Suchergebnisse

"As emerging powers deepen their involvement in world trade and global governance, it is crucial to explore the what and the why of their strategic choices vis-a-vis the World Trade Organization. This book does just that, examining the trade policy decisions of two emerging power states, Brazil and India, since 2001. In this timely work, Laura Carsten Mahrenbach develops a broad-based analytical framework which addresses trade policy within EP states, in their regions and on the global level. The findings underline the importance of examining domestic factors when trying to understand strategic decisions by emerging powers. They also have important implications for our understanding of the role of emerging power states in global (trade) governance"--

As thewto's Dispute Settlement Body (dsb) gains relevance as a rule-maker in trade governance, understanding the reform negotiations addressing its legal framework becomes increasingly important. This article examines how domestic ideas and interests affect the reform positions of two of thedsb's most active users, emerging power states Brazil and India. Regarding domestic interests, I draw on the domestic politics and two-level games literatures to argue that the amount and favorability of domestic sectors' experience with thedsbaffects their incentives to lobby during the reform negotiations. Interestingly, this results in countries pursuing liberal interests within negotiations, despite having conflicting domestic interest preferences overall. Regarding domestic ideas, I find evidence that Brazilian and Indian politicians feel accountable to voters in the negotiations, contradicting claims to the contrary in the literature. This highlights the need for more research illustrating links between voters and officials in this context.

As emerging powers forge ahead with big data initiatives, questions arise regarding the implications of these programs for governance in the Global South more broadly. One understudied aspect deals with how actors attribute legitimacy to governments' big data activities. We explore actors' agency in one crucial case: the world's largest demographic and biometric data program, India's Aadhaar. Analyzing roughly 250,000 tweets collected in the first 10 years of Aadhaar's operation, we find that both normative acceptance and cost–benefit calculations are crucial for legitimacy attribution. This finding challenges mainstream theoretical approaches, which prioritize normative factors and often fail to examine how normative and material factors interact during legitimacy attribution. In addition, our study demonstrates a new, mixed-methods approach to measuring legitimacy attribution using Twitter data, which overcomes traditional challenges. As such, we underline the viability of Twitter data as a tool for social measurement.

Emerging states, such as Brazil, India, and China (the BICs), have big plans for big data and digitalization. Research has identified distinct policy visions regarding how technological advances can facilitate economic development and improve governance.This article examines how BIC governments frame data-driven ambitions across the diverse issue areas in which governments plan to use big data, as well as how they frame the role(s) of the government and citizens in the era of big data. We find clear differences in discussions of big data across the BICs and across issue areas. Moreover, we show the societal changes governments seek to effect using big data vary greatly in scope, with Brazil and India seeking more fundamental changes than China.

Recent scholarship has highlighted the role of domestic pressures in determining state preferences toward the reform of international organizations (IO s). This article adds a new dimension by examining how partisanship and ministerial control affect state preferences toward IO empowerment. The article derives two expectations from the existing literature. First, partisan position will determine preferences toward IO empowerment. Second, when a government is constituted by multiple parties, the position of the party with the IO's ministerial portfolio will determine the government's position toward IO empowerment. The article illustrates this argument by examining the positions of four net donors (Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and two net recipients (Brazil and India) during the World Bank's reforms. By bringing domestic politics back in, this article complements existing studies on the politics of IO reform and weighs in on central debates in comparative politics and international political economy.

Given long‐standing criticism of global economic institutions by rising powers, it is puzzling that these same governments supported the transfer of substantial resources and responsibilities to the IMF and the World Bank during recent reform negotiations. We argue rising powers' support for international organization (IO) empowerment is linked to their concerns regarding an IO's flexibility. We introduce two types of flexibility as being most relevant for rising powers. These include governance flexibility – the extent to which rising powers may participate in IO decision‐making – and issue flexibility – the extent to which rising power preferences are incorporated into IO policies and programs. We illustrate our argument by examining the preferences of the BIC states (Brazil, India and China) towards IMF and World Bank reforms between 2008 and 2012. Drawing on archival material with over 50 statements from BIC representatives, we find, first, that there were clear links between Bank and Fund governance flexibility and the BICs' support for empowerment of these IOs, but that this was not true for issue flexibility. Second, we find evidence indicating the strategies of individual BIC governments differ within these IOs, suggesting a need to undertake more differentiated studies of rising powers' IO activities.

AbstractGiven long‐standing criticism of global economic institutions by rising powers, it is puzzling that these same governments supported the transfer of substantial resources and responsibilities to the IMF and the World Bank during recent reform negotiations. We argue rising powers' support for international organization (IO) empowerment is linked to their concerns regarding an IO's flexibility. We introduce two types of flexibility as being most relevant for rising powers. These include governance flexibility – the extent to which rising powers may participate in IO decision‐making – and issue flexibility – the extent to which rising power preferences are incorporated into IO policies and programs. We illustrate our argument by examining the preferences of the BIC states (Brazil, India and China) towards IMF and World Bank reforms between 2008 and 2012. Drawing on archival material with over 50 statements from BIC representatives, we find, first, that there were clear links between Bank and Fund governance flexibility and the BICs' support for empowerment of these IOs, but that this was not true for issue flexibility. Second, we find evidence indicating the strategies of individual BIC governments differ within these IOs, suggesting a need to undertake more differentiated studies of rising powers' IO activities.

Intro -- Contents -- Notes on Contributors -- List of Acronyms -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- 1: Continuities and Change in IPE at the Start of the Twenty-first Century -- Introduction -- Contemporary IPE Theory -- Global Reordering -- Global Crises -- Emerging Issues in Contemporary IPE -- An Agenda for IPE Development in the Coming Decade? -- References -- Part I: Contemporary IPE Theory -- 2: Financial Statecraft -- The Meaning of Financial Statecraft -- The US: The Financial Statecraft of the Incumbent Hegemon -- China: The Financial Statecraft of the Emerging Challenger -- Shifts in Financial Statecraft in the Twenty-First Century? -- References -- 3: Global Market Power -- Global Markets and Power -- Market Power -- Agency -- Structure -- Strategies, Political-Economic Cultures, and Resources -- Knowledge Economy, Internationalization, and 'Network Power' -- The Digital Economy -- References -- 4: Political Economy and International Economic Law -- The Changing Context of Political Economy -- Political Actors and International Economic Law -- Two Hypotheses about Legal Development in the Global Political Economy -- Implications for the Study of Global Political Economy -- Conclusion: The Legal Gestalt -- References -- 5: Varieties of Global Governance -- Introduction -- Transnationalism -- Cosmopolitanism -- Hegemonism -- Conclusions -- References -- 6: Regionalism: In Crisis? -- European Integration and the Problem of Generalization -- New Regionalism: New Theories -- Early Successes and Crises During the 1990s -- The Rise of Regional Powers During the 2000s -- New Challenges Ahead -- Conclusion -- References -- 7: Domestic Politics and the Societal Approach -- The Puzzle -- Domestic Politics Theories -- The Societal Approach to International Political Economy -- Case Study: Convergence and Divergence in the Group of Twenty.

AbstractSolutions to global sustainability challenges are increasingly technology‐intensive. Yet, technologies are neither developed nor applied to governance problems in a socio‐political vacuum. Despite aspirations to provide novel solutions to current sustainability governance challenges, many technology‐centred projects, pilots and plans remain implicated in longer‐standing global governance trends shaping the possibilities for success in often under‐recognized ways. This article identifies three overlapping contexts within which technology‐led efforts to address sustainability challenges are evolving, highlighting the growing roles of: (1) private actors; (2) experimentalism; and (3) informality. The confluence of these interconnected trends illuminates an important yet often under‐recognized paradox: that the use of technology in multi‐stakeholder initiatives tends to reduce rather than expand the set of actors, enhancing instead of reducing challenges to participation and transparency, and reinforcing rather than transforming existing forms of power relations. Without recognizing and attempting to address these limits, technology‐led multi‐stakeholder initiatives will remain less effective in addressing the complexity and uncertainty surrounding global sustainability governance. We provide pathways for interrogating the ways that novel technologies are being harnessed to address long‐standing global sustainability issues in manners that foreground key ethical, social and political considerations and the contexts in which they are evolving.

Solutions to global sustainability challenges are increasingly technology‐intensive. Yet, technologies are neither developed nor applied to governance problems in a socio‐political vacuum. Despite aspirations to provide novel solutions to current sustainability governance challenges, many technology‐centred projects, pilots and plans remain implicated in longer‐standing global governance trends shaping the possibilities for success in often under‐recognized ways. This article identifies three overlapping contexts within which technology‐led efforts to address sustainability challenges are evolving, highlighting the growing roles of: (1) private actors; (2) experimentalism; and (3) informality. The confluence of these interconnected trends illuminates an important yet often under‐recognized paradox: that the use of technology in multi‐stakeholder initiatives tends to reduce rather than expand the set of actors, enhancing instead of reducing challenges to participation and transparency, and reinforcing rather than transforming existing forms of power relations. Without recognizing and attempting to address these limits, technology‐led multi‐stakeholder initiatives will remain less effective in addressing the complexity and uncertainty surrounding global sustainability governance. We provide pathways for interrogating the ways that novel technologies are being harnessed to address long‐standing global sustainability issues in manners that foreground key ethical, social and political considerations and the contexts in which they are evolving.