Revisiting Global Governance in Multistakeholder Initiatives: Club Governance Based on Ideational Prealignments

Multistakeholder initiatives that bring together actors from the state, the business sector and society to formulate, implement and/or monitor rules governing different policy fields have assumed a prominent role in global governance since the 1980s. In the governance literature, it is generally assumed that the actors from the three sectors have diverse interests, but contribute different resources. This should allow to address transnational problems more effectively. While cooperation among the various collective actors in these initiatives might be based in part on complementary resources, we argue here that such cooperation is also shaped and conditioned by ideational prealignments of the participating actors. Such ideational prealignments are consequential, because they predetermine (1) the composition of multistakeholder forums in terms of which actors participate and which do not, (2) the processes that govern these forums, (3) the results of these forums and (4) the relations among the collective actors who participate in these forums and the stakeholders they are deemed to represent. When viewed from this perspective, multistakeholder initiatives are a form of club governance that is based on ideational factors. We illustrate this argument by drawing on research that examines the setting of standards for private military and security companies (PMSCs).     

生物多样性议题安全建构的碎片化

1992年,《生物多样性公约》与《联合国气候变化框架公约》《联合国防治荒漠化公约》一并成为全球环境治理与合作的重要制度性框架文件。目前,生物多样性的国际合作程度、社会认知深度、治理行动速度等都明显逊色。生物多样性治理的迫切程度不亚于其他的全球性环境议题,但其议题安全化的分散性却不利于建构整体性的安全认知。生物多样性议题安全建构的碎片化体现在生态、治理目标、谈判、国家及其他行为体四个层面。生态层面是指生物多样性的安全认知;治理目标层面是指全球生物多样性治理的"爱知目标"与安全的联系;谈判层面包括资金机制、资源动员、遗传资源获取和惠益分享、保护区以及主流化等议题;各缔约方及其他行为体层面不仅在各项议题上表达各自关切,同时也将生物多样性问题建构为粮食安全、水安全、公共卫生安全、经济安全等多元安全关注。生物多样性议题安全建构的碎片化导致了该问题虽然在话语上进入了安全领域,但是缺乏共同的安全认知,难以提供简明和清晰的治理目标和路径,不利于推动全球有效治理。     

数字经济时代的全球数据安全治理与中国策略

进入数字经济时代以来,日益严峻的数据安全风险与变幻莫测的国际形势交织叠加,各国围绕数据安全治理规则博弈呈现加剧态势,引发全球数据安全治理问题。各国际行为体虽然已经意识到数据安全治理的重要性,但对全球数据安全治理并未形成统一的治理框架。全球数据安全治理仅仅由单边、双边和多边框架以及贸易规则拼凑而成,相关治理议题在公民个人、社会、经济以及国家安全等多个层面相继涌现。多领域多维度的数据安全问题难免造成治理主体利益诉求的差异,也导致全球数据安全治理出现了规则碎片化、机制效用不足、治理乏力等问题。与此同时,个别国家的数据霸权主义行为更是使得国际行为体难以凝聚共识,全球数据安全治理步履蹒跚,重视和加强对全球数据安全问题的治理迫在眉睫。中国高度重视数据安全的相关议题,由于中国在数据治理领域起步较晚,仍存在立法不完善、技术创新能力薄弱、国际合作不足、治理乏力等问题。中国需要全面、系统地分析影响数据安全的各种重大风险因素,准确把握全球数据安全趋势,进一步优化中国在全球数据安全治理中的策略选择。     

Gunning for security governance in a resource-rich African state? Interrogating militarisation in a democratic Nigeria

ABSTRACT

This article examines the socio-historical factors that underpin the political sociology of militarism in Nigeria. In spite of subscribing to a democratic constitution and several regional mechanisms that advance democratic values, security governance in Nigeria has been marked by the increasing use of military force in responding to perceived threats posed by armed militias in the oil-rich Niger Delta. I argue that the securitisation of oil is fuels militarisation, facilitated by local, national and international actors. The turn to democratisation and changing conceptions of security have reinforced rather than reined in militarism, which results in a competitive and often violent politics between national, local and global security and military actors over access to and control of oil resources. These dynamics also result in dangerous socio-economic and political consequences for Niger Delta communities.     

Comparing regional organisations in global multilateral institutions: ASEAN, the EU and the UN

Structural change brought about by the end of the Cold War and accelerated globalisation have transformed the global environment. A global governance complex is emerging, characterised by an ever-greater functional and regulatory role for multilateral organisations such as the United Nations (UN) and its associated agencies. The evolving global governance framework has created opportunities for regional organisations to participate as actors within the UN (and other multilateral institutions). This article compares the European Union (EU) and Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as actors within the UN network. It begins by extrapolating framework conditions for the emergence of EU and ASEAN actorness from the literature. The core argument of this article is that EU and ASEAN actorness is evolving in two succinct stages: Changes in the global environment create opportunities for the participation of regional organisations in global governance institutions, exposing representation and cohesion problems at the regional level. In response, ASEAN and the EU have initiated processes of institutional adaptation.     

Orchestration and transnational climate governance

With multilateral efforts to mitigate climate change in gridlock, attention has turned to transnational climate governance initiatives, through which sub- and non-state actors seek to reduce greenhouse gases. These initiatives include networks of cities committed to lowering their carbon footprints, voluntary corporate reduction targets and disclosure processes, and many of the rules that govern carbon markets. The paper considers the role of “traditional” actors in world politics—states and intergovernmental organizations—in orchestrating such initiatives. This strategy accounts for nearly a third of transnational climate governance initiatives, we find, and upends the conventional dichotomy between “top down” and “bottom up” solutions to global collective action problems. We develop a theory to explain when states and intergovernmental organizations are likely to engage in orchestration, and we provide initial support for this theory with a new dataset of transnational climate governance initiatives and case studies of two of the most active orchestrators, the World Bank and the United Kingdom.     

The Complexity of Global Security Governance: An Analytical Overview

By suggesting predictable and controllable patterns of development, the literature on global governance seems to simplify the world for decision-making tractability. In this respect, security narratives often remain analytically frozen, while the dynamics of global life are not. Relying on complexity thinking, this article both comments on the construction and potential reconstruction of the concept of security as it relates to the question of global governance and engages with the cognitive multiplicity of the notion of global security governance. Such an exploration suggests the need for the complexification of the discourses and practices of security governance through the adaptive contingency of “security as resilience”, which rejects the detachment between human and natural systems and the ability of the former to control the latter. The argument is that the logic of “security as resilience” is more appropriate than the conventional logic of “security as control”. In policy terms, therefore, the complexity of global security governance intimates an ability to cope with vulnerabilities, defy adversity and construct a new proficiency in response to the uncertainty, cognitive challenges, complex unbounded risks and the need for continuing adaptation prompted by the alterations in global life.     

美国气候战略及中美气候合作北大核心

当前全球气候危机加速演进,气候变化与国际战略深度融合,全球气候治理进入大变局和秩序重塑的关键时期。美国拜登政府重启气候新议程,将气候变化议题提升至美国国家安全与外交政策的中心地位,其战略目标是在全球气候权力重组、气候安全体系重构、气候治理秩序重塑中争夺主导权,拜登政府的气候战略框架已基本成型。统筹应对美国气候战略竞争风险和深入推进COP26后中美气候外交,关系到国际安全体系与全球气候治理新秩序的构建。中美唯有良性互动、拓展合作空间才能维护国际安全及人类在21世纪的可持续发展。     

Defensive development,combative contradictions: towards an international political sociology of global militarism in Africa

ABSTRACT

Drawing on international political sociology, this article shows how the merger of development and security has become part of the ideational architecture that facilitates a new ‘feel-good’ militarism in Africa. Contemporary international reform efforts are designed to restrain military power in the name of development, democracy and civilian oversight, but also to strengthen the coercive capacities of African security institutions and make them more efficient in the global fight against violent extremism. Such defensive development efforts have implications for the historically problematic relationship of the African state with modern forms of organised force, reconfiguring and recalibrating relations and dynamics between the state, military forces and external actors. The article concludes that defensive development is fraught with combative contradictions and risks becoming the handmaiden not only of increased militaristic violence, but also of oppression and the restriction of freedom and democracy.     

On regional security governance once again: how analysis of the Southern Caucasus can advance the concept

Already introduced to the academic and political debate some years ago, the concept of “security governance” still needs to be clarified. In particular, four main shortcomings need to be overcome to make the concept more useful for an assessment of current security dynamics: in the first place, attention has been devoted more to “governance” than to “security”, while failing to consider the role of the understandings and perceptions of the actors involved in the governance system. Second, the literature on the actors (governmental or not) involved is still fragmented. Third, the literature on security governance has too often been detached from reflections on regionalism, while it would be useful to further explore the relationship between cognitive definitions of regional and security dynamics. Fourth, the literature has predominantly focused on Europe and the transatlantic area, overlooking processes of “region-building” in security terms in other “unexpected” geographical spaces. After proposing avenues to overcome the current gaps in the literature, the Southern Caucasus is chosen as a case study to show the different instances of security governance emerging, thanks to definitions of the region in security terms that have involved regional and external actors, of a state and non-state nature.     

中国崛起与全球安全治理转型

中国崛起与全球安全治理转型是21世纪初国际关系领域两个备受瞩目的全球性现象。文章以全球安全治理体系中的安全制度安排和安全规范设定为主要分析路径,以全球政治安全治理和全球经济安全治理为主要分析单元。一方面,自二战结束以来全球安全治理体系可分为"单边全球主义"和"全球单边主义"两个阶段,并且每一阶段的全球安全治理体系均可分解为政治制度、经济制度、政治规范和经济规范四个领域;另一方面,运用比较研究法,对各个时期全球安全治理体系在上述四个领域所体现出来的差异性进行剖析,可以发现,这种差异性集中表现为正在进行中的全球安全治理体系转型,崛起的中国在此次转型过程中开始发挥参与者、建设者和贡献者的作用。在传统全球安全治理体系陷入危机之时,中国崛起在相关领域所带来的制度效应和规范效应正在逐渐潜移默化地嵌入到全球安全治理体系中,中国的政策和实践也将相应日益形成规范化的趋势。     

Civil Society Democratising Global Governance? Potentials and Limitations of “Counter-Democracy”

A major aspect of global interdependencies during the last two decades has been the intensified interactions between international organizations (IOs) and civil society organizations (CSOs). In this paper, we propose a new way of analysing the potential of CSO inclusion to democratise global governance. The aim is to explore the possibility for CSOs to function as a form of counter-democratic force. This approach contrasts with earlier research that has tended to focus on participation, voice or representation when evaluating IO-CSO interaction from a democratisation perspective. Using Pierre Rosanvallon's term, we argue that counter-democratic actors organise distrust against power-holders, pressuring them to strengthen accountability. Counter-democracy is manifested in the institutions, agents and functions that are committed to overseeing ruling institutions, expressing mistrust and channelling dissent. Importantly, counter-democracy is not contrary to democracy, but a vital and perennial aspect of it. Our argument is that Rosanvallon's concept of counter-democracy can help us understand how the monitoring activities of CSOs may restrain the power of IOs and make them more responsible which in turn can be related to democratic qualities of global governance. However, we maintain that not all activities of transnational CSOs have counter-democratic qualities. To examine if and how a specific CSO might serve as a democratising force in global governance, we suggest that the actors and their activities should be scrutinised according to an analytical framework centred on the concepts of power-resources, ideational foundations and activities. Empirically, we investigate three carefully selected cases of CSOs that perform monitoring activities in a global governance context: the Corporate Europe Observatory, the NGO forum on the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and NGO Monitor.     

国际气候安全与气候技术合作困境与对策

全球气候变化正在带来严重的国际安全风险，气候问题已经与国家安全深度绑定。气候安全的治理能否成功，很大程度上取决于气候技术的选择及其全球普及程度。当前，国际社会积极利用先进气候技术实现气候安全面临着多重困难。文章对国际气候技术合作存在的障碍、未来合作方向和机制建设进行梳理，并以中美气候技术合作为例，探讨克服气候技术合作障碍的可能路径。解决气候技术合作难题，需要知识产权保护制度的改革和行业技术规范的供给。中美作为全球最大的两个经济体和碳排放国，宜进一步加强气候技术合作，履行大国责任，向发展中国家积极转让清洁能源技术，并借此契机重塑彼此互信，扩大科技领域的合作空间。     

al Qaeda and Global Governance: When Ideology Clashes With Political Expediency

In recent years, statements by al Qaeda leaders have included references to topics often associated with global-governance proponents’ critique of the state. This article examines the organization's attitude toward symbols of global governance, giving particular attention to its view of the United Nations as the foundation for global governance, and to the manner in which al Qaeda approaches the central questions of environmental threats and human rights. The organization is seeking to insert itself into the discourse of global governance and use it in an instrumental manner; it focuses on anti-Western narrative and seeks to expose the existing order as designed by Western powers, particularly the United States, for self-serving reasons. However, the article argues, notwithstanding al Qaeda's reputation for sophistication in manipulating public opinion, the organization's references to global governance underscore the limitations its rigid ideology imposes on its messaging efforts. Even though adopting the global governance discourse is in line with the group's effort to improve its image, al Qaeda's extremist ideology limits its ability to take full advantage of the benefits this discourse offers.     

Germany and European security governance: how well does the Birmingham model perform?

Abstract

The expansion of the security agenda after the end of the Cold War, propelled by the blowback of 11 September 2001, raises questions about the German ability and willingness to contribute to the regional and global security governance tasks facing Europe and Germany's continuing fidelity to its post-war European avocation. It also calls for a reconsideration of the Birmingham model of foreign policy analysis, particularly its emphasis on (and interpretation of) the ideational and institutional factors defining the German foreign policy agenda and shaping German foreign policy behaviour, at least with respect to the implementation (rather than formulation) of European Union security policies. Towards assessing the continuing utility of the Birmingham model, this article proceeds in three steps: the presentation of the Birmingham model and its restatement as six conjectures; a discussion of the security governance functions undertaken by the EU and the collective action problem facing Europe (and Germany) in executing them; and an empirical investigation of Germany's contribution to the EU as a security actor since 1990.     

Security governance in Europe: a return to system

The security governance literature has developed in four waves: the first is dedicated to matters of definition; the second to conceptual debate; the third to matters of application in the European setting and the fourth to how well the concept works in extra-European regions and at the global level. For all this effort, security governance as a concept remains problematic: it still has some way to go before it obtains clear definitional precision, conceptual clarity and a secure standing as concept in Security Studies. We address some of the theoretical and methodological difficulties common to the literature and argue that security governance has become overly preoccupied with agency and has thereby neglected structure. It has, in other words, obtained an actor-centered focus and so tended to conflate security governance as an analytical category with the specific actions of security actors. It has thus moved forward little in its ability to determine how and why security actors behave in the aggregate and whether that behavior reflects wider systemic properties. We thus ask in a third section whether it is worth returning to systemic thinking on security governance especially in the European context where the concept has had its most sophisticated application.     

Parting the Black Sea (Region): Geopolitics,Institutionalisation and the Reconfiguration of European Security

Abstract

This article examines critically one of the most active regional dynamics of European security, centred on the Black Sea. Recently, the Black Sea region has received increased attention from a variety of political actors, who seek to increase the profile of the region in order to develop a common regional identity and an integrated approach to the security problems of the Black Sea region. This resurgence of the Black Sea region can be understood as the combined product of local interests, European integration and the ‘global war on terror’. The main argument of the article is that Black Sea security integration is characterised by a fundamental contradiction between two different logics of security—geopolitical and institutional. Three other problems—transposition, fragmentation, and duplication—are also discussed. In the conclusion, the article examines the significance of the efforts to build the Black Sea region for the future of regional integration in European security.     

Towards prestige mobility? Diplomatic prestige and digital diplomacy

This article responds to previous efforts to calculate diplomatic prestige while adapting these methodologies to the exigencies of digital diplomacy. In particular, we are interested in how digital diplomacy provides opportunities for diplomatic actors lacking in material resources to overcome prestige deficits. We adapt approaches used in earlier studies to calculate the material and ideational components of diplomatic prestige to the online sphere—in terms of presence, centrality and perceptions. By analysing the twitter accounts of 67 foreign ministries and 33 United Nations missions, we find that the traditional markers of diplomatic prestige do not automatically translate online, and that significant effort is required to maintain prestige in online diplomatic networks. We also find that the flexibility and transience of online networks do allow diplomatic actors a degree of prestige mobility. Hence, this study is highly significant for understanding how prestige is managed and strategically influenced in digital diplomacy.     

Reflections on Globalisation,Security and 9/11

The study of globalisation carries important conceptual insights into the contemporary security agenda following the events of September 11th 2001 ('9/11'). This article argues that globalisation can be defined in a variety of ways, ranging from liberalisation to Westernisation, and can also be extended into concepts of supra-territorialisation. In combination, these definitions help to explain the generation of 9/11 style-conflict by providing the political-economic motivation for hyper-terrorism, by facilitating the political identities and activities of non-state actors; and by creating an environment for the global reach of terror movements. Additionally, the interconnection between globalisation and security can be seen in the response of the United States to 9/11 and its striving to project military power on a global scale with declining reference to time and geographical distance, and the varied ability of sovereign states to respond to the challenge of trans-sovereign security problems in the future.     

Security Governance and Networks: New Theoretical Perspectives in Transatlantic Security

The end of the Cold War has not only witnessed the rise of new transnational threats such as terrorism, crime, proliferation and civil war; it has also seen the growing role of non-state actors in the provision of security in Europe and North America. Two concepts in particular have been used to describe these transformations: security governance and networks. However, the differences and potential theoretical utility of these two concepts for the study of contemporary security have so far been under-examined. This article seeks to address this gap. It proposes that security governance can help to explain the transformation of Cold War security structures, whereas network analysis is particularly useful for understanding the relations and interactions between public and private actors in the making and implementation of national and international security policies.