POLB81 Lecture 3 – Jan 21 2012
World Economic Forum: Article on this website
This article is an instant of Institutionalism because different states come
together to talk about the global issues. They’re talking to the leaders of IMF
and their reconstruction of their policies. It’s an instant of institutionalism of
global governance to keep economics stable. States are having trust in their
institutions to make the rules. The states have given the IMF the authority to
deal with issues. Elites and expertise are the IMF experts on economic stability.
It’s very relevant.
There’s also an opposition group. It could be an instant of transnationalism of
private actors which tries to influence global governance.
Third instant is conflict of tools and purposes within global governance. We
have to remember that global governance is a political set of dynamics. You’re
policies are going to conflict. People will see these regulations and they’re going
to push their incentives too. IMF might be hurting the people and helping global
banks. There are lobbying groups to stop IMF to grow.
Transnationalism: is the expansion of different actors and agenda. It is not only states
which create international interactions, but also public and private actors. (Ex. NGOs
Purpose: depending upon the kind of actor or specific actor. You can see a
diversity of perspective. Some actors are working on solving problems. Other
actors are looking to transform the system. There’s a duel transaction.
o WWF example – looks to developing the convention of international
trade on animal species. They’re looking to solve problems and influence
states to work on changes. States are influence international
organizations to help environmental problems.
o Some NGOs want to transform global governance to move away from
1. Affect other forms of Governance.
2. Make Rules themselves.
Transnationalism: purpose: problem solving -> other governments or own rules/
transformation. The problems of transnationalism are larger common goals or specific
goals dealing with specific populations. The problem is broader because of bigger actors
and multiple problems that are crossing borders, above the states, below states, and
between states. (Institutionalism perspective needs cooperation amongst states. This is the problem.)
If the agenda is larger, tools are larger as well.
o Transgovernmental networks are networks of governmental officials,
who work on informal policies. There are hundreds of these networks.
They can affect how other forms of government work.
o Civil actors – NGOs working to change IMF. They interact with the
o Private actors trying to get to change public actor to do what they want
them to do. Tools they use to pursue their interest:
stressing public values
Using moral argument or a representative argument (this is what
everyone else wants).
Expertise in transnational perspective as well (ex. environmental
Type III: Public-Private link – it brings together both the public and private.
Public sector is the government sector which has public interest. Private sectors
are NGOs and corporations who have private interest, and have network both
public and private actors.
Type IV: Is transnationalism always good? No, because of terrorist. Terrorist are
using bad tools, violence, criminal organizations, working across borders for
particular interest or for the common. Don’t equate global governance to things
that are good.
Hegemonism: Marxist thoughts, dominant set of ideas and social structure that shape
how the world works: global capitalism. Global governance is not the source of problem
solving but it maintains global capitalism.
Purpose: People adhere to this notion of capitalism. They agree to