Politika, Politológia | Felsőoktatás » Dr. Alan Russell - The State and Other Actors in Contemporary World Politics

Source: http://www.doksinet Toulouse IEP December 2007 THE STATE AND OTHER ACTORS IN CONTEMPORARY WORLD POLITICS Dr. Alan Russell Email: a.mrussell@staffsacuk 1 Source: http://www.doksinet ANNEE UNIVERSITAIRE 2007/2008 Master Science Politique Mention 3 – Relations Internationales Spécialité : « Géopolitiques des Relations Internationales » The State and other Actors in Contemporary World Politics (M. Allan RUSSEL) DEVOIR SUR TABLE – DUREE 2 HEURES Answer one question only : 1. Why should the discipline of International Relations study actors other than the state ? 2. Explain why the concept of “interdependence” in so important 3. How important are international institutions in the process of international organisation ? 4. Using examples explain why regional integration is important in international relations. 5. How important are international organisations with universal membership, such as the United Nations or the World Trade Organisation ? 6. Using

examples assess the importance of international non-governmental organisations. Devoir à rendre par voie électronique au plus tard : le lundi 10 décembre 2007 au matin. – Délai de rigueur master@sciencespo-toulouse.fr 2 Source: http://www.doksinet THE STATE AND OTHER ACTORS IN CONTEMPORARY WORLD POLITICS PART 1 Objectives of session: • • • To introduce the idea of a ‘mixed actor’ international system. To identify characteristics of actor-ness in international relations. To identify challenges to the traditional view of international relations focused on a system of states. Outline 1. 2. 3. State-centric realism Challenges to state-centric image Actors and transnational effects on international relations 1. State-centric realism A traditional conceptualisation in International Relations has been associated with ‘state-centric realism’ (see the work of H.J Morgenthau, M Wight, etc) Some key assumptions of state-centric view: 1. 2. 3. ‘State as actor’

assumption i.e state is only important actor ‘State as unitary actor’ assumption i.e state is cohesive or unitary actor Power in all forms is sought by states i.e ‘international politics like all politics is a struggle for power’ (Morgenthau) The ability to ‘act’ is identified with: 4. 5. 6. Sovereignty i.e there is no legal authority superior to the state Recognition i.e other states admit/refuse admission to the ‘club’ of states – mutual recognition Territoriality i.e state has control over its territory and population Thus state power enables states to dominate the international system. They are independent, autonomous actors whose governments represent them. States / governments act as unitary or monolithic structures in order to express / satisfy needs / demands of domestic societies. Neo-realist (eg K Waltz) suggests states are ‘like units’ in the same way economists assume firms to be like units concerned with the maximisation of profits. Certain issues

dominate the international agenda: 7. There is a hierarchy of issues dominated by security i.e states use military power/preparedness to achieve security The international agenda reflects the concerns (or national interests) of states / governments. Questions: • Why has the state-centric perspective associated with political realism dominated the study of international relations for so long? 3 Source: http://www.doksinet • Does it offer an effective simplification of the real world that can give useful insight into international politics? 2. Challenges to state-centric image One challenge (Hocking and Smith, World Politics) suggests that there is no ‘uniform’ state (they are therefore not like units). There are great differences between developed, developing and less developed states. There are big differences between former Eastern bloc states and the west Many states are relatively ‘fragile’. The modernized state (developed) performs a wide range of functions

concerned with a much wider set of issues which cross the domestic / foreign policy divide. States differ in the extent that they seek to gain by and influence this greater range of issues and there can be problems for them: • • • Danger of overload and fragmentation as government itself becomes an arena for competing groups. Their ability to deliver / satisfy expectations can be challenged. Growth of centres of power other than state / government apparatus – powerful sectional interest groups, corporations, etc. Thus challenge concerns the greater pluralism in domestic and international systems. There is a greater range of actors and issues that we must consider. Some key features of this viewpoint follow: R. Keohane and J Nye define transnational interactions as: "The movement of tangible or intangible items across state boundaries when at least one actor is not an agent of a government or an intergovernmental organisation". (Thus: a transnational interaction may

involve governments but not only governments) INTERACTIONS OF 3 TYPES ARE OF NOTE: a) where actors do not leave their locations -e.g banking, newspapers, tele-communications b) transnational organisations -i.e where they have bases in more than one state and interact with other states governments or societies (e.g MNCs, PLO) These are non-state actors c) transgovernmental relations -i.e where sections of government (such as government departments or agencies) communicate with sections of governments in other countries. Linked to the idea of bureaucratic politics within individual governments and states, but extended transnationally (see below). Transnational applies when states as actor assumption is relaxed. Transgovernmental applies when states as unitary actor assumption is relaxed. TRANSGOVERNMENTAL BEHAVIOUR: a) transgovernmental policy coordination -Informal communication between national officials/bureaucrats who regularly meet -transgovernmental attitudes developing among

national officials/bureaucrats b) transgovernmental coalition building -Coalitions of national officials/bureaucrats to influence government decision-making -attempts by governmental sub-units to bring actors from other governments into their own decisionmaking as allies -Transgovernmental conflicts THUS: LEVELS OF INTERACTION: Supra-national Intergovernmental Transgovernmental Transnational Subnational 4 Source: http://www.doksinet Questions: • Identify examples each of the levels of interaction above • Identify an example of transgovernmental policy co-ordination • Identify an example of transgovernmental coalition building 3. Actors and transnational effects on international relations Keohane and Nye suggested 5 major effects of transnational interactions: 1. Attitude changes -Face to face contact alters opinions within and between societies -Elites and non-elites both affected -development of transnational "cultures" -Emergence of world products and fashions

-Spread of ideals/ideology 2. The promotion of international pluralism -Linking of interest groups across borders -Tremendous growth of INGOs -Internationalising of domestic politics -Functionalism and neofunctionalism considered significant -Greater dispersion of decision-making influence in system 3. Growth of interdependence and dependence two categories: a) sensitivity interdependence: -Liability to costly effects imposed from outside the state before policies are altered to change the effects -i.e the sensitivity of one society to things happening elsewhere b)vulnerability interdependence -An actors liability to suffer costs imposed by external events even after their own policies are altered -i.e degree of sensitivity remaining after efforts to reduce it THUS: Interdependence can be a source of conflict Interdependence as mutual dependence 4. Certain governments may find their ability to influence others increases -Governments may manipulate interdependence in their favour:

e.g trade flows, using MNCs etc e.g states with strong currencies may influence exchange rates worldwide 5. The emergence of transnational organisations with private foreign policies -MNCs using political influence -INGOs with policies -Which transnational organisations have political power? Questions: • Identify some examples of sensitivity interdependence • Identify some examples where interdependence suggests vulnerability • What are the advantages of defining interdependence as ‘mutual dependence’? 3. Transnational issues A selection: -Transnational economic processes -Growth and influence of INGOs -MNCs and their activities -International religious issues -Revolutionary organisations -Terrorism -Private international finance 5 Source: http://www.doksinet -Governments and international business -Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -Transnational pressure group activity -Drugs trafficking -Organised crime -The environment International political economy

issues are of particular note. Essential argument that the international system has changed so much that the realist approach is much less relevant. Questions Why might the pluralist perspective provide a more relevant framework of analysis? Does it give a better interpretation of the structure of the global system? Does the approach give a better insight into the process of change? Does the approach give any insights into order and stability? Does the approach effectively offer an alternative range of issues to realism? THUS: IN SUMMARY Multiple channels of communication Multiple issues (other than security) Force not relevant in dealing with many issues PART 2 THE IMPACT OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION ON THE GLOBAL SYSTEM: REGIONALISM AND UNIVERSALISM Objectives • • To indicate the range of international organisations evident today in the international system To offer classifications and key features Introduction: -Post-war rapid expansion of state system -45 states to 180+

-thus universal organisation (where all states can join) becomes more complex: a) more states to involve in discussions (see growth in UN membership) b) wider range of issues on agenda -it is increasingly evident not all issues are universal -regions a "natural" focus? Outline: 1. The concept of international organisation 2. Traditions in the study of international organisation 3. International order and the challenges for international organisation since the end of the Cold War 4. Perspectives and the future of international organisations 5. Regionalism and integration 6. A typology of types of organisation 7. Regionalism vs Universalism 6 Source: http://www.doksinet 8. Organisations and the global system 1. International organisation as a concept -Context of growing complexity of world - i.e ever more to organise -Universal and/or regional dimensions to this BY DEFINITION "INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION" HAS TWO PARTS TO IT:1. 2. International organisation is a

process the international system requires organising International organisations are institutions - institutions assist in this process Thus: We need to examine the process of organising international relations and the role of institutions in this. See, Clive Archer, International Organizations, or A. LeRoy, Bennett, International Organizations 2. Traditions in the study of international organisation Origins of the study: 1. The diplomatic historian 2. The international lawyer 3. The progressive rationalist social engineer 4. The emergence of IR as a discipline Four phases of study: 1. Formal institutions as a focus - especially at height of League of Nations and early years of UN 2. Institutional processes as a focus - processes of decision-making examined in terms of the politics etc involved. 3. Organisational roles - increasing questioning of the extent different types of IO are part of the larger process of organisation. 4. Governance and regimes as a focus - a more recent focus

on norms and principles leading to decision-making and rules, in issue areas. Decision-making and rule formation in issue areas without necessarily a focus on any specific organisation - principles and underlying norms addressed. The link with international relations -Largely a sub-field of I.R - but other influences also -Thus the main perspectives in I.R impinge on the study of IO i.e 1. Inter-war years idealism 2. Post-war political realism 3. 1970s onwards and transnationalism and interdependence 4. Some elements of N-S structural dependency (after Marxism) See: R. Little & M Smith (eds) Perspectives on World Politics, 2nd edition, 1991 The problem of order, governance & stability -The general importance of order in international relations - i.e stability, limiting violence and "justice" -Problem of differing views on order -Institutions when associated with order often have optimistic beginnings -The international political context can both give rise to I.O and

limit the effectiveness of institutions Todays international agenda is complex and diverse - so are the institutions 7 Source: http://www.doksinet 3. International order and the challenges for international organisation since the end of the Cold War -Order is undoubtedly a major international issue - as it always has been (See R. Lieber, No Common Power) -BUT there have been changes in its conceptualisation: -Changes are related to the altering agenda of international relations practice and:-Changes are related in part to new theories or perspectives -THUS CONCERN OVER: -International justice -Welfare -Human rights -Participation in the political process -Access to equitable share of resources -Changes in the former E. Bloc associated with much of this -North-South problems reflect such concerns -Order means more perhaps than the political stability of the state system - distributive issues and justice are significant -Concept of New World Order to embrace! -Legal aspects of

international relations are still significant and relate to order -Increased complexity of the system is reflected in issues of international law Thus our insight over international organisation: a) As PROCESS and b) As INSTITUTIONS must reflect these changes 4. Perspectives and the future of international organisations See: C. Pentland in Little & Smith, Perspectives on World Order (and this text generally) And: C. Archer, International Organizations Our assessment of the future of international organisation is shaped by the perspective we adopt Political realism -I.O has a restricted future contingent upon what states will allow and in relation to national interests - thus I.Os continue to be used by states a) -Neo-Realists (since 1980s) see the importance of governance but have focused more on: Hegemonic leadership - although they note the decline of the USA b) Regimes -With the decline of hegemony some see scope for global order through co-operation (e.g R Keohane) Pluralism

-Traditional home of much of the study of IO -Wide-ranging perspective that by definition challenges state-centric interpretations -Many types of non-state actor seen as significant in a world of varied and increasingly complex issues - including INGOs -Concepts ranging from interdependence, transnationalism, to integration are utilised -Functionalist, and neo-functionalist images can be incorporated (but not by everyone) Neo-functionalists see pluralist process as very significant in a regional context 8 Source: http://www.doksinet -Complex economic issues invite consideration of many types of actor -Environmental issues in relation to both IGOs and INGOs can be included Dependency -IO focus harder to pin down than with pluralism -Dependency as a focus has many variants Thus -Some see key institutions as instruments of Northern dominance/imperialism (e.g through IMF, World Bank, WTO and BINGOs) -Some have seen institutions as a basis for resisting Northern dominance (e.g through

General Assembly, UNCTAD) -Some globalists see trends towards institutions which will serve the needs of the planet rather than a small elite 5. Regionalism and integration The long established contrast between REGIONAL and UNIVERSAL dimensions to international organisation remain: -Witness the establishment of the next European stage - the European Union -Witness the complex mix of institutional arrangements vis-à-vis European security (NATO, WEU, OSCE, EU) -What prospects for an expanded EU? -Certainly closer links with other European states -Witness the development of NAFTA - its expansion in future might invoke a regional focus At the universal level consider the recent focus on a New World Order (but dont hold your breath!) The literature will undoubtedly continue to debate all of these developments and perspectives will no doubt be refined. But the following perspectives on integration remain useful: 1. Federalism -oldest theory -involves government and political elite

promoting integration -supranationalism as objective -governments give up power to higher body with loss of sovereignty -two or more levels of government result -domestic models - USA, Switzerland -process of integration is political -aim to pacify relations between states -empahasis on end product rather than process of integration 2. Pluralism or confederalism -community of states - not supranationalism -"we feeling between states -friendship instead of conflict - war inconceivable as a means to resolve conflicts -involves government and political elite promoting integration -also formal and informal exchanges between societies -process of integration is again political -end product is a condition rather than a process 3. Functionalism Much owed to David Mitrany -end product of integrative process not specified -focus is on the process itself -social and economic needs as focus in an increasingly complex world -such needs beyond capacity of individual countries -networks of

functional institutions result -many organisations formed for functional ends 9 Source: http://www.doksinet -form follows function -final end result not specified -"working peace system" due to complex ties between societies -governmental and non-governmental institutions active in process -important role for technocrats/bureaucrats -plus democratic assemblies 4. Neofunctionalism - a return to power in integration Much owed to Ernst B. Haas -merges insights from functionalism and federalism -much attention on w. European experience -assumes positive goal can be identified and worked towards eg. Supranational government -power of governments/elites to promote or resist integration recognised -given the will - then functional means are best for promoting integration -key institutions delegated or created - eg. Coal and steel community, commission etcestablishment of many functional institutions on road to integration -spillover as important concept - spillover to political

integration -i.e Technical integration leads to political integration Thus: -importance of process of integration -importance of integration as a condition -possible mix between: federalism confederalism functionalism neofunctionalism (and other approaches) The concept of regional organisation "Regional" organisation is difficult to define -N.B the extremes of a) two geographically adjacent countries and b) universal membership of an I.O -Regional organisation falls between these extremes -But: How do we define "region"? -We can usually define a core set of states with geographic proximity -Problem is peripheries blur -How homogenous should members be? Organisations of like units? -Are regions defined by high levels of interdependence and interaction among units? -No regional organisation covers all states in a continent (OAU is nearest - less S. Africa; and OAS contains most states in its continent) Many cover more than one continent In addition to geographic

considerations there are other characteristics. Thus: Geographic ) Economic ) Social ) set of Cultural ) characteristics Political ) Security ) -Homogeneity and interdependence in these 6 dimensions help define a region Difficult cases: -Is OPEC regional? -Is there a North Atlantic "region"? -How is the Commonwealth best described? -How extensive is Europe as a region? 6. A typology of inter-national organisations 10 Source: http://www.doksinet -IGO UN -INGO. GREENPEACE -UNIVERSAL UN (and Agencies) -REGIONAL EU, OAS -TECHNICAL WIPO. -ECONOMIC IMF, WTO -SPECIFIC WHO, UPU -GENERAL UN, EU -POLITICAL ANC, AU -MILITARY NATO Categories are not mutually exclusive West Europe as most integrated region: -EUROPEAN COMMUNITY Council of Europe European Parliament European Commission -WEU -OECD -NATO -BENELUX -NORDIC COUNCIL -EFTA Questions: • To what extent are technical or ‘functional’ international organisations more effective than international organisations that are focused

on political agendas? Give examples. • To what extent do international organisations provide a degree of international governance given the absence of a world government? • How effective are the respective theories of integration in explaining the development of regional organisations? 7. Regional vs Universal? a) Regional organisation: -alternative to universalism -easier to achieve -more efficient -political units more homogenous -sometimes general - e.g Eu -sometimes specific - opec -sometimes dependent on a major power - e.g NATO, SEATO (now defunct), OAS (all with US) -regional disintegration possible, e.g Warsaw Pact, CMEA b) Regionalism (see P. Taylor, International Organization in the Modern World) -The search for "that area in which a function might be most efficiently performed" -Thus: a utilitarian concept -However: a territory may also be seen as not necessarily being the best for the performance of individual tasks, but is a compromise for the attainment of

a range of tasks -Institutions may then be considered in relation to regional aspirations and characteristics -Links to concepts like integration -Many types of writings on regionalism: Quantitative (to define regions) The process of regionalism/integration Prescriptive writing Focus as alternative to limitations of universalism See, A. Gamble and A Payne (eds), Regionalism and World Order (1996) and L Fawcett and A Hurrell (eds), Regionalism in World Politics, (1995) c) links with universalism 11 Source: http://www.doksinet -Often seen as more effective from regional point of view (e.g in growth period of OAS) -Can complement universalism while being more comprehensively integrative (e.g EU) -Can be stepping stone to co-ordinated activity at universal level G.77 and UNCTAD EU and UN, NAFTA, EU, APEC and GATT/WTO -If federalism results out of regionalism a larger unit then exists for universal participation 8. Organisations and the global system -The question may be asked: What

affect do International Organisations actually have on the global system? -It is clear that the increasing complexity of the global system has given rise to enormous scope for international institutions at the regional and/or universal levels -Nevertheless we can summarise the potential impact of organisations with reference to three possible categories of impact as identified by Charles Pentland: a) International Organisations as instruments of policy (a realist state centric view) -Large states are probably on the whole more able to utilise international organisations in their pursuit of foreign policy than small states -However, even large states are not free to exploit them as they wish. Examples like the US using the UN in the Korean War context are rare -Yet between states there may be a consensus to try to achieve certain tasks, which international organisations become the instrument of that common requirement -Small states may use the organisation quite effectively as a means

to draw larger states into providing public goods that they also benefit from (often the case in security organisations with one large state and numerous small ones) b) International organisations as systemic modifiers of state behaviour -International organisations may be seen to restrain the behaviour of states -They are part of the landscape on which states operate -".they are institutional channels, obstacles, and aids collectively created by states which modify the traditional laissez-faire character of their relationships" (Pentland) -The growth of interdependence and the corresponding huge growth in numbers of INGOs as well as IGOs provide a "web" of interdependence in the words of Mitrany -Images of globalisation add further emphasis to this view as a minimum c) International organisations as actors -It may be questioned how autonomous international organisations are -INGOs certainly are independent for the most part -But increasingly we might argue that

IGOs can directly influence states or avoid being influenced by individual states -In addition to this we could argue that with increased globalisation and the general erosion of the borders of states and the compromises to sovereignty entailed, then governments are just one type of actor in a complex global system. Governments are therefore losing control anyway in the face of an onslaught of globalising factors. Questions: • Which of the three views outlined by Pentland best explains the impact of international organisations? • To what extent are regional organisations a response to the limitations of universal organisations? • To what extent are regional organisations a response to the governance problems resulting from globalisation? Two particular points summarise the above: A) There remains great scope for processes of international organisation 12 Source: http://www.doksinet There is much to organise out there! B) The problems requiring organisation may themselves be

getting more complex More states and non-state actors interacting. Conclusion You should develope an understanding of: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Concepts appropriate to the study of international organisation (including I.O itself) Theoretical explanations or interpretations of I.O and integration (functionalism/federalism) The structures of various organisations and the methods by which they take decisions and implement them - the "nuts & bolts" Case examples of a variety of types of I.O, their roles and their influence in issues areas The processes involved in organisation such as consultation, co-operation, co-ordination etc. -Case studies represent the best way to bring these things together -Include IGOs and INGOs -General IO texts cover most of the above -Some specific reading needed on case examples -International organisations of a huge variety of types and specialisms are affecting the global system in many ways. -As this system itself is radically transforming there is

likely to be a growth in the scope of international actors, such as IGOs and INGOs to make a mark - alongside TNCs, international banks, international pressure groups etc. -In other words the globalisation process is in part reflected in the very importance and activities of the international institutions. PART 3 CASE STUDIES The project is focused on examining inter-governmental organisations (IMF, OECD etc). The project thus constitutes the development of case studies of certain types of international organisations. There follows some case examples of international non-governmental organisations: The Erosion of National Borders and the Impact of International Nongovernmental Organisations: Greenpeace, Amnesty International. Introduction Traditionally the study of international organisation concentrated on international governmental organisation as states were perceived to have certain characteristics in international law: 1. States with few exceptions are the subjects of

international law. 2. Sovereign states are equal in their standing in international law. 3. They are constitutionally self-contained and international law cannot interfere internally. Thus international organisations comprised of states could have a legal standing in international law. 13 Source: http://www.doksinet This view has altered. a) Certain organisations have always admitted non-state representatives as well as states: e.g ITU, UPU; b) Some organisations favour certain states in the decision-making processes e.g IMF; UN (Security Council) The doctrine that states cannot be bound by agreements to which they are not party would lead to the inference that unanimity would be required. These weaknesses in a strict state-centric legalistic approach open up wider avenues. Thus we can approach the study of international organisation in a more pluralistic fashion taking account of: IGOs Transgovernmental organisations Transnational organisations/International Non-Governmental

organisations The genuine INGO has only members which are non-governmental (hybrid INGOs may have government representatives also). "Such organisations bring together the representatives of likeminded groups from more than two countries" (Archer, 1992:42) eg International Olympic Committee, World Council of Churches. Note that the membership can be other organisations or individuals. However, it is usual in the study of international organisation to limit attention to non-profit organisations. Aim of this lecture: To focus attention on the general importance of international non-governmental organisations; to provide an overview of two significant examples. Aim of section The broad aim of the section is to introduce INGOs into our analysis of the process of actors, international organisation and governance. Two important examples will be highlighted as well as introducing the phenomenon of specialist transnational networking. In the context of globalisation such developments

are becoming considerably more significant. Outline 1. 2. 3. Epistemic communities, regimes and transnational networking Greenpeace and global environmental concerns. Amnesty International and human rights. 1. Epistemic communities In the first instance it is importance to identify context for the operation of important INGOs. Epistemic communities offer a useful way to undertake this. The concept has gained considerable attention both with respect to the study of international organisation and the study of policy networks. Epistemic communities can be defined as: "networks of knowledge-based experts." Or more specifically: ".a network of professionals with recognised expertise and competence in a particular domain and an authoratitive claim to policy relevant knowledge within that domain or issue area." See P.M Haas, in International Organisation, Vol46, no1, Winter 1992, p3 Special edition on epistemic communities. They can be transnational and have four

characteristics: 1. A shared set of normative and principled beliefs, which provide a value-based rationale for social action of the members of the community. 14 Source: http://www.doksinet This could for example centre on a common view by a transnational community of scientists and others that the quality of the global environment is being eroded by human activity. 2. Shared causal beliefs, which are derived from their analysis of practices leading to or contributing to a central set of problems in their domain. From this policy options are considered in relation to desired outcomes. In relation to damage to the ozone layer a transnational epistemic community of concerned scientists emerged after 1974 (following the publication of an hypothesis which suggested chlorine in CFC emmissions could damage the ozone layer). It included individual scientists, international organisations (notably UNEP - the UN Environment Programme - governmental officials (such as members of the US

Environmental Protection Agency, and others. The community assisted in the dissemination of new scientific information which kept the issue alive. 3. Shared notions of validity - that is intersubjective, internally defined criteria for weighing and validating knowledge in the domain of their expertise. Such a consensus enhances their influence on others who might seek their advice, or respond to it if the issues are brought to their attention. In the ozone depletion case the community gradually swayed governments and organisations to seriously consider the issue - leading to UNEP taking a lead in working towards an international Convention to be followed by a Protocol. 4. A common policy enterprise - or set of common practices associated with a set of problems to which their professional competence is directed (and which could enhance human welfare in their view). In the ozone depletion case the epistemic community pushed for action to lower CFC emissions. States gradually came to

respond (although it took the discovery of the hole in ozone layer over Antarctica in 1985 to spur real and substantial action). The Montreal Protocol resulted - which led to deep cuts in global CFC emissions. Epistemic communities can be very influential as they are underscored by the power of collective knowledge. Often the network involved is transnational and can bring together many acknowledged expert groups including INGOs and organisations within states. Other examples of epistemic communities at work to influence international policy outcomes include: The network of well placed professional economists in the US and Britain, along with policy specialists who brought Keynsian theory to bear on the design of the post-war Bretton Woods economic system. An epistemic community was responsible for shifting the prevaling opinion on food aid to one that recognised that giving food donations in respsonse to shortages could create dependence rather than alleviate the long term problem of

food production. Where epistemic communities represent consensus withing the network other forms of transnational interactions are less cohesive. Organisations like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth can interact across borders to challenge governments, firms and other organisations. However, at times they might be part of epistemic communities. Greenpeace The US has had a long tradition of environmental organisations. The Sierra Club for example goes back to 1892. Yet since the 1980s the fastest growing in terms of membership in the US was Greenpeace. In the US it was doubling its membership and its budget every two or three years. By 1989 it was adding 50, 000 members every month in the US. 15 Source: http://www.doksinet From 5 international affiliates in the late 1970s Greenpeace International has become a federation of over 20 national organisations with a membership of over 4 million. It is a loose global federation held together by an annual meeting that agrees on a common

set of priorities and strategy. Greenpeace (and Friends of the Earth) became heavily involved in: The Antarctic mineral negotiations The London Dumping Convention on disposal of waste at sea The negotiations leading to the Montreal Protocol - in particular advising the Australian and Norwegian delegates, who were pushing for a phaseout date of 1997 for CFCs, as a means to try to pressure the US and Britain. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) The whaling moratorium put in place by the International Whaling Commission In another famous case Greenpeace found out that Burger King in the mid-1980s imported to the US 700,000 steers from Costa Rica which was destroying rainforest to create cattle pastures covering from 8.5 to 20 million acres in 20 years They organised a boycott (with other organisations) against Burger King who stopped the imports. Over the years Green peace has been associated with both attempts to engage the policy process by joining in

networks and using direct action in the form of interfering with waste being dumped at sea, entering French nuclear weapons testing areas, and occupying Brent Spar. Perhaps the most famous involvement in recent years was the Brent Spar campaign. Brent Spar Brent Spar was a redundant floating storage and oil loading facility that Shell was planning to sink in deep water. It weighed 14,500 tonnes The DTI in Britain gave permssion for it to be sunk This was estimated to cost £12 million against disposal on land at £46 million. Shell initially planned to bring it ashore. It was not cost that changed their mind but they came to a conclusion that it was too fragile to tip on its side and fill with inert gas to assist moving it in shallow coastal waters. At first there was little discussion of the decision in the media. It all smacked of a cosy arrangement between Shell and the DTI. Then on 30th April 1995 Greenpeace occupied Brent Spar. On 20th June Shell abandoned its plan to sink Brent

Spar. Grant Jordan, "Indirect Causes and Effects in Policy Change: The Brent Spar Case", in Public Administration, vol.76, Winter 1998, pp713-740) explores the causes of the policy change He argues it was not just a direct consequence of the occupation. Effects of the Greenpeace action included: 1. At a superficial level we can suggest there was political action by Greenpeace and a response by Shell. 2. More subtly we can suggest that Greenpeace succeeded in changing how the issue was defined Initially Shell and the DTI defined the issue as an industry matter. The industry took the view that international law on dumping had been framed when oil facilities were working closer to shore and that dumping on the sea bed was unacceptable. over time the increase in size of the facilities and furhter out from shore meant that sinking was more viable (and less environmentally damaging) than disposal on land 16 Source: http://www.doksinet Greenpeace used a different logic and

saw international opinion as generally moving against prohibitions to all forms of dumping. Shell saw it like dumping a nail on Loch Ness Green peace defined it as the start of a process that could lead to a village pond full of rustng cars. 3. Greenpeace published a document suggesting the contents were harmful pollutants. With the public ignorant of the science they took Greenpeace on trust. Shell cited an article in nature that suggested such metals (i.ethe waste) were a natural seabed phenomenon due to volcanic activity. 4. Greenpeace engaged Shell in a PR battle. At one point they claimed Shell had misled the public by not admitting to 5,000 tonnes of oil on board. This claim by Greenpeace was later shown to be in error. They also calimed the structure was to be sunk in the North sea when the plan had been to sink it in the much deeper North Atlantic. 5. The campaign began to create complex international links involving Greenpeace PR activity all over Europe and the response

of the media. A boycott of Shell petrol stations by geen sensitive Germans led Shell Germany to put pressure on Shell UK to change the decision. The whole battle took on an image in the media of David versus Goliath. 6. The whole issue also became linked to a meeting of Environment Ministers from North Sea countries in early June. Some say it was to influence this planned meeting that Greenpeace occupied the structure. 7. European governments began to respond to the transnational debates and pressures from within their own countries and publically began to support disposal on land. Both Greenpeace and one senior Shell representative used the phrase "defining moment or event in the environmental movement. Amnesty International Amnesty International was launched in 1961 by Peter Beneson (with the assistance of Eric Baker a prominent Quaker; Louis Blom-Cooper, a well known lawyer; David Astor, the editor of The Observer; and Gerald Gardiner who later became Lord Chancellor). It

published the following aim: ". to work impartially for the release of those imprisoned for their opinions, to seek for them a fair (and public) trial, to enlarge the right to asylum, to help political refugees find work, and to urge the creation of effective international machinery to guarantee freedom of opinion". Six weeks after its launch it held its first international meeting (with representatives from Belgium, France, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, , Britian and the United States). In 1961 Amnesty had 19 staff and an annual budget of £35,000. By 1981 it had 150 staff and an annual budget of £2 million. By 1992 it had 1.1 million members, subscribers and donors in 150 countries, over 8,000 local Amnesty groups in 70 countries and a budget of £12.75 million There are strict controls on who it will take money from to avoid undue influence. (Grant Jordan and William Maloney, The Protest Business (Manchester UP, 1997). In 1977 it was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize

in recognition of its work. Its main underlying logic is that governments respond to public opinion. The core of Amnesty International is the Local Groups who may use different strategies in different contexts. he Local Groups are based around particluar prisoners or groups of prisoners or specified countries activities. 17 Source: http://www.doksinet Quite persuasion by friends may help some prisoners best while others require huge internationally orchestrated campaigns. National Sections send a representative to an annual International Council Meeting where the International Executive Committee is elected. The committee then directs the work of the International Secretariat and appoints a Secretary General. There is also a national level conference. Overall its mandate is based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In some respects the operation of Amnesty is cumbersome and decisions it takes over its priorities, tactics, and strategies are dictated by the vagaries of

international events. Yet it has sometimes been more effective than governments or the UNs Human Rights Committee. Its methods include: Letter writitng campaigns Adopting identified prisoners Careful investigations (on the spot if possible) Publicity and testimony concerning those still held prisoner in violation of human-rights standards Current work focuses amongst many other things on: Extrajudicial executions "Disapearances" Torture or ill-treatment Prisoners of conscience Unfair trials Detention without charge or trial Death penalty Human rights abuses by armed opposition groups It produces masses of documents and mobilises public and governmental opinion the world over. Conclusion Greenpeace and Amnesty International are just two INGOs with worldwide impact. They are transnational in their activity and often score spectacular successes. However, they are not the only INGOs by far. Many others meet important functions and for come theorists (e.g functionalists) they

represent a key factor in dealing with complex modern international problems. In this they are part of an integration process Questions: • To what extent are international non-governmental organisations increasing in importance as a consequence of globalisation? • How useful is the Brent Spar example in illustrating the range of important actors in a complex ‘mixed actor’ sytem? • Identify other examples of ‘epistemic communities’. To compare with the international non-governmental examples and the inter-governmental examples of the projects, we can also consider the European Union. The EU represents the most integrated example of a regional organisation, it represents the only example suggested to have attained a degree of supra-nationality, and it is currently advancing further into integration with the single currency. 18 Source: http://www.doksinet REGIONAL INTEGRATION: The EU We have seen that the concept of regional integration and associated with this regional

organisation is difficult to define. Problems of geography and scope of organisational activity; the degree of homogeneity of members; the need to address geographic, economic, social, cultural, political, and security dimensions. No two regional organisations fulfil any one set of criteria Nearest to continental coverage have been the OAS and the OAU. Less clear examples are OPEC and the Commonwealth. Asia-Pacific has a growing number of regional organisations but there is tendency to look outward rather than across the region (although this is changing). Objectives: • To provide an overview of EU integration • To consider the EU as an actor in the global political economy • To consider the EU’s trade position and the role of the Euro Outline 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Historical context Structure and decision-making European integration External relations The EU in the global economy 1. Historical context to European integration • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Postwar European reconstruction Marshall Plan and OEEC (becomes OECD) 1948 NATO formed in 1949 European Defence Community devised, 1951 (overtaken by WEU) WEU fully set up 1955 (begun in 1948 with Brussels Treaty) European Payments Union, 1950 for currency convertability European Coal & Steel Community signed by the six, 1951 Treaty of Rome establishes European Economic Community (EEC), & Euratom, 1957 EFTA set up as alternative (led by UK) Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), 1962 UK refused membership, 1963 (vetoed by De Gaulle) Agreement to merge institutions of EEC, Euratom & EC&SC, 19657 "Luxembourg compromise", 1966 on voting in Council UK, Eire, Norway & Denmark request to join, 1967, accepted 1971 (Norway does not join) Common Fisheries Policy, 1971 Lomé Convention signed, 1975 Guidelines for European Council meetings agreed, 1977 Direct elections to European Parliament, 1979

EMS put into effect, 1979 Greece joins (1981)Greenland leaves (1985) EECEFTA free trade area setup, 1984 Negotiations to let in Spain & Portugal concluded, 1985 Agreement to reform Treaty of Rome, 1985, with single market by 1992, via: Single European Act, 1986 Single European Market, 1992 Treaty on European Union (Maastricht), 1992 Austria, Sweden & Finland join, 1995 Single currency – the Euro – introduced 1st January 2002 Ten more countries joined the EU on 1st May 2004: Cyprus (Greek part), the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia – making a total of 25 members European Constitution signed in Rome, October 2004 (to be ratified). Stalled after referenda Bulgaria is now a member (joined 2007) with Croatia, FYR Macedonia and Rumania to join in near future. Turkey to follow European constitution replaced with proposed treaty. 19 Source: http://www.doksinet 2. Structure and decision-making Complex structure since

Maastricht: Three pillars: EUROPEAN COMMUNITY As based on Treaty of Rome Plus new areas: EMU, culture, education etc. COMMON FOREIGN & SECURITY POLICY COOPERATION IN JUSTICE & HOME AFFAIRS Member state consultation on Police, customs, judicial & foreign & security policy immigration, cooperation Joint action & eventual common defence policy The three pillars are something of a compromise: Between increasing integration in established areas of the EC. and extending into new areas The other two pillars are more intergovernmental The main decision-making institutions relate to the European Community European Union institutions: Visit: http://europa.euint/abc/index3 enhtm This site gives a useful overview Main bodies: European Council Comprised of Heads of Government (or State) plus the President of the Commission Has gained most from Maastrict European Council in effect is at apex of the three pillars Has evolved out of irregular summit meetings to a permanent

arrangement But it is not a formal institution and does not legislate It debates and reaches conclusions which have authority by nature of its membership Council It is comprised of Government Ministers (plus a staff of 2,000) This is also intergovernmental The Council now extends across the three pillars It meets twice a month with different ministers attending depending on the issue (e.g Finance or Agriculture) It wields final decision-making power Decisions often on majority vote, except where Parliament rejects the proposal & a unanimous decision is required Single European Act & Maastricht extended scope for majority voting Some issues excluded from majority vote (e.g taxes, movement of people) Commission Comprised of Commissioners appointed by member govts (larger states have 2 Commissioners) Is the driving force for the EU Represents a possible source of supranationality Commission has always been major source of policy initiatives Now Parliament or Council of Ministers

can ask Commission to explore an area & produce draft It has characteristics of being both an administration & a government As well as Commissioners there are 23 Directorates General 9 (each with a cabinet) European Parliament Directly elected body of 624 members (2003) Increased powers since SEAct & Maastricht Can Veto Commission proposals Can force Council to take unanimous decisions Has powers over budget Has a role in approving international agreements 20 Source: http://www.doksinet Political group Abbreviation No. of seats European Peoples Party (Christian Democrats) and European EPP-ED Democrats Party of European Socialists PES European Liberal, Democrat and Reformist Party ELDR European United Left/Nordic Green Left EUL/NGL Greens/European Free Alliance Greens/EFA Union for Europe of the Nations UEN Europe of Democracies and Diversities EDD Non-attached NA TOTAL 232 175 52 49 44 23 18 31 624 European Court Of Justice Anyone can bring a case: states, EC

institutions, individuals, and organisations Safeguards the enforcement of Directives Court of Auditors This body ensures sound and lawful management of the EU budget Additional bodies: • European Economic and Social Committee (expresses the opinions of organised civil society on economic and social issues – brings many interest groups together including trades unions, employers, consumers, ecologists, etc) • Committee of the Regions (expresses the opinions of regional and local authorities) • European Central Bank (responsible for monetary policy and managing the euro) • European Ombudsman (deals with citizens complaints about maladministration by any EU institution or body) • European Investment Bank (helps achieve EU objectives by financing investment projects) Number of votes in Council Belgium Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Germany Greece Spain Estonia France Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Austria Poland Portugal Slovakia Slovenia

Finland Sweden United Kingdom TOTAL Number of members of Parliament 12 4 12 7 29 12 27 4 29 12 7 29 4 7 4 3 13 10 27 12 7 4 7 10 29 24 6 24 14 99 24 54 6 78 24 13 78 9 13 6 5 27 18 54 24 14 7 14 19 78 321 732 Following the 2004 enlargement new numbers of votes and MEPs were planned to be as above (in alphabetical order according to the countrys name in its own language): A decision by the Council often requires that countries representing about 72% of the votes are in favour. 3. European integration • • • General question of the extent of integration desirable – much debate! How much integration possible? Should integration be economic or political? Should it lead to a full Federal structure of government? 21 Source: http://www.doksinet • • • • • • • • • • Early ideas of technical integration which spillover into political integration Is EUa union of states or peoples? Maastricht is vague on this & 3 pillars is a compromise Importance of

harmonising social policies? Problems of different perspectives amongst the member governments How much democracy in EU? N.b limits of democracy in Parliament, but some indirect democarcy through Council as govt. reps Subsidiarity adopted in Maastricht – decisions to be taken at lowest appropriate level: local, regional, national or Brussels A common foreign policy? A common security policy? N.b review of Maastricht due in 1996 Problems of increasing integration at the same time as more members 4. External relations EU as an integrated core in Europe with a surrounding periphery of other states, many wishing to join Intention was to allow all former EFTA members to join (but Norway remained out) followed by Poland, Hungary, Czech Rep. & Slovakia (after 1996 review) Is a multispeed, multitiered Europe possible? EU as an international actor Negotiated in GATT Uruguay Round Future common UN Security Council seat? Implications of a common currency in international economy Common

Foreign Policy (efforts at European Political Cooperation since 1969) Based on consultation and exchange of information until 1987 SEAct and Maastricht commit EU to formulate a common foreign policy But can it ever develop beyond less important matters? Common Security Policy (origins in defunct European Defence Community proposals) Importance since end of Cold War WEU growing in significance EU failure over Yugoslavia crisis Leads to great international loss of credibility Germany recognised Croatia & Slovenia before EU Absence of common EU military force The literature debates extensively the level of achievement reached by the EU in developing a common foreign policy and acting as a coherent actor. • • • • It certainly offers an alternative voice to that of the US on important diplomatic issues It engages a collective negotiating team in trade policy It is the principal Northern voice in North-South relations It contributes to the management of the global economy

However, Chris Hill (The Capabilities-Expectation Gap, 1993) suggests that there are future actor-like functions the EU might perform but that these expectations cannot be matched by capabilities (ability to agree, resources, instruments at disposal). It may be that we have to view the EU in more aspirational terms: • An executive that is capable of taking clear decisions • Democratic legitimacy • Sophisticated bureaucracy Hill suggests it is better seen as a ‘system of international relations’. There are three parallel sets of activities; -national foreign policies -‘sophisticated co-ordination and common initiatives through EPC’/CFSP 22 Source: http://www.doksinet -‘highly structured political economy dimension of collective commercial and development policies. 5. The EU in the global economy • • • In 1999 the EU’s 15 members had a combined GDP of $7 trillion – this exceed the total of the whole of the NAFTA. This gap will increase with EU enlargement

It is the largest and richest consumer area in the world With 6.4% of the world’s population the EU nevertheless accounted for 40% of total international trade (Kegeley and Wittkopf/ The Economist) The EU is now represented in trade negotiations by a single team representing the whole EU. At the Uruguay Round negotiation which ended in 1993 and established the WTO Leon Britton was the Commissioner who negotiated for the EU. The rule-based, open, multilateral, international trade system is a key factor in EU (and global) prosperity. The EU wants to see these advantages extended and therefore proposed a comprehensive new round of trade negotiations. Setback at Seattle, however However, there have been some high-profile trade conflicts between the EU and the US: The bananas wars GM food disputes Growth hormones in beef However, as we have seen in this module trade and stable currency exchange are associated. In this respect the EC and later the EU have long seen the need for a currency

system within Europe. In March 1972 the Six EEC members attempted to impart fresh momentum to monetary integration by creating the "snake in the tunnel": a mechanism for the managed floating of currencies (the "snake") within narrow margins of fluctuation against the dollar (the "tunnel"). Thrown off course by the oil crises, the weakness of the dollar and the differences in economic policy, the "snake" lost most of its members in less than two years and was finally reduced to a "mark" area comprising Germany, the Benelux countries and Denmark. March 1979 saw the creation of the fixed-exchange rate European Monetary System (EMS). The currencies of all the Member States, except the UK, joined. Over a ten-year period, the EMS did much to reduce exchange-rate variability. With Single Market Programme adopted in 1985 it became apparent that the full potential of the internal market could only be fully exploited by enhancing monetary

stability. In June 1988 the Hanover European Council set up a committee to study economic and monetary union under the chairmanship of Jacques Delors, the then President of the European Commission. Its report, submitted in April 1989, proposed the introduction of economic and monetary union in three stages. On the basis of the Delors report, the Madrid European Council decided in June 1989, to launch the first stage of EMU: full liberalisation of capital movements in eight Member States by 1 July 1990. In December 1989 the Strasbourg European Council called for an intergovernmental conference that would identify what amendments needed to be made to the Treaty in order to attain full economic and monetary union. The work of this intergovernmental conference (launched at the Rome European Council in December 1990) led to the Treaty on European Union, which was formally adopted by the Heads of State and Government at the Maastricht European Council in December 1991 and signed on 7

February 1992. 23 Source: http://www.doksinet Following a process of convergence of economies the EU adopted the single currency in 1999 when 11 members signed up. There are now 12 The Euro removes exchange rate uncertainty within the EU but there have been concerns over its value in world markets. A European Central Bank sets interest rates. See the attached timetable of Euro developments. CONCLUSION The EU is the most advanced region in the world in terms of political and economic integration In many respects we can suggest it is an actor in the global political economy It is the largest economic area and set to expand further in the future It has now the advantages of a single market and a single currency Questions: • To what extent can we argue that the EU has achieved an impact as an actor in the global system? • What are the problems in obtaining the level of co-operation that is found in economic issues in issues of foreign policy? • To what extent will monetary union

encourage further political integration? BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECTS: INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS-AS-ACTOR Case study: the World Bank, IMF, WTO, OECD and the global economy Outline 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Bretton woods and post-war world economic problems Trade and monetary ‘regimes’ The IMF and the World Bank From GATT to WTO OECD: a rich state’s club Contemporary economic problems Bretton woods and post-war world economic problems Origins of the Bretton Woods institutions: 1. Formally at conference held at Bretton Woods NH (USA) -IMF and World Bank established 27 Dec. 1944 (29 countries initially signed) 2. Concern to avoid the inter-war economic crises occurring again - failure of Gold Exchange Standard and later the World Depression of 1930s 3. Response to developments in economic theory (Keynsian economics) identifying a role for macroeconomic intervention (by governments or institutions) 4. Requirement of international monetary stability again acknowledged (fixed

exchange rate system) 5. Requirement for a facility to assist in reconstruction and development after the war 24 Source: http://www.doksinet 6. Main architects of Bretton Woods system were Harry D. White and John M Keynes - with main government initiatives from US and UK Trade and monetary ‘regimes’ Regimes analysis has developed to enable a focus on issue areas in the context of international governance. It has close links with the study of the process of international organisation – indeed it offers a departure from a primary focus on institutions per se. While definitions vary a commonly used definition comes from Stephen Krasner: ‘International regimes are defined as principles, norms, rules, and decision-making procedures around which actor expectations converge in a given issue area’. (S. Krasner, International Organization, Spring 1982) Thus: the oceans regime; the nuclear energy regime; the telecommunications regime; environmental regimes; the monetary regime;

and the trade regime. Changes in norms or principles represent changes of the regime while changes in rules and decision-making procedures represent within the regime. Thus principles and norms provide the basic defining characteristics of the regime. Regimes are effectively seen as modifiers of state behaviour See: S. Haggard and BA Simmons ‘Theories of international regimes’, International Organization vol.41,no3, Summer 1987 R. Keohane and J Nye, Power and Interdependence 2nd Edition How do regimes develop? There are various explanations for regime formation from: collective self-interest; norms and principles gradually emerging; usage and custom; political power (including hegemony); and knowledge. The great benefit of regime theory is the focus is primarily on converging expectations in issue areas rather than on the agenda of individual organisations. Governance is included but there may be a variety of organisations involved. The IMF and the World Bank – The monetary

regime Their origin was shared and their operation has grown closer within the monetary regime. At the centre of the regime is a (western) consensus about the need for a stable monetary order, free movement of currencies, liberal market conditions, and at the domestic level a market based economy with limited government intervention. The institutions oversee the principles and norms and provide a focus for rule-making and decision-making. THE WORLD BANK OPERATES UNDER: 1. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD). Set up at Bretton Woods in 1944 -Lends funds to better off developing states By 1999 overall loan total was over $330 billion for some thousands of projects. However concessional aid in 1998 was $12 billion below 1990 figure. 2. International Development Association (IDA). Set up 1960 -Funded by 20 donor countries, lends to poorer developing countries (up to $895 per capita income - as of 1999) on highly concessional terms (no interest and 50 years to

repay - 40 years since 1987) 25 Source: http://www.doksinet -Loans thus made at commercial "loss" and so IDA constantly searching for volunteer contributions. -By 1999 committed nearly $116 billion for projects in the worlds poorest 55 countries 3. International Finance Corporation (IFC). Set up 1956 -Promotes the private sector in developing countries by taking equity or by lending 4. Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) -Encourages private direct investment by providing insurance against political risk. Newest agency set up in 1988. -Original objective of World Bank was to assist European post-war reconstruction -Generally the World Bank targets poverty -Until the 1980s its approach to developing countries was to fund specified projects -It now tries to provide a basis for sustained economic growth in LDCs. It now lends more for programmes and in the context of STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT and CONDITIONALITY. The debt crisis did much to shift this emphasis and

brings the WB closer to the IMF in approach. -Loans have overwhelmingly been to governments -IBRD obtains funds through borrowing on international markets, IDA from donations. Funding also via commercial banks taking some of the debt Critics have focused on the shift to policy-based lending (stuctural adjustment) and a view that the WB reflects the interests of private capital and businesses. A second line of criticism focuses on the environmental effects of the WB encouraging liberalisation and capitalism – in the context of the regime norms and principles. However, we should remember that the bank is a bank and must operate as such with all the constraints of the global financial system. Moreover, it has gone through many stages of reform as it has adapted to changing conditions, including the move away from post-war reconstruction to a focus ondeveloping countries and modernising the world economy. Along the way the other agencies comprising the World Bank Group have made their

mark. INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (182 members - 1999) -Devised to stabilise exchange rates internationally (under fixed rate system) – the keeper of the rules. -Enabled states to "borrow" foreign exchange against deposits they make in gold or their own currency -Each 25% tranche invokes higher levels of scrutiny -Devaluations had to be legitimised by IMF (following "fundamental disequilibrium" -Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) introduced from 1969:- the worlds first international artificial currency (like Monopoly money!) -SDRs are the IMFs unit of account (c.f ECUs) -IMF as "keeper of the rules" of the international economic order -But in many respects a dollar system (underpinned by US hegemony) Problem after 1973: -Fixed exchange rate system abandoned -What is role of IMF? -During 1960s it was developing new roles - these take over -Members can borrow for a wider range of reasons -Longer term loans introduced (over 5 years) -Develops structural

adjustment facility - and therefore begins to operate more in parallel with the World Bank. It also stresses conditionality but in the case of the IMF this has a longer tradition going back to Bretton Woods principles. -Has become major centre of expertise to governments and other institutions -Links with G.7, OECD and World Bank, UNCTAD etc 26 Source: http://www.doksinet -Since 1995 and the Mexican financial crisis the IMF has adopted a strong focus on surveillance. However, this was left wanting in the light of the Asian financial crisis Critics highlight similar problems as with the WB. The dominance over developing countries is higlighted along with the lack of agreed principles on intervention. STRUCTURE OF IMF AND WORLD BANK (IBRD): Very similar in structure and voting arrangements -Both have a Board of Governors (meet annually) which delegates most powers to a Board of Executive Directors which meets as required -IMF Managing Director and World Bank President are also Chair

of the Executive Directors -Some Governors and Executive Directors of IMF serve in World Bank -To join IBRD a state must be a member of IMF -They are even on opposite sides of the same street in Washington! -Operating language is English in both cases -Both publish important annual economic reports -Voting powers are weighted to reflect economic strength in both institutions. (subscriptions to WB and quotas in IMF). Developing countries in total account for less than 50% of the vote in the IMF - but set against this is that it is the currencies of the developed countries which are overwhelmingly used by the fund. In the World Bank and the IMF voting is usually avoided as they try to operate by consensus. But the big players like the US are able to block proposals they do not like and can influence important agenda. There may be hegemonic power in terms of regime maintenance. -In the IMF the voting powers are in effect dominated by the creditor states over the debtor states. However,

IMF consensus procedures arose largely because the Group of 10 in the 1960s began to move the IMF towards multilateral or collective management following some 15 years of unbridled US hegemony. Developing countries are not without influence in that certain key committees which discuss policy use representation on the Executive Board as the basis for membership - giving a sizeable number of seats to them. -But of course many issues are discussed outside the IMF by the developed countries (e.g in G7 and the OECD) which shape the environment the IMF functions in. -Since early 1980s their activities have grown closer and closer together with much overlap (more below re: debt) -Together these institutions are used in large measure by the developed countires to impose and economic discipline on the developing countries. From GATT to World Trade Organisation The second regime to consider is the trade regime. This shares some principles and norms with the monetary regime in terms of a

‘consensus’ on liberalisation of markets internationally (especially since the Uruguay Round). Long-standing principles in the regime include: Most Favoured Nation principle (MFN); reciprocity; non-discrimination; market efficiency. 27 Source: http://www.doksinet Rules and decision-making authority rested for most of the post-war period with the GATT to be taken up by the WTO. It is important to note that the regime as it consolidated excluded alternative centres of decision-making such as the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) which the developing countries (G.77) tried to bring centre stage Origins: -General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade became an alternative to the proposed International Trade Organisation -ITO was intended to be the 3rd Bretton Woods institution - although taking longer to negotiate it was agreed under the Havana Charter of 1947 -GATT would have been an agreement under the umbrella of the ITO -The US (President) and Britain championed idea -23

countries originally signed GATT and it was established on 1 January 1948 as interim arrangement (114 members now) -Was granted only limited institutional support as it was expected to be replaced by ITO -GATT is based on parts of the proposed ITO charter -The ITO was abandoned when it became clear that the US Congress was not going to ratify its charter Structure: -All of the above makes the GATT post-war structure unusual for an IGO -The proposed ITO was to have been run up to operation by an Interim Commission for the ITO (ICITO) i.e a small staff was assembled to prepare the way -GATT as a treaty had no real institutional existence -It therefore "leased" the ICITO as its secretariat! Had Director General by resolution -Funding from members as %of their trade Objectives of GATT: -To liberalise trade between nations -Promote principle of Most Favoured Nation (MFN) -Establish and operate rules of trade -Provide for dispute settlement Operation of GATT: -A series of

"Rounds" have occurred which have brought reduced tariffs etc. -Most significant have been a) Tokyo Round (1973-1979) - 99 countries involved in Round -b) Uruguay Round (1986-1993) - most ambitious and wide ranging Round -15 negotiating groups lead to deal as in Handout -Latest Round faced many new problems associated with the contemporary international economy -But a major decision was the establishment of a World Trade Organisation to oversee GATT and other arrangements -WTO will administer the results of the Uruguay Round and will in particular provide an enhanced dispute settlement role -It will also be the focus for future rounds (but witness Seattle, December 1999). World Trade Organisation (130 members - 1997) -Ministerial Conference as highest authority (meets at least once every two years) -Much of day to day work under General Council, which also convenes as Dispute Settlement Body. Also dlegates responsibility to other more focused bodies and committees -Has 450

staff headed by Director General -Decisions taken by consensus - although votes (one per state) where consensus not possible -More attention to development issues than under GATT -Interacts with other multilateral economic institutions (e.g IMF, World Bank, etc) Critics have in this instance mobilised themselves to the extend of riots in Seattle over the perception of the WTO as the main bastion of capitalism and perceived evils of unfettered trade. This represents a challenge to the fundamental norms and principles. 28 Source: http://www.doksinet This must be set against the general observation that trade is inherently politicised at the domestic level in both the developed and developing worlds and is politicised in the relations between states also. Nor should we lose sight of the importance of the WTO dispute settelment provisions which ultimately move countries away from unilateral responses in disputes - something the US in the past has never hesitated to use and has built

into its domestic law through its "Super 301"legislation. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD): A rich state’s club Members: The Governments of 29 countries: Canada, USA, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Korea, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, UK. The OECD was established on the 30 Sept. 1961 as the successor body to the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC) - which was formed in 1948 and administered the Marshall aid plan in Europe (the European Recovery Programme). Again the origins of this organisation were in the early post-war environment. Its aims are the promotion of economic and social welfare in its Member countries, as well as the sound and harmonious development of the world economy, notably by improving the lot of developing countries. It is a unique

forum and differs from the other international economic institutions in its approach to enhancing the basis for policy development through information collection, analysis and hosting wide-ranging discussions between member representatives. The OECD identifies differences between it and other intergovernmental organisations in that: 1. It has no legal powers or financial resources for loans or subsidies Its declared sole function is direct co-operation among the governments of its member countries. 2. At the OECD co-operation is taken to mean co-operation among nations in terms of their domestic policies where they might interact with those of other countries, in particular through trade and investment. Member states are expected to adapt their domestic policies to minimise conflict with other countries. Learning from each other’s experience is seen as important 3. The OECD focuses on a range of specific issues in a multi-disciplinary fashion Macro-economic and more specific or

sectoral issues are addressed. Acknowledging the rapid growth of interdependence and globalisation the OECD sees itself serving as a vehicle for international co-operation and discussion on issues of mutual interdependence in the context of the erosion of national economic borders. The Structure of the OECD The Council The OECD Council, composed of one representative for each Member country, meets either at Heads of Permanent Delegations level (about twice a month), under the Chairmanship of the Secretary-General, or at Ministerial level (usually once a year), under the Chairmanship of a Minister elected annually. Decisions and Recommendations are adopted by mutual agreement of all members of the Council. There is an Executive Committee, composed of 14 members of the Council designated annually by the latter that is responsible for implementing the decisions of the Council and overseeing the work of the Organisation. 29 Source: http://www.doksinet The Secretariat The secretariat is

made up of economists, statisticians, scientists, lawyers and other professional and administrative staff who support the work of the committees (see below) with research , analysis, data collection and policy recommendations. The secretariat works in English and French and includes citizens of OECD countries who serve as international civil servants with no national affiliation. The Secretary-General The Secretary-General chairs the Council and manages the work of the secretariat. The position involves acting as a link between the member countries and the analytical support of the secretariat. The OECD also inherited the OEEC Appeal Board that acts as an administrative tribunal, issuing binding decisions on legal grounds. The committees and other bodies are, as a rule, composed of civil servants either from capitals of Member countries or from the Permanent Delegations to OECD which are established as normal diplomatic Missions and are headed by an Ambassador. They are serviced by an

International Secretariat, headed by Secretary-General. The OECD is financed by contributions from its Member countries. The OECD has official links with many other international bodies, including the EU, WTO (GATT), UNCTAD, IMF, UNESCO, FAO, IAEA and the IBRD Special Arrangements establishing close links with Council of Europe were concluded in 1962. The OECD also has links with non-Governmental Organisations that are deemed to be widely representative in general economic matters or in a specific economy sector can be granted a consultative status enabling them to discuss subjects of common interest. So far, this status has been granted to: Business and Industry Advisory Committee to the OECD (BIAC); Trade Union Advisory Committee to the OECD (TUAC); European Confederation of Agriculture (CEA); International Association of Crafts and Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (IACME); International Federation of Agricultural producers (IFAP). Activities of the OECD The OECD is concerned with

all aspects of economic and social policy. Regular meetings are held of the many committees and their specialist sub-groups to provide a forum where experts and senior policy advisors from government administrations request, review and contribute to work that will improve policy making across a wide range of issue areas. Committee discussions are usually confidential and decisions are reached on the whole by consensus. There are more than 200 Specialised Committees and Working Parties. Some of the important committees are: The Economic Policy Committee Economic and Development Review Committee Development Assistance Committee Trade Committee Committee on Capital Movements and Invisible Transactions Committee for International Investment and Multinational Enterprises Committee on Financial Markets Committee on Fiscal Affairs There is also the International Energy Agency set up within the OECD framework in 1974 (following the OPEC price hike of 1973/4) which co-ordinates policies in

stockpiling, conservation and research into new energy resources. The Development Centre was set up in 1962 (it holds an autonomous position relative to the OECD) and aids in research and transfer of knowledge on development problems. Relations with non-members Following the collapse of the Soviet Bloc and the end of the Cold War the OECD launched a broadlybased programme of assistance to countries attempting to construct market economies. It did this through the Centre for Co-operation with the Economies in Transition (CCET). Most of Central and Eastern Europe, and many of the former Soviet republics, have a working relationship with the OED. This includes technical assistance in specialist fields and reviews of national economies 30 Source: http://www.doksinet The Liaison and Co-ordination Unit co-ordinates relations with non-member states in other parts of the world, including Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Three interdisciplinary programmes are involved in this: the

OECD/Dynamic Non-Member Economy Policy Dialogue; the Programme of Dialogue and Co-operation with China; and the Emerging Market Forum. Contemporary economic problems Some problems facing IMF: -Assistance in stabilising floating exchange rates -Longer term structural adjustment of economies -The growing internationalisation of capital markets ($1.5 trillion a day in cross border money dealings!) -The Debt Crisis -East Europe and former Soviet Union -Asian crisis Some problems facing World Bank: -The Debt Crisis -Structural adjustment in South and East nations -Integrating East Europe into world economy Some problems faced by GATT/WTO: -New protectionism since 1970s -Non-tariff measures -Agricultural trade -International intellectual property protection -Trade in services expanding -Use of new dispute settlement provisions -Establishing a new Round after Seattle debacle Some problems faced by OECD: -In many respects the OECD shares all of the above problems given its advisory role.

-However, a controversial proposal surfaced a few years ago hosted by the OECD A controversial proposal - the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) This was a proposal put forward in February 1998 that would have given considerable power to the MNCs over governments. They would be able to sue governments for any profits lost through laws that discriminate against them. See handout In December 1998 after an extensive backlash from NGOs and many pressure groups, and some hesitation by national legislature the OECD announced it was no longer hosting negotiations on the MAI. Instead the discussions have moved to other agencies such as the IMF and the EU where there is still some momentum to establish an open environment for the movement of MNC investments movement of profits and further liberalisation in the movement of finance. The regimes involved are not confined to these institutions but increasingly regimes overlap and networks have grown in importance. Thus the broader

capitalist order is maintained through linkages between the IMF, World Bank, WTO, OECD, G.7 and many other looser or more informal arrangements. Decision-making may be seen in a pluralist context although much of the literature also emphasises the structures that emerge. 31