) Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. "Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Elkins, David J. (1995) Beyond Sovereignty. Territory Politics," American Political Science Review, 99 (1): and Political Economy in the Twenty-First Century. 29-43. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Greven, Michael T. (2000) "Can the European Union Elkins, Zachary, Guzman, Andrew T., and Simmons, Finally Become a Democracy?," in Michael T. Greven Beth A. (2006) "Competing for Capital: The Diffusion and Louis W. Pauly (eds.), Democracy Beyond of Bilateral Investment Treaties, 1960-2000," National Limits. The European Dilemma and the International Organization, 60 (4): 811-846. Emerging Global Order. Lanham: Rowman & Enders, Walter and Sandler, Todd (2006) "Distribution Littlefield. 35-61. of Transnational Terrorism Among Countries by Gronau, Jennifer, Nonhoff, Martin, Schneider, Steffen, Income Class and Geography After 9/11," Inter• and Nullmeier, Frank (2009) "Spiele ohne Brot? national Studies Quarterly, 50: 367-393. Die Legitimationskrise der G8," Leviathan, 37 (1): Evans, Peter B., Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, and Skocpol, 117-143. Theda (eds.) (1985) Bringing the State Back In. Haas, Peter M. (1992) "Introduction: Epistemic Com• Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. munities and International Policy Coordination," Finnemore, Martha (2003) The Purpose of Intervention: International Organization, 46 (1): 1-35. Changing Beliefs about the Use of Force. Ithaca, NY: Haas, Peter M. and Stevens, Casey (2009) "Organized Cornell University Press. Science, Usable Knowledge and Multilateral Frankel, Jeffrey A. (1993) On Exchange Rates. Governance" in Rolf Lindskog and Göran Sundqvist Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, (eds.), Governing the Air. The Dynamics of Science, Ganghof, Steffen (2006) "Tax Mixes and the Size of the Policy, and Citizen Interaction. Cambridge. MA: MIT Welfare State. Causal Mechanisms and Policy Press. 125-161. Implications," Journal of European Public Policy, 16 Habermas, Jürgen (1998) "Die postnationale • (4): 360-373. Konstellation und die Zukunft der Demokratie," Garrett, Geoffrey (1998b) "Global Markets and National Blätter für Deutsche und Internationale Politik, Politics: Collision Course or Virtuous Circle?," 43 (7): 804-817. International Organization, 52 (4): 787-824. Habermas, Jürgen (2007) "Kommunikative Rationalität Garrett, Geoffrey (1998a) Partisan Politics in the und grenzüberschreitende Politik eine Replik," in Global Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Peter Niesen, and Benjamin Herborth (eds.), Anarchie Press. der kommunikativen Freiheit - Jürgen Habermas 422 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

unddie Theorie der Internationalen Politik. Frankfurt Hooghe, Liesbet and Marks, Gary (2008) a.M.: Suhrkamp. 406-459. "A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: Haftel, Yoram Z. and Thompson, Alexander (2008) From Permissive Consensus to Constraining "The Independence of International Organizations: Dissensus," British Journal of Political Science, 39 Concepts and Applications," Journal of Conflict (1): 1-23. Resolution, 50 (2): 253-275. Hooghe, Liesbet and Marks, Gary (2010) "Two Types of Hall, Peter A. and Soskice, David (2001) Varieties Multi Level Governance," in Henrik Enderlein, Sonja of Capitalism. The Institutional Foundations of Walti, and Michael Zürn (eds,), Handbook of Multi- Comparative Advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Level-Governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, i.p. Press. Höpner, Martin and Schäfer, Armin (2007) "A new Harvey, David (1989) The Condition of Postmodernity: Phaseof European Integration: Organized Capitalisms An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. in Post-Ricardian Europe," MPIfG Discussion Paper Oxford: Blackwell. 2007/4, Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsform Hawkins, Darren G., Lake, David A., Nielson, Daniel, hung: Köln. and Tierney, Michael (eds.) (2006) Delegation and Human Security Centre (2005) "Human Security Report Agency in International Organizations. Cambridge: 2005: War and Peace in the 21st Century," The Cambridge University Press. University of British Columbia: Canada. Held, David (1995) Democracy and the Global Order: Hurd, lan (2007) After Anarchy: Legitimacy and Power From the Modern State to Cosmopolitical Gov• in the United Nations Security Council. Princeton, ernance. Cambridge: Polity Press. NJ: Princeton University Press. Held, David, McCrew, Anthony, Goldblatt, David, and Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Kohler-Koch, Beate (1996) Perraton, Jonathan (1999) Global Transformations: "Regieren im dynamischen Mehrebenensystem," in Politics, Economics and Culture. Cambridge: Polity Markus Jauchtenfuchs and Beate Kohler-Koch (eds,), Press. Europäische Integration. Opladen: Leske & ßudrich. Held, David and McGrew, Anthony (1993) "Globaliza• 15-44. tion and the Liberal Democratic State," Government Jessop, Bob (1994) "Post-Fordism and the State," in and Opposition, 28 (2): 261-285. Ash Amin (ed.), Post-Fordism: A Reader. Oxford: Helliwell, John F. (1998) How much Do National Blackwell. 251-279. Borders Matter? Washington, D.C.: Brookings Joerges, Christian (1996) "The Emergence of Dena• Institution Press. tionalized Governance Structures and the European, Hirsch, Joachim (1995) Demationale Wettbewerbsstaat. Court of Justice," Arena Working Paper 16/1996, Staat, Demokratie und Politik im globalen Center for European Studies, University of Oslo: Kapitalismus. Berlin; Amsterdam: Edition ID-Archiv. Oslo. Hirst, Paul and Thompson, Grahame (1996) Kahler, Miles (1995) International Institutions and the Globalization in Question: The International Economy Political Economy of Integration. Washington, DC: and the Possibilities of Governance. Cambridge: Brookings Institution. Polity Press. Kahler, Miles and Lake, David A. (2009) "Economic Hobsbawm, Eric J. (1992) Nations and Nationalism Integration and Global Governance: Why So Little since 1780. Program, Myth, Reality. Cambridge: Supranationalem?," in Walter Mattli and Ngaire Cambridge University Press. Woods (eds.), The Politics of Global Regulation. Holm, Hans-Henrik and Sorensen, Georg (1995) Princeton: Princeton University Press. 242-275. "Introduction: What has Changed?," in Hans-Henrik Kaldor, Mary (2006) New and Old Wars: Organized Holm and Georg S0rensen (eds.), Whose World Violence in a Global Era. Cambridge: Polity Press. Order? Uneven Globalization and the End of the Kaldor, Mary (1999) New and Old Wars: Organized Cold War. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. 1-17. Violence In a Global Era. Stanford, CA: Standford Holzgrefe, J. L. and Robert 0. Keohane (eds.) (2003) University Press. Humanitarian Intervention; Ethical, Legal, and Katzenstein, Peter J. (2005) A World of Regions. Asia Political Dilemmas. Cambridge. Cambridge Univer• and Europe in the American Imperium. Ithaca, NY; sity Press. Cornell University Press. Hooghe, Liesbet and Marks, Gary (2004) "Does Identity Katzenstein, Peter J. (ed.) (1978) Between Powerand or Economic Rationality Drive Public Opinion on Plenty: Foreign Economic Policies of Advanced European Integration?," Political Science and Industrial States. Madison, Wl: University of Politics, 37 (3): 415-420. Wisconsin Press. GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 423

Katzenstein, Peter J. (1985) Small States in World Marks, Gary, Hoghe, Liesbet, and Schäkel, Arjan H. Markets. Industrial Policy in Europe. Ithaca, NY: (2008) "Patterns of Regional Authority," Regional Cornell University Press. and Federal Studies, 18 (2): 167-181. Katzenstein, Peter J. (1975) "International Mau, Steffen (2007) Transnationale Vergesellschaftung. Interdependence: Some Long-term Trends and Die Entgrenzung sozialer Lebenswelten, Frankfurt Recent Changes," International Organization, 29 a.M.: Campus Verlag. (4): 1021-1034. Miller, David (1995) On Nationality. Oxford: Oxford Keohane, Robert 0., Macedo, Stephen, and Moravcsik, University Press. Andrew (2009) "Democracy-Enhancing Multi• Moravcsik, Andrew (1998) The Choice for Europe. lateralism," International Organization, 63 (1): Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to 1-31. ' Maastricht. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, Keohane, Robert 0. and Milner, Helen V. (eds.) (1996) Morse, Edward L. (1976) Modernization and the Internationalization and Domestic Politics. Transformation of International Relations. New York: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Free Press. Keohane, Robert. O. and Nye, Joseph S., Jr. (2000) Muir, Ramsey (1932) The Interdependent World and Its "Globalization: What's New? What's Not? (And So Problems. London: Constable, What?)," Foreign Policy, 118: 104-119. Pattberg, Philipp (2007) Private Institutions and Global Keohane, Robert O. and Nye, Joseph S„ Jr. (1977) Governance. The New Politics of Environmental Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Sustainability. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Transition. Boston: Little, Brown & Company. Pevehouse, Jon C, Nordstrom, Timothy, and Warnke, Kielmansegg, Peter G. (ed.) (1976) Légitimations- Kevin (2004) "The Correlates of War 2 International problème politischer Systeme. Opladen: Governmental Organizations Data Version 2.0," Westdeutscher Verlag. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 21 (2): Kitschelt, Herbert, Lange, Peter, Marks, Gary, and 101-119. Stephens, John D. (eds.) (1999) Continuity and Pierson, Paul (1996) "The New Politics of the Welfare Change in Contemporary Capitalism. Cambridge: State," World Politics, 48 (2): 143-179. Cambridge University Press. Polachek, Solomon W., Robst, John, and Chang, Yuan- Krugman, Paul R. (1994) Peddling Prosperity. New York: Ching (1999) "Liberalism and Interdependence: Norton. Extending the Trade-Conflict Model," Journal of Krugman, Paul R. (1995) "Growing World Trade. Peace Research, 36 (4): 405-422. Causes and Consequences," Brookings Papers on Pugh, Michael C. and Cooper, Neil (2004) War Economic Activity, 1: 327-362. Economies In a Regional Context: Challenges of Le Billon, Philippe and Nicholls, Eric (2007) "Ending Transformation. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner. 'Resource Wars': Revenue Sharing, Economic Quinn, Dennis P, and Toyoda, A, M, (2007) "Ideology . Sanction or Military Intervention?," International and Voter Preferences as Determinants of Financial Peacekeeping, 14 (5): 613-632. Globalization," American Journal of Political Science, Lee, Chang Kil and Strang, David (2006) "The 51:344-363. International Diffusion of Public Sector Downsizing," Reinicke, Wolfgang H. (1998) Global Public Policy. International Organization 60 (4): 883-909. Governing without Government? Washington, DC: Leibfried, Stephan and Zürn, Michael (2005) Brookings. Transformations of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge Reuveny, Rafael and Kang, Heejoon (1998) "Bilateral University Press. Trade and Political Conflict/Cooperation. Do Goods Luhmann, Niklas (1971) "Die Weltgesellschaft," in Matter?," Journal of Peace Research, 35 (5): 581-602. Niklas Luhmann (ed.), Soziologische Aufklärung, Bd. Rieger, Elmar and Leibfried, Stephan (1997) 2. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. 51-71. "Sozialpolitische Grenzen der Globalisierung. Mansfield, Edward D. and Milner, Helen V. (1997) The Wohlfahrtsstaatliche Gründe außenwirtschaftlicher Political Economy of Regionalism. New York: Schließung und Öffnung," . Politische Columbia University Press. Vierteljahresschrift, 38 (4): 771-796. Marks, Gary, Hooghe, Liesbet, and Blank, Kermit Rittberger, Volker, Nettesheim, Martin, Huckel, C, and (1996) "European Integration from the 1980s: Göbel, T. (2008) "Introduction: Changing Patterns State-Centric Versus Multi-Level Governance," of Authority," in Volker Rittberger and Martin Journal of Common Market Studies, 34 (3): Nettesheim (eds.), Authority in the Global Political 341-378. Economy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 424 HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Rixen, Thomas and Rohlfing, Ingo (2007) "The Scharpf, Fritz W. (1998) "Demokratische Politik in der InstitutionalChoice of Bilaterallsmand Multilateralism internationalisierten Ökonomie," in ^Michael T. in International Trade and Taxation," International Greven (ed.), Demokratie-eine Kultur des Westens? Negotiation, 12 (3): 389-414. 20. Wissenschaftlicher Kongreß der Deutschen Rodrik, Dani (1997) Has Globalization Gone too Vereinigung für Politische Wissenschaft. Opladen: Far? Washington, DC: Institute for International Leske & Budrlch. 81-103. Economics. Scharpf, Fritz W., Reissert, Bernd, and Schnabel, Fritz Rosecrance, Richard, Alexandroff, Alan, Koehler, (1976) Politikverflechtung: Theorie und Empirie des Wallace, Kroll, John, Lacqueur, Shlomit, and Stocker, kooperativen Föderalismus in der Bundesrepublik. John (1977) "Whither Interdependence?," Regensburg: Scriptor. International Organization, 31 (3): 425-471. Schneckener, Ulrich (2006) Transnationaler Terrorismus. Rosecrance, Richard and Stein, Arthur (1973) Charakter und Hintergründe des »neuen« "Interdependence: Myth or Reality?," World Politics, Terrorismus. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. 26 (1): 1-27. Seeleib-Kaiser, Martin (2000) "Politische Diskurse und Rosenau, James N, (1990) Turbulence in World Politics. Wohlfahrtssysteme: Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, A Theory of Change and Continuity. Princeton, NJ: Japan und die USA im Vergleich," Universität Princeton University Press. Bremen: Bremen. Rosenau, James N. (1992) "Governance, Order, and Senghaas, Dieter (1994) Wohin driftet die Welt? Ober Change in World Politics," in Ernst-Otto Czempiel die Zukunft friedlicher Koexistenz. Frankfurt a.M,: and James N. Rosenau (eds.), Governance without Suhrkamp. Government: Order and Change in World Politics. Shanks, Cheryl, Jacobson, Harold K., and Kaplan, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1-29. Jeffrey H. (1996) "Inertia and Change in the" Rosenau, James N. (1997) Along the Domestic-Foreign Constellation of International Governmental Frontier. Exploring Governance in a Turbulent World. Organizations, 1981-1992," International Organi• Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. zation, 50 (4): 593-629. Rucht, Dieter (2004) "The quadruple "A". Media strat• Simmons, Beth A., Dobbin, Frank, and Garrett, Geoffrey egies of protest movements since the 1960s," in (2006) "Introduction: The International Diffusion Wim van de Donk, Brian D. Loader, Paul G. Nixon, of Liberalism," International Organization 60 (4): and Dieter Rucht (eds.), Cyberprotest. New media, 781-810. citizens and social movements. London: Routledge. Simmons, Beth A. (2009) Mobilizing for Human Rights: 29-56. International Law in Domestic Politics. Cambridge: Rucht, Dieter (2010) "Globalisierungskritische Cambridge University Press. Proteste als Herausforderung an die internationale Slaughter, Anne-Marie (1997) "The Real New World Politik," In Michael Zürn and Matthias Ecker- Order," Foreign Affairs, 76 (5): 183-197. Ehrhardt (eds.), Gesellschaftliche Politisierung und Smith, Anthony D. (1979) Nationalism in the Twentieth internationale Institutionen. Frankfurt a.M.: Century. Oxford: Martin Robertson. Suhrkamp Strange, Susan (1996) The Retreat of the State. Thé Ruggie, John G. (1998) Constructing the World Polity. Diffusion of Power in the World Economy. Cambridge: London: Routledge. Cambridge University Press. Russett, Bruce M. and Oneal, John R. (2001) Swank, Duane (2006) "Tax Policy in an Era of. Triangulating Peace. Democracy, Interdependence, Internationalization: An Assessment of a Conditional , and International Organizations. New York, NY: Diffusion Model of the Spread of Neoliberalism," Norton. International Organization 60 (4): 847-882. Sassen, Saskia (1998) Globalization and Its Discontents. Tallberg, Jonas (2002) "Paths to Compliance: • New York, NY: New Press. Enforcement, Management, and the European Scharpf, Fritz W, (1999) Governing in Europe: Union," International Organization, 56 (3): Effective and Democratic? Oxford: Oxford University 609-644. Press. Tarrow, Sidney (2001) "Transnational Politics: ; Scharpf, Fritz W. (1997) "Economic Integration, Contention and Institutions in International Politics,'" • Democracy and the Welfare State," Journal of Annual Review of Political Science, 4 ( 1 ): 1 -20, European Public Policy, 4 (1): 18-36. Tilly, Charles (1984) Big Structures, Large Processes, Scharpf, Fritz W. (1987) Sozialdemokratische Huge Comparisons. New York: Russell Sage . Krisenpolitik in Europa. Frankfurt a.M.: Campus. Foundation. GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 425

Vogel, David (1995) Trading up. Consumer and Zürn, Michael (2004) "Global Governance under Environmental Regulation in a Global Economy. Legitimacy Pressure," Government and Opposition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 39 (2): 260-287. Vogel, Steven K. (1996) Freer Markets, More Rules: Zürn, Michael (2000) "Democratic Governance beyond Regulatory Reform in Advanced Industrial Countries. the Nation-State. The EU and Other International Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Institutions," European Journal of International Wade, Robert H. (2004) "Is Globalization Reducing Relations, 6 (2): 183-221. Poverty and inequality?," World Development, 32 Zürn, Michael (2010) "Global Governance as Multi- (4): 567-589. Level Governance," in Henrik Enderlein, Sonja Wälti, Waltz, Kenneth N. (1979) Theory of International and Michael Zürn (eds.), Handbook of Multi-Level- Politics. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. Governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 80-99. Walzer, Michael (1983) Spheres of Justice: Zürn, Michael, Binder, Martin, Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York: and Radtke, Katrin (2007) "Politische Ordnungs• Basic Books. bildung wider Willen," Zeitschrift für Internationale Weiss, Linda (1998) The Myth of the Powerless State. Beziehungen, 14 (1): 129-164. Governing the Economy in a Global Era. Cambridge: Zürn, Michael and Joerges, Christian (eds.) (2005) Law Polity Press. and Governance in Postnational Europe. Compliance Zacher, Mark W. and Sutton, Brent A. (1996) Governing beyond the Nation-State. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Global Networks. International Regimes for University Press. Transportation and Communication. Cambridge: Zürn, Michael and Leibfried, Stephan (2005) "A New Cambridge University Press. Perspective on the State: Reconfiguring the national Zangl, Bernhard and Zürn, Michael (2003) Frieden und constellation," in Stephan Leibfried and Michael Krieg. Sicherheit in der nationalen und post-nationalen Zürn (eds.), Transformations of the State. Cambridge: Konstellation. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. Cambridge University Press. 1-36. Zürn, Michael (1995) "The Challenge of Globalization Zürn, Michael and Stephen, Matthew (2010) 'The View and Individualization: A View from Europe," in of Old and New Powers on the Legitimacy of Hans-Henrik Holm and Georg Sorensen (eds.), Whose International Institutions," Politics, 30 (1), 91-101. World Order. Boulder, CO: Westview. 43-68. Zürn, Michael and Walter, Gregor (eds.) (2005) Zürn, Michael (1998) Regieren jenseits des Globalizing Interests. Pressure Groups and Nationalstaats. Globalisierung und Denationalisierung Denationalization. Albany, NY: State University of als Chance. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. New York Press.