International Journal of Peace Studies, Volume 16, Number 2, Winter 2011 Searching for Democratic Potential in Emerging Global Governance: What Are the Implications of Regional and Global Involvements of Local Governments? Chadwick F. Alger Abstract Increasing involvement of local governments in global governance is a result of changes in the missions of both global and local government organizations. For example, the UN System mission has extended inside the borders of states as a result of its Millennium Development Goals and its Mission to Protect; and local governments are now engaged in a movement to spread democratic local governments worldwide. For many years there have been global and global region organizations of local governments. Some local government organizations that cross state borders focus on specific issues such as peace, recycling and environment. Efforts are being made to coordinate these organizations through a World Association of Cities and Local Authorities Coordination (WACLAC). There is now a UN Advisory Committee on Local Authorities. The First World Conference on City Diplomacy was held in June 2008. This paper provides an overview of these, and other, developments and examines their potential for future global governance. Introduction The research of this political scientist is focused on international organizations, with emphasis on the United Nations system. In recent years there has been escalating participation in the UN system of actors other than governments of States,1 including NGOs/civil society, business, and local governments (Alger, 2009). As a result, participants in international organizations now include those who have long been studied by separate academic fields. There is now a need to have scholars in these fields extend their agendas to include aspects of global governance. Toward this end, the purpose of this article is to provide an overview of growing involvement of local governments in international organizations in order to place these organizations on the agenda of scholars whose research is focused on the worldwide relations of cities. Recent studies of the world relations of cities have added significantly to our growing understanding of the complexity of world relations. Here are six brief examples: Saskia Sassen, Cities in a World Economy, 2006, “This book shows how some cities …have evolved into transnational ‘spaces.’ As such cities have prospered, they have come to have more in common with one another than with regional centers in their own nation-states …Such developments require all those interested in the fate of cities to rethink traditionally held views of cities as subunits of their nation-states. …” (Sassen, 2006) Joe R. Feagin, The New Urban Paradigm: Critical Perspectives on the City, 1998, “…the first major book to deal centrally and empirically with how the development of large cities is linked to the world capitalist economy, its large multinational 2 Chadwick F. Alger corporations, and its processes of economic restructuring across the globe.” (Feagin, 1998) Paul L. Knox and Peter J. Taylor, World Cities in a World-System, 1995, analyzes the nature of “world cities” and their relationships with one another and with the world economy, within various conceptual frameworks. (World Cities in a World-System, 1995) Peter J. Taylor, World City Network: A Global Urban Analysis, 2004,” the focus is on inter-city relations, on dependencies and interdependencies between cities.” (Taylor, 2004) John Rennie Short and Yeong-Hyun Kim, Globalization and the City, 1999, they “distinguish three related aspects of globalization”, economic globalization, cultural globalization, and political globalization, and conclude that “global processes lead to changes in the city and cities rework and situate globalization.” (Short, 1999) H. V. Savitch and Paul Kantor, Cities in the International Marketplace: The Political Economy of Urban Development in North America and Western Europe, 2002, compares ten cities in Europe and North America, with a final chapter: “Conclusions: Cities need not be leaves in the Wind.” (Preparing for the Urban Future, 1996; Savitch, 2002) These six volumes, and numerous other books and articles, have greatly extended our knowledge of the increasingly complicated nature of relations among human settlements around the world. I am sure that these authors could offer very useful insights on emerging global governance by extending their agendas to include international organizations created by local governments, and their participation in the UN system. Recently there has been growing concern about the threat that escalating globalization poses to local democracy (Globalism and Local Democracy, 2002). On the other hand, the escalating participation of local governments in regional and global governance suggests that democratic potential could be emerging out of local responsiveness. This search for democratic potential in emerging involvement of local authorities in global governance is rooted in my long-held belief that we must reach beyond State models in our effort to comprehend governance reaching across State boundaries (Alger, 1977). Among those offering significant theoretical insights have been David Mitrany and Ernst Haas. In a 1966 work on functionalism, Mitrany perceived cooperation across state borders as extending to more and more functions to the point that a “a web of international activities and agencies” will overlay political divisions (Mitrany, 1966). In 1970 Haas criticized his earlier state- centered approach to regional integration in Europe by perceiving the emergence of “asymmetrical overlapping”, meaning that authority drawn from States “is distributed asymmetrically among several centers, among which no single dominant one may emerge ....” with respect to “legitimacy in the eyes of citizens ... the image of infinitely tiered multiple loyalties might be the appropriate one.” (E. Haas, 1970) But it was Dahl and Tufte who first prodded me, in 1973, to ponder the democratic relevance of the growing “web of international activities and agencies” of Mitrany, and the “asymmetrical overlapping” of Haas, when they asserted “that ‘theory’ then needs to do what democratic theory has never done: to offer guidance about the appropriate relations among units.” (Dahl, 1973a) “Rather than conceiving of democracy as located in a particular kind of inclusive sovereign unit, we Searching for Democratic Potential in Emerging Global Governance 3 must learn to conceive of democracy spreading through a set of interrelated political systems ... none of which is sovereign.” (Dahl, 1973a, p. 135) The recent growth in regional and global involvements of local governments is offering empirical evidence that is responsive to the theoretical challenge offered by Dahl and Tufte. Local governments are now forming organizations that range from local regions, to global regions, to the entire world. Thus, in response to their dynamically changing worldwide linkages, authorities in these more limited territories are finding it necessary to develop organizations that parallel those of States. At this point we can only speculate on the degree to which they are a potential response to Dahl and Tufte’s plea for a “democracy spreading through a set of interrelated political systems ... none of which is sovereign.” (Dahl, 1973a) The primary goal of this article is to facilitate perception of the growing, and very complicated, involvement in global governance by local governments. I. Global organizations of local governments Governments of cities throughout the world have joined together to create organizations, with some having general purposes and some more limited concerns. A typology of global organizations is presented in Table 1. 1. Global Membership, General Purpose. The oldest in this category was the International Union of Local Authorities (IULA) founded in 1913 in Ghent, Belgium, with its headquarters later in The Hague. Its aims were to promote local autonomy, contribute toward improvement of local administration, study questions concerning life and activities of local authorities and welfare of citizens, promote the idea of participation of the population in civic affairs, and establish and develop international municipal relations. IULA held its 36th Congress in Rio de Janeiro in May 2001, with 1100 representatives of local governments, their associations and related donor agencies and governments present from 90 countries. Included in the main points coming out of the plenary sessions were (1) the assertion that local democracy is the fundamental source of legitimacy, (2) the importance of strong local Government Associations, uniting and representing all local governments, both nationally and internationally, and (3) recognition of Municipal International Cooperation as a cost- effective and stimulating way to strengthen local government. Table 1: Global Organizations of Local Governments (1) General purpose United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) www.cities-localgovernments.org (2) Larger cities Metropolis is the World Association of Major Metropolises www.metropolis.org (3) Environmental focus ICLEI, Local Governments for Sustainability www.iclei.org (4) Peace Focus Conference of Mayors for Peace www.mayorsforpeace.org (5) Language focus Association Internationales des Maires Francophones, Paris, France www.aimf.asso.fr Federation Mondial des Cities Unies (FMCU), with headquarters in Paris, was active for some forty years with an agenda quite similar