Suchergebnisse

Der Einfluss Internationaler Organisationen reicht angesichts der Herausforderung, für globale Probleme Lösungen zu finden, mittlerweile so weit, dass sich die Frage nach den in ihnen vorhandenen Machtbegrenzungsmechanismen stellt. Doch wie kann die Macht Internationaler Organisationen kontrolliert werden, wenn das aus dem nationalen Verfassungsrecht bekannte Gewaltenteilungsprinzip nicht auf die internationale Ebene übertragen werden kann? Die Arbeit analysiert die dazu innerhalb der Vereinten Nationen (UNO) und der Welthandelsorganisation (WTO) existierenden formalisierten Mechanismen anhand ihrer Gründungsverträge. Dabei werden drei Kategorien von Machtbegrenzungsmechanismen identifiziert: Kompetenzzuweisungen und -abgrenzungen, organinterne Mechanismen und schließlich Interaktion zwischen den Organen. Die in der Praxis bedeutsamsten Mechanismen stellen zum einen das Vetorecht im UN-Sicherheitsrat sowie der negative Konsens im Streitbeilegungsgremium der WTO dar, die zur Gruppe der organinternen Mechanismen gehören. Zum anderen besteht in der Kontrolle der Streitbeilegungs-Panel der WTO durch den Appellate Body eine wichtige Machtbegrenzung durch Interaktion. Die Untersuchung dokumentiert das paradoxe Phänomen, dass die Mechanismen zur Begrenzung der Macht in vielen Fällen auch eine machtsteigernde Wirkung haben, indem sie die Effizienz, Akzeptanz und Legitimation der Organisation erhöhen. Die Verfasserin erklärt dies damit, dass das Augenmerk der Gründungsstaaten in der Entstehungsphase auf dem Funktionieren der Organisation als Gegengewicht zu ihren jeweiligen Mitgliedsstaaten lag. Dass Internationale Organisationen in der Zwischenzeit so stark an Einfluss gewonnen haben, dass ihre Macht nunmehr begrenzt werden sollte, ist eine neue Entwicklung, die jedoch in Zukunft deutlich an Bedeutung gewinnen wird. ; In light of the challenge to find answers to global problems, the influence of international organizations nowadays goes so far that the question of existing checks and balances within these organizations arises. But how can power be controlled when the principle of separation of powers originating from national constitutional law cannot be transferred to the international stage? The purpose of this thesis is to analyze existing formalized internal mechanisms within the United Nations and the World Trade Organization on the basis of their founding treaties. The author identifies three categories of checks and balances: allowing and limiting competencies, mechanisms within the organs and finally interactions between the organs. In practice, the most important mechanisms of these organizations are on the one hand the power of veto within the UN Security Council and the negative consensus within the WTO dispute settlement body, which belong to the category of mechanisms within the organs. In addition, the control of the WTO dispute settlement panels by the Appellate Body is an important form of checks and balances through interaction. The analysis shows the paradoxical phenomenon, that checks and balances in many cases have the effect of increasing power by augmenting the efficiency, acceptance and legitimacy of the organization. The author explains this by reference to the intentions of the founding states during the developing phase to strengthen these organizations as a counterbalance to their respective member states. It is a new development that international organizations have now increased their influence so much that their power should be limited, but this will become significantly more important in the future.

International organisations have recently come under pressure. Brexit, the election of Donald Trump, and the rise of China appear to all indicate the same thing: established international organisations are losing authority. In reality, however, the formal authority of international organisations has grown significantly in recent decades.
International organisations have become more authoritative over the past few decades – that is, they are now less dependent on control by individual member states. The growing authority of international organisations is reflected in the increasing extent to which national governments (a) set aside their vetoes by endorsing majoritarian forms of decision-making (pooling) and (b) empower independent institutions to act on their behalf (delegation).
This rise in international authority involves trade-offs, as pooling and delegation seldom go together. In task-specific organisations, pooling is widespread, whereas delegation is limited; in general-purpose organisations, the opposite is the case.
The reasons for the rise in international authority are threefold: (i) the functional quest for effective cooperation, (ii) increasing political demands for participation by non-governmental actors, and (iii) the diffusion of authoritative institutional templates amongst international organisations. These forces are likely to continue pushing towards greater international authority in the future.
Stronger international organisations also invite contestation, which induces certain governments to devise strategies to circumvent those organisations they perceive to be overly authoritative. These trends could potentially weaken existing international organisations.
For much of the post-war period, international organisations have largely operated out of the limelight; however, this is changing as their authority increases. Policymakers should realise that international organisations' growing authority may fuel a political backlash that could lead to stagnation or even backsliding. While there are compelling reasons for deeper international collaboration in an interdependent world, political contestation has the potential to override them.

Aus jugoslawischer Sicht

This article addresses the puzzle of why, and under what conditions, international organisations cease to exist. International Relations literature offers rich explanations for the creation, design and effectiveness of international institutions and their organisational embodiments, international organizations (IOs), but surprisingly little effort has gone into studying the dynamics of IO termination. Yet if we want to understand the conditions under which international organisations endure, we must also explain why they frequently fail to do so. The article formulates and tests a theory of 'IO death' using a combination of population-wide statistical analysis and detailed historical case studies. My analysis is based on an original dataset covering the period 1815–2016. I find that exogenous shocks are a leading proximate cause of IO terminations since 1815 and that organisations that are newly created, have small memberships, and/or lack centralised structures are most likely to succumb. My analysis leads me to suggest a number of extensions and refinements to existing institutionalist theories.