Global Governance

The term global governance is a term used both for a political program as well as a political or social science research program. As a political program, global governance refers to the cooperative, multilateral globalization. Leading the way were the Brundtland Report published in 1987, the end of the Cold War and in 1995 presented the final report Our Global Neighbourhood of the Commission on Global Governance.

Complementary to these social developments has been taken up in the social sciences global governance as a research program. In the tradition of the ( neo) liberal institutionalism, in particular the Interdependenztheorien, standing, global governance approaches examine the compaction of international cooperation and the transformation of the international system, in which the anarchic system of sovereign nation-states apparently to a multi-level system involving non-state actors converts. Probably the earliest more powerful become publication Governance without Government of Czempiel and Rosenau (1992 ), an attempt was made in the Authority as a " system of rule" (German: " regimes " ) to model the without formally authorized and equipped with power monopoly player comes into play.

In contrast to government, the term governance emphasizes the absence of a formal hierarchy and highlights in the broadest sense of the collective regulation of social activities from. Depending on the understanding of the concept of the individual authors can " governance " both complementary superordinate to be understood to "Government". This far-reaching concept design is a major selling point for critical reflection of global governance. Claus Offe described the concept of global governance as " empty signifier ," a meaningless word empty shell that would be used arbitrarily.

As a German translation, for example, global governance, global governance or global regulatory and structural policies have been proposed. None of these variants, however, has prevailed, so that in general the English name will be used.

Definition

Dirk Messner defines the term as: ". Development of institutions and control system and new mechanisms of international cooperation, which allow the continuous problem solving global challenges and cross-border phenomena " The term thus refers to the pursuit of, or the totality of institutions, control systems and mechanisms with which different actors to discuss and decide global challenges.

You can have several term variations which are grouped under Global governance distinguished:

Differentiation from other concepts

Global governance does not mean Global Government ( world government ). In the context of global governance processes, the nation-states retain their sovereignty, but practice forms of voluntary cooperation. However, this restriction is criticized in some, such as by weltföderalistisch oriented scientists who understand developmental rather open process under global governance, which may well lead to forms of global governance.

Global governance goes beyond the scope of the concept of international politics, if one ( so ) shall not the neorealist understanding to reason. International politics refers to the political sphere, entertain in the States political relationships. Global governance, however, is the sum of coordination processes of different stakeholders, government, mastered with those global challenges and global opportunities can not only be taken and differs from the concept of international politics by its problem-solving orientation from.

Features

Global governance is defined by certain behaviors and characteristics:

Levels

The architecture of global governance recognizes different actors at different levels:

• Nation-states
• International regimes
• Regional integration projects
• UN agencies
• Civil society ( especially in the form of NGOs)
• Local politics

A problem of global governance lies in the national interests of sovereign states. So these ( for example, the pursuit of the U.S., its economy not by the fulfillment of the Kyoto Protocol to hinder ) disagree on the need of global solutions to problems frequently.

Global Governance as an academic discipline

Given, as shown above, ambiguous use of the term global governance as a concept in international politics, some authors have suggested, not substantial, but methodically to define it. Accordingly, global governance is in this sense an analytical method, which provides an independent perspective on political events, which may differ from those in the existing specialized " international relations ". Some universities, including those that offer degree programs in " International Relations ", have now set up their own global governance programs.

Critical reception

Is viewed critically the control and problem-solving idea inherent in the Global Governance Project. Relevant facts are described in terms of regulatory problems that can be solved by efficient control. Ulrich Brand has global governance analyzed in terms of a Hegemonialdiskurses according to Foucault. He points out that the control logic does not ask for reasons or conflicts of interest, but just after the efficient problem-solving ability. The problem the emergence of new, especially private, stakeholders will also seen. NGOs, private companies, think tanks, or expert groups do not constitutionally enshrined in the rule and therefore subject to a legitimacy deficit. Remains problematic attribution of responsibility in multi-stakeholder approaches, including such new actors. In this circumstance, for example, makes John R. Bolton attention when he writes: " [ ... ] the civil society idea Actually Suggests a ' corporativist ' approach to international decision -making did is troubling for democracy Dramatically Because it posits ' interests ' ( Whether NGOs or Work ) as legitimate actors alongwith popularly Elected Governments ". The Bolton already implied notion that problem solving can best be ( non-governmental ) expert groups ( interests ) take place, as is the case with Haas ' Epistemic communities or even in Slaughters "government networks" will also be seen by Shapiro critical, therefore, by Global Governance "experts and enthusiasts" are favored to represent their respective interests, but "both knowledge and passion generate perspectives did are not Those of the rest of us. " Other authors deny that in the context of the global governance concept postulated change in the policy -making process is all. Global Government assumes that there is a shift of power from the state to non-state actors in terms of a zero-sum game. Ole Sending and Iver Neumann, however, have tried governmentality - term with recourse to Foucault to show that non-state actors such as NGOs, governments are co-opted, ie, that does not automatically mean the gain in regulatory competence for the non-government sector a loss on the side of the state.