SOLUTION: INTL 101 UCD Wk 3 Significance of International Institutions Exam Practice

Get Custom Essay on SOLUTION: INTL 101 UCD Wk 3 Significance of International Institutions Exam Practice

Let Our Team of Pofessional Writers Take Care of Your Paper.

INTL 101 Week 3
Summer Bales
Section A08/A07
Section will be recorded
Agenda





Last week’s quiz
Discussion groups
Readings
Quiz 3
Next week
Quiz 2
Great job!




Clear arguments
Remember to incorporate more
than one of the readings
Excellent answers

Put concepts into your
own words

Writing flowed, response
had great construction

No grammar, spelling,
citation errors
Remember PDF
Discussion
1.
What is a norm? Why are they important?
2.
In what ways are democracies constrained in international politics?
3.
What challenges in the 21st century does Annan identify?
4.
Do international organizations have what it takes to confront the challenges that Annan identified?
5.
What is “enduring” about the liberal order talked about by Ikenberry? How might this order be limited
in addressing the challenges Annan identifies?
Michael Barnett and Martha Finnemore. “The Politics, Power and Pathologies of
International Organizations”

“Global organizations do more than just facilitate cooperation by helping states to
overcome market failures, collective action dilemmas and problems associated with
interdependent social choice. They also create actors, specify responsibilities and
authority among them and define the work these actors do, giving it meaning and
normative value. Even when they lack material resources, IOs exercise power as
they constitute and construct the social world.” (700)
Michael Barnett and Martha Finnemore. “The Politics, Power and Pathologies of
International Organizations”



More than shells for state actors, autonomous actors
Sources of autonomy and authority
○ Rational legal authority, depoliticization, norms
Power of IOs
○ “(1) Classify the world, creating categories of actors and actions
○ (2) Fix meanings in the social world,
○ (3) Articulate and diffuse new norms, principles and actors around the globe” (710)
John Owens. “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace”


Democratic peace: democracies do not go to war with other democracies (but sometimes illiberal
states)
Combines structural and normative theories


Structural: Democratic peace is because of institutional constraints within democracies
Normative theory: Democratic peace is due to ideas and norms held by democracies

Missing element: State perception

Primary hypothesis: A liberal democracy will only avoid war with a state it believes to be liberal

4 case studies (out of 12)

Franco-American relations in 1796-98

France is perceived as republican, elites agitate against war = no war

Anglo-American relations 1803-12: England is not considered republican, elites agitate for war = war

1861-63: US Emancipation Proclamation, shared liberal ideals = no British intervention

1895-96: Venezuelan border crisis, perceived one another as liberal democracies = no war
John Owens. “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace”

Liberal ideas are the independent variable

Creates both liberal ideology and liberal
institutions

Either liberals run government, or elites
agitate for liberalism

Liberals trust states they consider liberal,
and distrust those they consider illiberal

Missing: how to maintain perpetual peace?
John Ikenberry. “The Illusion of Geopolitics: The Enduring Power of the Liberal
Order”
“Alliances, partnerships, multilateralism, democracy – these are the tools of US
leadership, and they are winning, not losing, the twenty-first century struggles over
geopolitics and the world order” (81)



US hegemony
China and Russia cannot challenge a deeply entrenched world order
Grand strategy: deep global engagement through trade, alliances, multilateral
institutions and diplomacy (90)
Kofi Annan. “The New World Disorder: Challenges for the UN in the 21st Century”




“Instead of the new world order, we have growing disorder. The international architecture set up after
WWII, which received a new lease on life in 1990, is proving unable to cope with the challenges of our
time”
Economic, demographic and technological change driving transnational issues
○ Tax avoidance, illicit financial flows, organized crime, cybercrime, terrorism, climate change,
migration
States are not equipped
IOs need to share power with developing countries and rising states (BRICS)
○ Expand voting rights in IMF and World Bank
○ Expand Security Council
Quiz 3
Why are international institutions important in global politics?
Please incorporate multiple readings/lecture




3 points for integrating the reading
3 points for critically evaluating other readings and lecture
3 points for writing and argumentation
1 point for excellent construction and argumentation
○ Grade yourself before you turn it in!
■ Check grammar, spelling and citations for an easy 3 points
■ If you are only summarizing one reading, you miss 3 points!
Next Week
October 26 – Global Institutions 2 – NGOS

Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, “Transnational Advocacy Networks in International and Regional
Politics,” International Social Science Journal 51, no. 159 (March 1999): 89–101.
(Links to an external site.)

Eizenstat, Stuart E. “Nongovernmental Organizations as the Fifth Estate.” Seton Hall Journal of Diplomacy and
International Relations vol.5 no.2 (Summer/Fall 2004): 15-28.
October 28 – Regional Institutions


Murithi, Tim. 2012. “The African Union at Ten: an Appraisal.” African Affairs 51(2): 415-425.
Thomas Wright, “What If Europe Fails?,” The Washington Quarterly 35, no. 3 (August 1, 2012): 23–41.
INTL 101 Week 3
Summer Bales
Section A08/A07
Section will be recorded
Agenda





Last week’s quiz
Discussion groups
Readings
Quiz 3
Next week
Quiz 2
Great job!




Clear arguments
Remember to incorporate more
than one of the readings
Excellent answers

Put concepts into your
own words

Writing flowed, response
had great construction

No grammar, spelling,
citation errors
Remember PDF
Discussion
1.
What is a norm? Why are they important?
2.
In what ways are democracies constrained in international politics?
3.
What challenges in the 21st century does Annan identify?
4.
Do international organizations have what it takes to confront the challenges that Annan identified?
5.
What is “enduring” about the liberal order talked about by Ikenberry? How might this order be limited
in addressing the challenges Annan identifies?
Michael Barnett and Martha Finnemore. “The Politics, Power and Pathologies of
International Organizations”

“Global organizations do more than just facilitate cooperation by helping states to
overcome market failures, collective action dilemmas and problems associated with
interdependent social choice. They also create actors, specify responsibilities and
authority among them and define the work these actors do, giving it meaning and
normative value. Even when they lack material resources, IOs exercise power as
they constitute and construct the social world.” (700)
Michael Barnett and Martha Finnemore. “The Politics, Power and Pathologies of
International Organizations”



More than shells for state actors, autonomous actors
Sources of autonomy and authority
○ Rational legal authority, depoliticization, norms
Power of IOs
○ “(1) Classify the world, creating categories of actors and actions
○ (2) Fix meanings in the social world,
○ (3) Articulate and diffuse new norms, principles and actors around the globe” (710)
John Owens. “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace”


Democratic peace: democracies do not go to war with other democracies (but sometimes illiberal
states)
Combines structural and normative theories


Structural: Democratic peace is because of institutional constraints within democracies
Normative theory: Democratic peace is due to ideas and norms held by democracies

Missing element: State perception

Primary hypothesis: A liberal democracy will only avoid war with a state it believes to be liberal

4 case studies (out of 12)

Franco-American relations in 1796-98

France is perceived as republican, elites agitate against war = no war

Anglo-American relations 1803-12: England is not considered republican, elites agitate for war = war

1861-63: US Emancipation Proclamation, shared liberal ideals = no British intervention

1895-96: Venezuelan border crisis, perceived one another as liberal democracies = no war
John Owens. “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace”

Liberal ideas are the independent variable

Creates both liberal ideology and liberal
institutions

Either liberals run government, or elites
agitate for liberalism

Liberals trust states they consider liberal,
and distrust those they consider illiberal

Missing: how to maintain perpetual peace?
John Ikenberry. “The Illusion of Geopolitics: The Enduring Power of the Liberal
Order”
“Alliances, partnerships, multilateralism, democracy – these are the tools of US
leadership, and they are winning, not losing, the twenty-first century struggles over
geopolitics and the world order” (81)



US hegemony
China and Russia cannot challenge a deeply entrenched world order
Grand strategy: deep global engagement through trade, alliances, multilateral
institutions and diplomacy (90)
Kofi Annan. “The New World Disorder: Challenges for the UN in the 21st Century”




“Instead of the new world order, we have growing disorder. The international architecture set up after
WWII, which received a new lease on life in 1990, is proving unable to cope with the challenges of our
time”
Economic, demographic and technological change driving transnational issues
○ Tax avoidance, illicit financial flows, organized crime, cybercrime, terrorism, climate change,
migration
States are not equipped
IOs need to share power with developing countries and rising states (BRICS)
○ Expand voting rights in IMF and World Bank
○ Expand Security Council
Quiz 3
Why are international institutions important in global politics?
Please incorporate multiple readings/lecture




3 points for integrating the reading
3 points for critically evaluating other readings and lecture
3 points for writing and argumentation
1 point for excellent construction and argumentation
○ Grade yourself before you turn it in!
■ Check grammar, spelling and citations for an easy 3 points
■ If you are only summarizing one reading, you miss 3 points!
Next Week
October 26 – Global Institutions 2 – NGOS

Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, “Transnational Advocacy Networks in International and Regional
Politics,” International Social Science Journal 51, no. 159 (March 1999): 89–101.
(Links to an external site.)

Eizenstat, Stuart E. “Nongovernmental Organizations as the Fifth Estate.” Seton Hall Journal of Diplomacy and
International Relations vol.5 no.2 (Summer/Fall 2004): 15-28.
October 28 – Regional Institutions


Murithi, Tim. 2012. “The African Union at Ten: an Appraisal.” African Affairs 51(2): 415-425.
Thomas Wright, “What If Europe Fails?,” The Washington Quarterly 35, no. 3 (August 1, 2012): 23–41.
The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations
Author(s): Michael N. Barnett and Martha Finnemore
Source: International Organization , Autumn, 1999, Vol. 53, No. 4 (Autumn, 1999), pp.
699-732
Published by: The MIT Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2601307
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2601307?seq=1&cid=pdfreference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

Terms and Conditions of Use


, The MIT Press , Cambridge University Press and University of Wisconsin Press are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Organization
This content downloaded from
68.101.209.244 on Tue, 06 Oct 2020 03:05:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Politics, Power, and Pathologies
of International Organizations
Michael N. Barnett and Martha Finnemore
Do international organizations really do what their creators intend them to do? In the
past century the number of international organizations (1Os) has increased exponentially, and we have a variety of vigorous theories to explain why they have been
created. Most of these theories explain IO creation as a response to problems of
incomplete information, transaction costs, and other barriers to Pareto efficiency and
welfare improvement for their members. Research flowing from these theories, how-
ever, has paid little attention to how IOs actually behave after they are created. Closer
scrutiny would reveal that many IOs stray from the efficiency goals these theories
impute and that many IOs exercise power autonomously in ways unintended and
unanticipated by states at their creation. Understanding how this is so requires a
reconsideration of IOs and what they do.
In this article we develop a constructivist approach rooted in sociological institutionalism to explain both the power of IOs and their propensity for dysfunctional,
even pathological, behavior. Drawing on long-standing Weberian arguments about
bureaucracy and sociological institutionalist approaches to organizational behavior,
we argue that the rational-legal authority that IOs embody gives them power independent of the states that created them and channels that power in particular directions.
Bureaucracies, by definition, make rules, but in so doing they also create social
knowledge. They define shared international tasks (like “development”), create and
define new categories of actors (like “refugee”), create new interests for actors (like
“promoting human rights”), and transfer models of political organization around the
world (like markets and democracy.) However, the same normative valuation on
impersonal, generalized rules that defines bureaucracies and makes them powerful in
We are grateful to John Boli, Raymond Duvall, Ernst Haas, Peter Haas, Robert Keohane, Keith Krause,
Jeffrey Legro, John Malley, Craig Murphy, M. J. Peterson, Mark Pollack, Andrew Moravcsik, Thomas
Risse, Duncan Snidal, Steve Weber, Thomas Weiss, and two anonymous referees for their comments. We
are especially grateful for the careful attention of the editors of International Organization. Earlier versions of this article were presented at the 1997 APSA meeting, the 1997 ISA meeting, and at various fora.
We also acknowledge financial assistance from the Smith Richardson Foundation and the United States
Institute of Peace.
International Organization 53, 4, Autumn 1999, pp. 699-732
? 1999 by The 10 Foundation and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
This content downloaded from
68.101.209.244 on Tue, 06 Oct 2020 03:05:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
700 International Organization
modern life can also make them unresponsive to their environments, obsessed with
their own rules at the expense of primary missions, and ultimately lead to inefficient,
self-defeating behavior. We are not the first to suggest that IOs are more than the
reflection of state preferences and that they can be autonomous and powerful actors
in global politics.1 Nor are we the first to note that 1Os, like all organizations, can be
dysfunctional and inefficient.2 However, our emphasis on the way that characteristics
of bureaucracy as a generic cultural form shape IO behavior provides a different and
very broad basis for thinking about how IOs influence world politics.3
Developing an alternative approach to thinking about IOs is only worthwhile if it
produces significant insights and new opportunities for research on major debates in
the field. Our approach allows us to weigh in with new perspectives on at least three
such debates. First, it offers a differ’ent view of the power of IOs and whether or how
they matter in world politics. This issue has been at the core of the neoliberalinstitutionalists’ debate with neorealists for years.4 We show in this article how neoliberal-institutionalists actually disadvantage themselves in their argument with real-
ists by looking at only one facet of IO power. Global organizations do more than just
facilitate cooperation by helping states to overcome market failures, collective action
dilemmas, and problems associated with interdependent social choice. They also
create actors, specify responsibilities and authority among them, and define the work
these actors should do, giving it meaning and normative value. Even when they lack
material resources, IOs exercise power as they constitute and construct the social
world.5
Second and related, our perspective provides a theoretical basis for treating IOs as
autonomous actors in world politics and thus presents a challenge to the statist ontology prevailing in international relations theories. Despite all their attention to international institutions, one result of the theoretical orientation of neoliberal institution-
alists and regimes theorists is that they treat IOs the way pluralists treat the state. IOs
are mechanisms through which others (usually states) act; they are not purposive
actors. The regimes literature is particularly clear on this point. Regimes are “prin-
ciples, norms, rules, and decision-making procedures;” they are not actors.6 Weber’s
insights about the normative power of the rational-legal authority that bureaucracies
embody and its implications for the ways bureaucracies produce and control social
knowledge provide a basis for challenging this view and treating IOs as agents, not
just as structure.
1. For Gramscian approaches, see Cox 1980, 1992, and 1996; and Murphy 1995. For Society of States
approaches, see Hurrell and Woods 1995. For the epistemic communities literature, see Haas 1992. For IO
decision-making literature, see Cox et al. 1974; Cox and Jacobson 1977; Cox 1996; and Ness and Brechin
1988. For a rational choice perspective, see Snidal 1996.
2. Haas 1990.
3. Because the neorealist and neoliberal arguments we engage have focused on intergovernmental
organizations rather than nongovernmental ones, and because Weberian arguments from which we draw
deal primarily with public bureaucracy, we too focus on intergovernmental organizations in this article and
use the term international organizations in that way.
4. Baldwin 1993.
5. See Finnemore 1993 and 1996b; and McNeely 1995.
6. Krasner 1983b.
This content downloaded from
68.101.209.244 on Tue, 06 Oct 2020 03:05:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Pathologies of International Organizations 701
Third, our perspective offers a different vantage point from which to assess the
desirability of 1Os. While realists and some policymakers have taken up this issue,
surprisingly few other students of IOs have been critical of their performance or
desirability.7 Part of this optimism stems from central tenets of classical liberalism,
which has long viewed IOs as a peaceful way to manage rapid technological change
and globalization, far preferable to the obvious alternative-war.8 Also contributing
to this uncritical stance is the normative judgment about IOs that is built into the
theo …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Calculate the price for this paper
Pages (550 words)
Approximate price: -

Try it now!

Calculate the price for this paper

We'll send you the first draft for approval by at
Total price:
$0.00

How it works?

Follow these simple steps to get your paper done

Place your order

Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.

Proceed with the payment

Choose the payment system that suits you most.

Receive the final file

Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you.

Our Services

Best Quality Essays has stood as the world’s leading custom essay writing services providers. Once you enter all the details in the order form under the place order button, the rest is up to us.

Essays

Essay Writing Services

At Best Quality Essays, we prioritize on all aspects that bring about a good grade such as impeccable grammar, proper structure, zero-plagiarism and conformance to guidelines. Our experienced team of writers will help you completed your essays and other assignments.

Admissions

Admission and Business Papers

Be assured that you’ll definitely get accepted to the Master’s level program at any university once you enter all the details in the order form. We won’t leave you here; we will also help you secure a good position in your aspired workplace by creating an outstanding resume or portfolio once you place an order.

Editing

Editing and Proofreading

Our skilled editing and writing team will help you restructure you paper, paraphrase, correct grammar and replace plagiarized sections on your paper just on time. The service is geared toward eliminating any mistakes and rather enhancing better quality.

Coursework

Technical papers

We have writers in almost all fields including the most technical fields. You don’t have to worry about the complexity of your paper. Simply enter as much details as possible in the place order section.