Search

This paper sets out to explore the role of private authority in global networks currently involved in the emerging issue area known as ‘ICT for Development’, with a specific view to disentangling how private authority shapes policy configuration in this particular issue area. Drawing on theories of global governance and governmentality, the paper highlights the historical formation of the ICT for Development agenda, the role of knowledge management and modernization ideals in the framing of the agenda, and, not least, the rise of global networks taking the shape of partnerships which specifically address the ICT for Development problematique in global and local settings [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I argue that incomplete contracting generates for the states willing to cooperate a kind of bargaining problem that ressembles the problem of compliance but should be considered as distinct; the problem of residual control. The first part of the paper offers a theoretical discussion in which I isolate the specificity of residual control problems and highlight its importance for the explanation of institutional design preferences and outcomes. I demonstrate how asymetries of power play a critical role in this process. In the second part of the paper, I explore the pertinence of the theory of incomplete contracting and residual control in a case study of NAFTA-EU relations. Immediatly after the creation of NAFTA, several proposals for the future of the transatlantic trade relations were made. Scenarios for a NAFTA-EU free-trade agreement were rapidly discarded and bilateral initiatives were pursued with very different outcomes: Mexico signed an interim FTA with the EU in 1997, EU-US proposals for New Marketplace and Partnerships did not materialize, and Canadians and Europeans have recently launched negotiations for a bilateral trade agreement of a new generation. This paper compares the institutional preferences of the three NAFTA members as they are articulated in their discussion with their european partner over trade relations. More precisely, I argue that preferences regarding the future of the trade partnerships with Europe can best be explained by the measure by which the original NAFTA contract addressed, or failed to address, residual control rights in a context of asymetry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the end of the Cold War, the European Union recognized "the transition to a new European order as a positive opportunity to develop its external role" (Pace 2003, 164). With the establishment of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) as part of the Maastricht Treaty, a renewed Mediterranean Policy was introduced in December 1990. Nevertheless, the EU still had not adopted long-term policies to address the increasing disparities between the two sides of the Mediterranean (Pace 2003, 164) until 1995 with its official start through the Barcelona Declaration/EuroMed Partnership (EMP), now succeeded by the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM). From the EU perspective, this paper seeks to show how both hard and soft power approaches are utilized in its foreign policy approach to MENA, with the CSDP as part of the CSFP (and a number of member state initiatives) the EU in tandem with NATO (and especially its Mediterranean Dialogue and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative) as hard power (Manners 2002, 237), and the UfM focusing on soft power. This paper addresses the security implications of soft power, with the optimal mix between security and soft power constantly being adjusted (Heisbourg 2001, 6/7), as different national and international parameters are securitized more or less. These dynamics are based on the political realities of the day globally and intra-regionally, as well as due to progress in the process of harmonization among UfM members, operationalized by security sectors and levels (Buzan, Waever and de Wilde 1998 within the "three basket structured" (political, economic, and social-cultural of the EMP as well as the UfM). Heisbourg (2001, 7) points out that capability is not merely a function of military hardware, but equally a "function of strategic vision" (Ibid.) - and the UfM is evaluated in the proposed paper for its role in contributing to the Euro-Mediterranean regional capabilities for stability and prosperity per its ENP mandate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Transnational public-private partnerships (PPP) are put in place to fill governance gaps and deal with a wide range of issues, such as energy and water supply, biodiversity protection, health, and social rights. Apart from the diversity of issue areas PPPs cover, their organizational set-ups range from loose cooperation forms to legally binding contracts for the implementation of specific projects. This paper asks why transnational PPPs in the water sector have increasingly formalized their goals and exhibit higher institutional degrees. Drawing on the literature on legalization, I will show that they do so in two ways. First, despite the fact that PPPs address complex problems, it appears that these PPPs increasingly attempt to formulate more specific goals and indicators and thereby increase the precision of their rules. In addition, PPPs increasingly implement sophisticated monitoring systems, which they at times outsource to external reviewers and thereby extend the level of delegation. By drawing on the theory of organizational fields, I show that these developments can be explained by coercive, mimetic and normative isomorphism. The paper shows that pressure exerted by donors and funding agencies, the frequent interaction among different PPPs and their staff members, and best practices that have served as model solutions contributed to the institutionalization. The paper draws on three case studies on the Global Water Partnership, Building Partnerships for Development in Water and Sanitation, and Water and Sanitation for the Urban Poor. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global public-private partnerships play an increasing role for global governance processes in a number of policy fields. As they lack the kind of legitimacy other actors like nations states and International Organizations possess, the question of accountability becomes crucial. The proposed paper deals with the specifics of partnership accountability. It departs from the multi-actor constellation which complicates both the identification of the agent and the control through the principals and analyzes mechanisms for the creation of accountability in three core dimensions. In order to make partnership activities transparent, information on a number of issues (e.g. sources and use of funding, governance structures, performance) is essential. This needs to be accompanied by mechanisms that ensure responsiveness towards the stakeholders, for which participation is key. Finally, principals need to be able to sanction undesired behaviour of the partnership (e.g. through non-compliance, withdrawal of support, reputational damage). To what extent these mechanisms are applied in reality is investigated in the paper for the policy-field of global health. Based on a detailed empirical analysis of global health partnerships in four areas (advocacy, research & development, service provision, financing) it is shown that the degree of accountability varies with the type of partnership and the function it fulfills. However, certain core requirements need to be met in order to make public-private partnerships legitimate participants in global governance processes. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The limitations of the Sino-Russian strategic partnership have often been noted: their fundamental engagements point in different directions- Russia towards Europe and China the Pacific - with each having only a secondary relationship in the opposing direction; their economic relations are underdeveloped and erratic; and the relative trajectory of the two countries under transition means that Russia has engaged China as much out of anxiety as amity. Above all both countries confront US power at almost every turn: this is the principal factor in their calculations and the principal constraint on their foreign policy agendas. The strategic partnership provides plentiful opportunity for rhetorical challenges ? declarations of multipolarity and resistance to hegemony abound ? but does the partnership actually provide either power with the things it needs when confronting US dominance? Most analysts have decided not, and this conclusion has only strengthened in the wake of September 11 2001 when Russia and China failed to gain any meaningful leverage from their partnership when faced with US determination to intervene in Afghanistan and Iraq. The post 9/11 developments on the Korean peninsula suggest a very different prospect, however. Here the interests and assessments of the two powers are very close: either US instigated regime change or North Korean brinkmanship could so destabilise and radicalise the Northeast Asian security order as to produce any number of unwanted consequences from Japanese nuclearisation to war on the peninsula. Any US decision to conduct pre-emption against North Korea would also violate a long-standing geopolitical principle: that US maritime hegemony is unchallengeable but that its penetration into continental Eurasia can and should be limited. Thus China and Russia may finally have found an issue on which they can make their partnership ‘strategic’ in a meaningful sense. They also appear to have means to this end: in 2002 Kim Jong-il visited Beijing and Moscow and Putin and Jiang made return visits to Pyongyang: economic and arms contracts followed. The US seems to be leaving the door open to negotiation but this may be still be an ordering of priorities until the Gulf situation has stabilised. As in 1950, therefore, the peninsula stands at the epicentre of regional tensions and may produce a comparable shift in relations between Moscow and Beijing and Washington. This paper will study the incompatible concepts of hegemony and multipolarity within the context of the Russia-China-US triangle using the current impasse over North Korea as a case study. It will ask questions such as: how far are Russia and China acting together to deflect US pressure on North Korea? How far are they prepared to go and can this succeed? Does this represent a significant shift in the balance of relations between the three powers and what will be the likely consequences for Northeast Asian security? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diehl and Goertz (2000) and Valeriano (2003) have investigated certain types of rivalry linkages. Diehl and Goertz (2000) focus on rivalries that are linked through a common foe or a common alliance partner. Valeriano (2001) investigates the impact of simultaneous rivalries on the severity of conflict within a rivalry. What is left is to look at rivalry groups. Some rivals are not dyadic, but groups of actors inter-linked together. For example, the rivalry between the United States and Soviet Union is deeply linked with China. This paper will identify which groups of states make up a complex rivalry; or those rivalries that include more than two interstate actors. Once the initial dataset is created, this analysis will allude to the dynamics of conflict within complex rivals. Do these types of rivalries experience war more frequently? Do they last longer than other types of rivalries? Are they more severe than other types of rivals? Not all rivals are strictly dyadic and the interactions of complex rivals may suggest that these types of rivals have significantly different conflict propensities and foreign policy practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Atlantic partnership was severely strained by the Iraq war of March-April 2003, and even more by the diplomatic wrangling that preceded the military conflict. But it is far from clear that policy towards Iraq was the source of these strains. This paper assesses recent changes in international politics and how these changes differentially affected the Atlantic partners. In so doing it provides a structural account of the present crisis, arguing that the transatlantic bargain consolidated in the 1950s rested upon a particular constellation of interests that was deeply undermined by the end of the Cold War as well as by the security implications of globalization. The stability of the Cold War Atlantic partnership rested upon an unusual balance between the interests of its most significant members: the US, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Once West Germany had been firmly enmeshed in the western security and economic systems, the central political problem of the transatlantic relationship was muting Franco-American rivalry. Two factors tended to mitigate Franco-American antipathies. The first was self-restraint on the part of successive US governments, who regarded NATO as the leading security arrangement, and Europe as the most important theatre of operations, of the Cold War conflict with the Soviet Union. The second mitigating factor was the restraining influence exercised by the Federal Republic of Germany on French policy, since realization of the Federal Republic’s dual objectives of security (in the present) and unification (in the future) depended on a careful balancing of political relations with Paris and Washington. The end of the Cold War substantially weakened both these buffers on Franco-American relations. The structural foundations of the Atlantic framework were further undermined by the eventual realization that America’s chief post-Cold War security concerns had more to do with transnational terrorism rather than with traditional interstate rivalry. The result is a system now in flux, but in which a re-emergence of the previous framework is unlikely; that framework has no basis in underlying political realities, and, despite widespread pretensions to the contrary, it holds little genuine appeal for the principal governments on either side of the Atlantic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will examine four fundamental questions concerning US allies and partners in Europe: How is the United States perceived by elites/public opinion? Why does this matter -- how do these countries figure in US interests? How can consequences for the United States be measured? What can/should the United States do to influence the impact on US interests [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will examine four fundamental questions concerning US allies and partners in Asia: How is the United States perceived by elites/public opinion? Why does this matter -- how do these countries figure in US interests? How can consequences for the United States be measured? What can/should the United States do to influence the impact on US interests? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Russia-EU relations have often been presented in terms of a normative gap, with the EU appearing as normative power and Russia as non-normative actor. This paper critically analyses the 'normative argument' that present the normative gap as the cause of tensions between the EU and Russia. It pleads for a less dichotomous approach of EU-Russia relations in terms of norms versus interests and challenges the normative argument on the basis of its assumed congruence between the norm-driven input and norm-promoting output of European foreign policy. An alternative approach is suggested exploring how the normative agenda serves instrumental purposes. While the argument that the EU is 'othering' Russia through its normative agenda is not fully supported, it appears that the EU's normative agenda creates a new hierarchy of identities among its East European neighbours, This does not imply that the Russia first policy is reversed. Rather, we face a process of complex and competitive prioritisation among Eastern neighbours. This changing prioritisation further reinforces the decoupling of the EU's Russia policy from its East European policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For much of the last decade the EU has been involved in protracted and controversial negotiations with the ACP group of countries with the aim of establishing a series of 'WTO-compatible' Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). In this paper, we locate the EPAs within the context of the wider shift in EU trade policy towards bilateralism. In doing so, we eschew much of the existing literature within EU Studies and, instead, turn to recent work in IPE emphasising the 'domestic-societal' and 'systemic' drivers of preferential liberalisation. Recent strands of this literature have drawn particular attention to the prominence of the so-called 'Singapore Issues' in driving developed countries to compete for preferential access in developing country markets. Although neither domestic-societal nor systemic pressures are sufficient to explain the EPAs - or indeed EU trade policy more generally - drawing attention to the above features allows us to account for why they have gone beyond the original remit of 'WTO compatibility' and why aspects of the emerging agreements bear close similarity to the EU's supposedly more commercially-oriented bilateral agreements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the postCold War era the European Union has been busily engaged in devising its relations with third parties in essentially postsovereign lines. Instead of more traditional international arrangements, such as international regimes, the EU has sought to link relationships with third parties based on various issueareas with expectation of profound normative convergence towards the liberal models and ideals propagated by the Union. This approach can be seen as part and parcel of the Union's attempts at (regional) normative hegemony. At the same time, the Union's policies do not operate in a vacuum but are crucially both enabled and constrained by the wider constitution of the international society. The proposed paper will seek to do two things. First, it will seek to flesh out the Union's essentially postsovereign approach to international politics. Second, it seeks to examine this policy against the wider backdrop of the current and evolving constitution of the international society. How do these two processes affect each other? Are they mutually compatible and complementary, or is - as is assumed - the Union trying to swim against the tide of wider constitution of the international society? If so, what are the likely repercussions on the EU and its own international actorness and objectives in the process? Empirically, the case to be discussed is China, which is often portrayed as potentially posing the starkest challenge to the EU's vision of future world order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper pursues several purposes: First, to trace the links, analyze and interpret the significance of the interactions between the most important think-tanks (TT) involved in the construction and governing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); second, to examine the extent to which these organizations articulate regional elites, their views regarding NAFTA, the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and, in general, their policy preferences; and last, the ways in which elites emerging from this network influence the region, shaping the process of integration. In short, to examine the role of TT in launching, promoting, defending and revising NAFTA. I argue that within this network of think tanks a new paradigm of regional integration has been conceived, a wide array of issues have been framed to make policies acceptable among the public opinion, and a new conventional wisdom has been reinvented. Furthermore, this network provides spaces where regional elites build social and ideological coherence, structuring mechanisms to gradually and selectively integrate, order and aggregate certain interests and preferences, marginalizing or ignoring others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the study of the role NGOs in global governance, international women's groups have received considerable attention. However, much of this has been directed towards second generation groups, or those established in the 1960s and later. Less attention has been paid to the older first generation groups established at the turn of the century. This is unfortunate as such groups not only were instrumental in establishing much of the framework of the international women's movement in the first place but also remain heavily involved in matters of global governance concerning women's international issues. In an effort to redirect attention to the importance of these groups in contemporary global governance, this paper examines the relationship between a particularly prominent first generation group, Zonta International, and the United Nations. This relationship is explored in light of two theoretical matters. The first concerns the criticism that by becoming integrated into mainstream organizations, like the UN, first generation women's groups have become less relevant to the global women's movement. The second concerns how we should view contemporary relations between NGOs and the UN, whether through a corporatist or partnership lens. After showing how the relationship between Zonta and the UN is manifested, conclusions concerning these theoretical issues are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The vision of the Desertec project the large-scale installation of solar thermal plants in the deserts of the MENA-Region to produce huge amounts of renewable energy for the whole region and the EU-market has attracted political support by the EU. Especially strong was the projects' resonance in the European Mediterranean politics, respective the Union for the Mediterranean founded in 2008, which integrated the idea of a renewable energy partnership as one of its priority projects. The aim of this paper is to explore the question why and how the private profit interests of the Desertec Initiative were successfully transformed into a political project taken up at the European level. In doing so it applies a perspective of a discursive hegemony theory. This will show up the added value of a reflectivist approach for the study of energy policy as well as the intimate relation between energy and identity politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the increasing role of non-state actors in various fields of global governance, questions of legitimacy have gained ground. This paper elaborates on the concept of accountability and examines the health aid discourse in this respect. It interprets the application of accountability with regard to foundations and global partnerships.It firstly introduces theoretical considerations on accountability embedding it in the current global governance discourse. The relationship of principals and agents is discussed and different levels of accountability are introduced. This will be further specified with regard to the role of non-state actors in global governance and specifically in global health governance. Afterwards, a critical assessment of the perception of accountability in the Paris Declaration and follow-up initiatives is presented. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multistakeholder partnerships (MSP) are said to deliver more inclusive, effective, and sustainable policy-making by bringing together governments, businesses, and civil society in a new process of interaction on policy design and implementation. Despite their increasing popularity both at the global and at the national policy level, so far multi-stakeholder partnerships have received little systematic scholarly attention. We argue that more needs to be said about main features and modes of operation of MSPs as well as about whether and how they are distinct from other types of collaborative arrangements. By developing a framework for the study of MSPs, this paper tries to fill a gap in the existing literature, as well as to provide practitioners with a useful framework for the analysis and strategic management of projects. In particular, civil servants and international organizations staff are given the task of designing, implementing, monitoring and assessing participatory initiatives with very little guidance on the peculiarities of these arrangements. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper claims that the forging of a common identity among India, Brasil and South Africa based on their role as leaders in their respective regions is a relevant yet neglected aspect of their partnership that will ultimately determine the success of IBSA. The argument is that the foundational south identity of the IBSA initiative retains ideological elements drawn from the heyday of the confrontational politics of Non-Alignment which do not adequately (or at least do not fully) represent the contemporary political and economic context of its members. Linked to this is the fact that, while acknowledged as powers by dint of their preponderance of economic and material means, this has not translated into wide-spread recognition within their respective regions. For all these reasons, IBSA relies primarily on an elite defined form of south activism as a key source of legitimacy for its endeavors. The construction of a strong regional identity for IBSA based on its members' strategic positions in South Asia, South America and Southern Africa is, in our viewpoint, a more convincing common ground to legitimize a sustainable diplomatic partnership between the IBSA states. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Do larger trade partners incur a larger share of the cost associated with establishing or perpetuating free trade arrangements? A key assumption found in many free trade theories states that larger trade partners are willing to incur disproportionate costs because of benefits specialized to their needs. In addition, their larger size gives them the greater capability to take on these costs. Therefore, they help their partners in establishing a free trade area in order for them to help themselves achieve greater benefits from free trade. The implication is that successful economic integration requires a regional preponderant power that acts as a core provider of public goods. However, this is just an assumption, one that has not seen the light of empirical testing. I propose to test this by using the case of the Common Market of the South (Mercosur). By utilizing macroeconomic data and findings from elite interviews with key Brazilian institutional actors (gathered during fieldwork in Brasília in May-July 2003), we can support the argument that Brazil has acted as a regional leader during crisis points (e.g. Argentinean peso crisis), within its capability, in order to maintain the process of integration in the Southern Cone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a result of the end of the cold war and rise in comparative American power, some analysts concluded that a possible Sino-Russian alliance might arise as a means of balancing the power of the United States in the international system. Relations between the two countries warmed during the Yeltsin regime in Moscow, and increased Russia-China trade and strategic cooperation has occurred since the 1990s. However, possible balancing behaviour between the countries has been countered by the numerous regional-level factors which have prevented the formation of a stronger alliance between Russia and China. These have included concerns over strategic competition in Central Asia, regional economic rivalries, and the increased presence of American interests in Asia. It is due to these factors that balancing behaviour from a Sino-Russian partnership will remain limited in the short term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents a study on the state of human security in the Middle East and North Africa. Identification of the main sources of insecurity in the region; Analysis of measures that have been taken or need to be taken to provide or enhance human security; Evaluation of the usefulness of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership in enhancing human security.

This paper will investigate the role of a new and poorly understood type of alignment that is becoming increasingly salient in the Asia Pacific security order - ‘strategic partnerships’. The term first entered the security lexicon to describe the Sino-Russian Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in 1996. Yet, the term ‘strategic partnership’ has also been employed to describe allied relationships as diverse as India-US and Australia-China. Despite its growing currency, there is little consensus on the definition or characteristics of ‘strategic partnerships’ in IR. This paper will address these deficiencies to offer some conceptualization of this form of alignment by employing existing IR theories and aspects of Business Studies (in which the term is well documented). In the process it will draw empirical examples from selected strategic partnerships in the region, especially the SCO. It will consider the significance and implications of this new form of alignment in the context of the evolving security architecture of the region, juxtaposing it with existing concepts such as ‘alliances’ and ‘security communities’ to reflect on how this new construction complements the traditional forms of security architecture. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies the effects of the extended “ASEAN Way” of cooperation as a cultural approach to international collaboration. It explores why, how and through which mechanisms Asian states reproduce a cultural approach that leads to a type of collaboration that appears to persistently lead to less institutionalized and legalized institutions, the so-called “ASEAN Way.” This type of institutionalization even appears to emerge if more cooperation-inclined states like the US, Japan or other European states are engaged. Starting from Miles Kahler's rationalist explanation for the variation of preferences for institutionalization among Asian states, the paper highlights the mechanisms and processes through which culture translates into specific outcomes, in this case “less institutionalized forms of cooperation.” The paper specifically focuses on the issue of "legalization" in promoting and furthering integration and resolving bilateral conflicts. The paper argues that legalization is a preferred option of Western states that â€" given diverging historical experiences that have led to a different culture of cooperation, does not constitute the preferred Asian "tool-kit". Through a systematic case study analysis focusing on Southeast and East Asia, the paper shows how culture shapes the preferences of Asian states and how these translate into specific approaches toward conflict resolution. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are a burgeoning, though relatively recent, phenomenon in global environmental governance (Richter 2002). Today, most UN agencies, regardless of their mandates, have set up a special unit to secure partnerships with the private sector (Bull et al. 2004).Whereas the existing literature now recognizes international organizations (IOs) as partnership entrepreneurs, it focuses largely on the policy effectiveness of the resulting PPPs. But it leaves unexamined the specific normative underpinnings of these partnerships and whether IOs have turned from partnership entrepreneurs into norm entrepreneurs.In this paper, I argue that PPPs arise as a policy instrument of market-based environmentalism, within a normative context that has been labeled “the compromise of liberal environmentalism” (Bernstein 2001). However, this liberal environmentalist norm is not uncontested. We can juxtapose it to at least two competing norms, that of “green governmentality,” which involves a top-down, regulatory approach to environmental governance, and “civic environmentalism” which aims at redefining governance towards environmental equity (Backstrand 2007). This sets up the question of what is the role of IOs in promoting particular norms of global environmental governance. This is an important step towards uncovering whether IOs are emerging as promoters of a hegemonic, market-based norm or are simply reflecting global consensus on how to best govern the global commons. The paper is organized in three parts: I examine the normative underpinnings of PPPs; develop a theoretical framework to analyze how IOs shift roles in multilateral governance, from policy entrepreneurs into norm entrepreneurs; and apply the framework to UNDP’s Division for Business Partnerships, and the World Bank’s Business Partnership and Outreach Group. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Realists comprehend the international system as a constellation of competing units of various sizes, various capabilities, and various goals but all of which are oriented ultimately on a single objective?promoting the interests of the individual state. These competing units are states that interact in a broad and complex constellation of actors. Each of these states is struggling independently of one another to achieve their goals through a variety of means that are to a certain extent dependent upon their capacities and to a certain extent dependent upon their position within the constellation. Large and resourceful states most successfully pursue their goals through partnership, alliance, influence, threat, and coercion. Realist theory has historically emphasized strategies of large, resourceful states. Less resourceful states, realists have argued, find strategies at their disposal more constrained. This paper analyzes the realist strategies for developing states, emphasizing the mechanisms that differ from those used by great powers. The paper analyzes realist theory with reference to Kazakhstan as a case study of a rapidly developing ?middle power? ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I focus on new governance structures (i.e. partnerships) that are being established to better govern the illegal trade in E-waste. To analyze the global governance of the international trade in E-waste, I use Manuel Castells? theory of flows and the network society, as well as the translation of this theory to the environmental social sciences as proposed by Arthur Mol and Gert Spaargaren. From this perspective, E-waste as a general environmental flow can be disaggregated or 'unbundled' in various distinct flows. In addition to the material flow of the waste itself, we can identify accompanying flows such as financial flows, risk flows, technology flows, etc. The Basel Convention is not able to prevent or adequately govern the illegal trade in E-waste. Therefore, new governance structures are being established in the form of partnerships between parties to the Convention, industry representatives and NGOs. Two such partnerships are being established in the framework of the Basel Convention: the Mobile Phone Partnership Initiative, which is working on guidelines on the environmentally sound management of used and end-of-life mobile phones, and the Global Computer Refurbishment and Recycling Partnership, which is still in its exploratory phase. In my paper I will briefly elaborate on the theoretical framework of my research, and then focus on the possible impact that these types of partnerships can have on the international trade in E-waste. Will such new policy instruments be better able to govern the material flows of E-waste? And what are the possible impacts on the other identified, non-material flows? ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will focus (a) on the contributions of global public-private partnerships in the health sector to governance by and in the south and (b) on the relationship between network regulation and two alternative modes of governance, namely public and private regulation. The most prominent form of network governance are global public-private partnerships (GPPPs). In the health sector we meanwhile observe more than 100 GPPPs that aim at influencing the global agenda, developing new drugs and vaccines, facilitating the access to drugs and medical equipment, and at financing the fight against specific diseases. The paper will give an overview of these various types of GPPPs and provide a more detailed insight into the structures of the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis und Malaria (GF), the most prominent and with a volume of nearly 3.5 billion US dollars also financially most important GPPP in Global Health Governance. The degree of participation of southern state and non-state actors in the governance of the GF at global and national level and the interplay of interests, power relations, conflicts and synergies in the activities of the GF will be given particular consideration. The second part of the paper looks at the connection of GPPPs and especially the GF with regulation by other public and private actors in Global Health Governance, such as multilateral institutions (WHO, UNAIDS), bilateral agencies, pharmaceutical companies and NGOs. It will be argued that although network regulation has expanded during the last decade, public regulation in particular continues to play an important role. New forms of governance like GPPPs do by no means substitute traditional modes of regulation, but offer an alternative institutional option to mediate between interests and to negotiate conflicts. GPPPs therefore may under certain circumstances contribute to a better integration of actors of the south and to the empowerment of weak actors. Since they may also be used by powerful actors of the north to pursue their interests, we should however be careful not to overestimate the potential of GPPPs. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes three primary questions in the Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources (CI/KR) public-private dynamic: What is the optimal construct of the public-private partnership, how will it react under stress and what are the best means of fosteri ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims at understanding the potential of partnerships of the European Union (EU) with emergent global actors (the so-called new leading powers (NLP) or BRIC countries), focusing on international trade law policy. Although the power base of these ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper addresses the issues of scalability and sustainability through partnered projects that bring information and communications technology (ICT) to the developing world. Such projects have the potential to empower the disenfranchised, foster econom ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to consider the current state of the EU-Russia relationship and to examine the concept of strategic partnership between the two actors. The EU and Russia launched the Common Spaces initiative in 2005 with the intention being t ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The goal of this paper is to examine and appraise the evolution of the relationship between the European Union and Brazil as well as its prospects. It will be argued that such an evolution exhibits a positive tendency to the extent that relations between ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The global health agenda is increasingly being shaped by NGOs and defined by private organizations and partnerships, the latter exemplified by the Gates Foundation. The paper will problematize the role of private foudnations and service-delivery partnersh ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Closely intertwined government and business sectors and widespread use of public-private partnerships are features commonly associated with the state-guided economies of Asia, not liberal America. This paper will discuss the increasing prominence of hybri ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will discuss the role played by the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in the prosecution of war criminals. As an introduction a general overview of the tribunal will be presented which will include the creation of this institution, its temporal, geographic and legal jurisdiction and its main structures and organs. Secondly there will be a presentation of the investigative methods used by the Office of the Prosecutor for the collection of evidence with a focus on the case of Srebrenica. In this part we will discuss the complexities and particularities of collecting evidence against high ranking political and military figures for war crime cases tried at an international tribunal as well as the strategies put forward by the Office of the Prosecutor in order to overcome obstacles in collecting this evidence. Finally the concepts of partnership and transition between international and national tribunals will be discussed, as well the role â€"if any- played by these tribunals in the reconciliation process in a post-conflict situation. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intermediary cooperation encompassing various levels of communication, coordination, and collaboration is necessary to realize the inherent complementarity of many official and private intermediary efforts. Effective negotiation between the intermediaries is necessary to achieve such cooperation. Official and private intermediaries must be willing to come to the table and, once there, they must be able to negotiate effectively. The paper builds on existing research on complementarity and cooperation by focusing explicitly on the communication and relationships between intermediaries and applying negotiation theory to analyze opportunities for and barriers to cooperation. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why do states uphold their alliance commitments? Most research has focused on characteristics of the state (like regime type) or dyadic/alliance level factors (like changes in relative power between the members of the alliance). One understudied effect is the role of other alliances held by a state. When a state faces the decision to uphold an alliance commitment during a conflict, its decision is likely to have reprecussions with other states, who are not involved in the immediate conflict but have an alliance tie with the deciding state. These additional alliance ties are likely to create incentives to uphold an agreement that less encumbered states are likely to possess. States with additional alliances are likely to worry about the future costs for reneging on an alliance, especially the possibility of increased aggression against other allies. Thus, this paper hypothesizes that states are more likely to uphold their alliance commitments when they are members of other alliances with similar commitments. This argument is tested on a set of alliance commitment choices from 1816-1992, controlling for other factors and possible selection effects. Results are supportive of the effect of reputation on whether a state upholds its alliance commitment. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many transnational multi-stakeholder initiatives (also known as partnerships) have emerged in global sustainability politics. Most research has so far been conducted in the form of single-or small-n case studies. Although many of these studies address the pressing questions of effectiveness (or influence), the accumulated case studies do not provide convincing knowledge on the role and relevance of partnerships in local and global politics. They suffer from a lack of consensus on a definition and therefore they are difficult to compare. Hence, we argue for a large-n evaluation of the influence of partnerships in global sustainability politics, to assess whether and how partnerships matter. To facilitate such analysis, we are developing a Global Sustainability Partnership Database (GSPD). In the GSPD data is collected on two types of variables: measures of the influence of transnational public policy partnerships, and possible explanatory factors. This paper presents an appraisal framework for the relevance and influence of partnerships, in particular by means of the GSPD that we are developing. To this end, we first review the available literature (section 2) and outline then our general approach and especially our database project (section 3). Its key elements we describe in the two subsequent sections: our measurement concept for the influence of partnerships (section 4), and a set of hypotheses that we will test in a larger research effort based on this database (section 5). ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The multi-stakeholder partnership initiative announced at the World Summit or Sustainable Development (WSSD) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects under the Kyoto protocol represent the rise of public-private partnerships and signify ?global public policy networks?, ?post-sovereign governance? or ?networked governance?, concepts receiving theoretical attention in international relations. Public-private partnerships can be conceived as new forms of global governance with the potential to bridge multilateral norms and local action by drawing on a diverse number of actors in civil society, government and business. The CDM and WSSD partnerships are particularly interesting since they tap into multilateral norms, agreements, targets as well as agendas of international organizations. Both the CDM and WSSD partnerships have been framed as innovative forms of governance that can effectively address the three ?deficits? of global environmental governance: the governance deficit, the implementation and participation deficit. However, the promise of partnerships, prevalent in contemporary global environmental discourse, makes an assessment of the legitimacy of these important, i.e. the effectiveness and accountability of networked governance structures. This paper evaluates the legitimacy of multi-sectoral partnership networks by comparing WSSD and CDM partnerships processes. Do they enhance legitimacy and authority necessary to carry out governance functions? Do they lead to a more participatory and flexible ways of decision-making? Can they be designed to help overcoming deadlocks that are typical of international policy making? We argue that legitimacy ? including issues such as public scrutiny, transparency, accountability, clear guidelines for monitoring effectiveness of networks, are critical to the future success of public-private partnerships. Furthermore, the success of partnership movements hinges on their interplay with international organizations that function as arenas for coupling partnerships with multilateral norms. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do Americans form opinions on trade and trade-related policies? Observational studies have primarily focused on three aspects of trade preference determination - individual economic effects, altruistic concerns, and security issues. To discriminate between the potentially correlated rationales, this study draws on data collected from a survey of 1,500 potential voters in the 2010 United States Congressional Election and uses an experiment which changes participants' perceptions of the United States' primary trading partners and the benefits of such trade. These induced changes - particularly the switch between developed and developing trade partners and security allies and adversaries - should result in contrasting outcomes between the control and treatment groups, but only for the set of factors on which individuals truly rely when forming preferences on trade and trade-related policies. Analysis of the results supports and extends previous work on the importance of altruism in shaping perceptions and no support for individual economic concerns and security concerns driving majority opinion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interdependence theories predict that increased trade dependence reduces conict. We argue that these theories could benefit greatly from accounting for the networked structure of international trade. We argue that indirect trade relations reduce the probability of conict by creating (1) opportunity costs of conict beyond those reected by direct trade ties; and (2) negative externalities for the potential combatants' trading partners, giving them an incentive to prevent the conict. We also argue that trade ows create groups of states with relatively dense trade ties, which we call trading communities. Our hypothesis is that joint members of trading communities are less likely to go to war, however little they directly trade with each other. We systematically measure and define trading communities across various levels of aggregation using the network analytic tool of modularity maximization. We find significant support for our hypothesis, indicating that interdependence theory can be extended to extra-dyadic relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is frequently argued that European trade unions would have participated in the neo-liberal restructuring of the social relations of production in Europe through an emphasis on a social partnership approach. This paper will critically evaluate these claims and assess whether unions have actually accepted neo-liberalism or whether they could still play a role in resistance to restructuring. Empirically, this analysis will provide a comparative analysis of French and Swedish trade unions. While the French labour movement is characterised by low unionisation levels and little institutionalised impact on policy-making, they have been rather successful at mobilising for demonstrations and strikes. Swedish unions, on the other hand, enjoy one of the highest unionisation levels in the industrialised world and excellent access to policy-making. They are, however, less active in the mobilisation for strikes. Theoretically, this analysis will be based on a neo-Gramscian perspective, able to conceptualise the restructuring processes related to globalisation as well as to assess the underlying rationale of trade unions strategies. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The term “cross-sector partnerships“ refers to a strategy which counts on the collaboration of actors from the public, the business and the civil sector in order to solve problems which none of them would be able to solve by itself – at least not to the desired degree. While the normative aspirations concerning these types of collaboration are often far-reaching there is still a lack of critical reflections on basic principles, which would be necessary in order to go beyond ad-hoc problem-solving and to allow for an open debate on the normative foundations and implications of “cross-sector partnerships“. The most important conclusion of this paper is that the problem-solving attitude that is reflected in the discussions on “cross-sector partnerships” hinders the establishment of general rules for this new type of social cooperation, which in turn leaves the question of “who contributes what under which conditions to what” open to the participants themselves. This means that none of them – especially when it comes to the business and the civil sector – can be made accountable for non-cooperation which leaves their actions subject to arbitrariness and puts them into a powerful position. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Partnerships have become an intrinsic part of global environmental governance, especially since the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development, where more than 200 Partnerships for Sustainable Development were launched as official outcomes. Even before ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

NATO was created in 1949 to secure its borders from an outside attack, but has been radically transformed during recent years. At present, both cooperation with partners and stabilisation operations in the Balkans and in Afghanistan have come to the foref ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To understand how the Chinese leadership views Sino-Russian partnership, it is important to see how relations with Russia fit into China’s overall foreign policy framework, particularly key tenets of Chinese foreign policy such as peaceful development, win-win diplomacy, and the creation of a harmonious world. The first section examines the link between China’s evolving identity as a rising power and changing appraisals of Russia as a great power. A second section assesses Chinese foreign policy, political, economic, and military interests in the Sino-Russian partnership. A third section evaluates China’s record in addressing challenges posed by cross-border problems within the context of the leadership’s increasing attention to non-traditional security problems and multilateral cooperative efforts. A final section examines the future prospects for Sino-Russian partnership. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is the best known framework for voluntary reporting of environmental and social performance by business worldwide. Using extensive empirical data, including interviews and documentary analysis, we examine GRI's organizational field and conclude that since its modest beginnings in 1999 GRI has been by several measures a successful institutionalization project. But the institutional logic of this new entity, as an instrument for corporate sustainability management, leaves out one of the central elements of the initial vision for GRI: as a mobilizing agent for many societal actors. This emergent logic reflects GRI's dominant constituency -- large global companies and financial institutions and international business management consultancies -- and not the less active civil society organizations and organized labor. We attribute these developments to such factors as: building GRI within the existing institutional structures; the highly inclusive multistakeholder process; and the underdeveloped base of information users. From the institutional theory perspective, this case shows that institutionalization needs to be understood as an ongoing, incomplete and sometimes contradictory process, the outcome of which is deeply affected by initial strategies of the founders, and which reproduces existing power relations. From the governance perspective, this case leads us to question the power of commodified information to mobilize civil society and to strengthen governance based on partnerships. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

WSSD devoted considerable effort to promoting multi-stakeholders transnational partnerships as a device to usher into a new era of result-oriented governance. The enthusiasm for partnerships is not backed up by a well-articulated framework for understanding the conditins under which the comparative advantages that partnerships supply can most effectively deliver the results that stakeholders demand. Botheva-Androva and Levy (2003)created a relational database of 231 WWSD partnerships which supports the following conclusions; 1) on balance they are supply-driven rather than demand driven and they reflect ongoing implementation efforts more than new ideas for bridging core implementations gaps. A transition to outcome based decision making will fail unless a new mechanism can be found to create a more demand driven system. 2) Partnerships mirrors prevailing patterns more than challenges it, reflecting well known power structures and priorities.3) How to follow up these needs more critical dscussion than there was time for at WSSD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]