Search results

The post-World War II era has seen the rise of international organizations such as the UN, NATO, and the World Bank. Coinciding with this, there has been accompanying trend toward global governance -- i.e., the coordination of multiple interdependent actors, minus a central authority, in the formulation, implementation, monitoring, enforcement and review of rules and regulatory institutions. While global governance proponents defend such arrangements as necessary to address problems and produce for states and societies benefits that would not come about through other means, concern has been voiced regarding the fact that decisions previously made at the national level have shifted to the international level. Decision-makers involved in global governance frequently consist of state officials and international bureaucrats, with limited participation by civil society actors. The authors attempt to address the question of whether global governances can or should be democratized. Citing protests held during meetings of the World Trade Organization, G7, and the European Union, they take up the matter of how to balance the concerns of civil society elements who feel excluded from the global governance decision process with concerns over the effectiveness of global governance in achieving its purported goals. Democratization processes (or their absence) are analyzed for five key organizations that, between them, represent such fields as health, economic development, and the environment. Adapted from the source document.

"William, when I went into the jungle, I was seventeen. When I walked out I was twenty-one. And, by God, I was rich!"Arthur Miller,Death of a Salesman, Act IFortunes magically and mysteriously made on vast continents overseas have tempted western entrepreneurs for generations, much as Uncle Ben tempted Willie Loman. But these exploits also involve machinations which appear sinister to a general public increasingly disturbed by the control giant corporations have over our daily lives. As long ago as 1900, John Hobson developed the theory that modern imperial expansion was the product of the manipulation of national foreign policies by the "Rand lords" and similar overseas financial operators. This idea was used by Lenin, Hilferding and others in their elaborations of the Marxist explanation of the nexus between economic forces and the political behaviour of states. Imperialism in tropical Africa was always seen as a key issue in this context. With the onset of decolonization and the struggle for development, questions of the history and the progress of imperialism have remained cogent subjects of intellectual controversy. The historical "scramble for Africa" and the process of colonization which followed created the basis for the modern political map of Africa and modern African political society. To what extent were these developments triggered or determined by the activities of private entrepeneurs? What relevance might the answer have for the contemporary study of international politics? This article seeks to explore these questions in the light of theories of transnational politics. At the same time, the problem of European expansion in Africa provides an important test for the transnational approach, as it relates to the overseas political activity of international business firms.

1 Transnational Actors and Policymaking in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Scholarly Context -- 2 Transnational Policy Process: Analytical Framework -- 3 Transnational Actors and Social Policymaking in Ghana: A Brief Historical Background -- 4 Transnational Actors and Policymaking: The Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS) -- 5 Ghana's Decision to LEAP Out of Poverty: Interrogating the Transnational Involvement -- 6 Transnational Policymaking After the GPRS and LEAP in Ghana and Beyond -- 7 Conclusion: Lessons and Implications.

"The democratic deficit in contemporary global governance arrangements is a matter of increasing political and scholarly concern. The participation of transnational actors, such as civil society groups and corporations, in global governance is often put forward as a solution to this democratic deficit. However, most research into the democratic aspects of transnational actor participation in global governance has focused on the democratic qualities of the global governance arrangement at large ₆ rather than specifically on the participating transnational actors. This book seeks to redress the balance and draws on case studies on the democratic legitimacy of different kinds of transnational actors, ranging from corporations and philanthropic foundations to non-governmental organizations, social movements, and diaspora groups. Combining normative democratic theory and empirical research into the legitimacy of transnational actors, the book offers innovative interpretations of democratic legitimacy in a transnational context"--Provided by publisher.