Suchergebnisse

"[M]any observers agree that the Commission has been 'leaking like a sieve'".Leaks have become a major element of European Union politics. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) leak in early May 2016 is neither the first of its kind nor will it be the last. Transparency by leaks – or "transleakancy" as the series of publications of confidential TTIP negotiation documents has already been coined – is one element of the political game that different interest groups, governmental and non–governmental, play on both sides of the Atlantic. And yet, leaked EU documents have been shared in wider policy-networks all along, independent of whether they have received media attention or not. The difference is that leaks similar to those that we see on TTIP have reached a new level of importance. Here, themere fact of their existence makes them newsworthy. The impact of these leaks on public debates is seen as amajor risk for negotiators.

Les rapports annuels sont un élément central dans la communication de la responsabilité des bureaucraties internationales aux États membres et aux autres parties prenantes. La plupart des bureaucraties du système des Nations unies produisent des rapports très longs et détaillés. Les agences internationales se servent de ces rapports pour attirer l'attention sur différents défis ou réalisations. Il est essentiel de trouver le ton juste à adopter pour communiquer avec leurs diverses parties prenantes en vue de conserver leur appui. Pour ce faire, les agences de l'ONU emploient un langage différencié, composé d'un mélange de sentiments et d'informations factuelles. Nous soutenons que l'orientation opérationnelle, les structures administratives et les besoins de mobilisation des ressources des agences ont un impact significatif sur la manière dont elles utilisent les sentiments pour communiquer avec les différents groupes de parties prenantes. Nous nous appuyons sur une analyse des sentiments basée sur le dictionnaire de trois corpus de textes de rapports annuels produits par trois agences du système des Nations unies – l'UNRWA (rapports publiés de 1951 à 2019), le HCR (1953-2019) et l'OIM (2000-2019) – pour mettre en évidence une tendance générale à l'augmentation du recours aux sentiments positifs dans les trois agences, qui coïncide avec une période de renforcement du souci pour les donateurs. En parallèle, nous observons une utilisation plus volatile et propre aux agences du sentiment négatif en réponse aux défis sur le terrain qui sont communiqués aux parties prenantes conformément à l'évolution des mandats des agences. Grâce à une perspective fondée sur le texte en tant que données, la présente contribution améliore notre compréhension comparative du langage diversifié et dépendant du contexte des bureaucraties internationales. Remarques à l'intention des praticiens En lisant les rapports des agences de l'ONU, les praticiens doivent être conscients des contraintes et des incitations auxquelles les bureaucrates internationaux sont confrontés – notamment l'orientation opérationnelle, les structures administratives et les besoins en ressources – qui entraînent des différences de ton entre les rapports et dans le temps.

Annual reports are a central element of international bureaucracies' accountability communication to member states and other stakeholders. Most UN system bureaucracies produce reports of significant length and detail. International agencies use these reports to draw attention to particular challenges or successes. Hitting the right tone with their diverse stakeholders is crucial to maintain continued support. UN agencies do so by employing differentiated sentiment-loaded language alongside factual reporting. We argue that agencies' operational focus, administrative structures and resource mobilization needs have a significant impact on how they use sentiment to communicate with different stakeholder groups. Drawing on a dictionary-based sentiment analysis of three text corpora of annual reports produced by three UN system agencies—UNRWA (reports published from 1951 to 2019), UNHCR (1953–2019) and IOM (2000–2019)—we show a general trend toward increased positive sentiment use across all three agencies, coinciding with a period of stronger donor orientation. At the same time, we find a more volatile and agency-specific use of negative sentiment in response to field-level challenges that are communicated to stakeholders in line with agencies' evolving mandates. Through a text-as-data perspective, this contribution enhances our comparative understanding of the diverse and context-dependent language of international bureaucracies. Points for practitioners Reading UN agency reporting, practitioners need to be aware of the constraints and incentives that international bureaucrats face—notably operational focus, administrative structures and resource needs—that drive tone differences across reports and over time.

AbstractThis article introduces, summarizes and contextualizes the key questions and findings of a special issue of Global Policy on the resourcing of international organizations (IOs). The article sets out trends in the financial resources available to IOs; discusses their organizational consequences; and highlights analytical implications for the study of IOs. We discuss resource diversification associated with growing complexity of the origins and types of funding available to IOs; the importance of non‐state actors in IO funding; and contestation over the classification of resources. Resource diversification encourages organizational differentiation, manifested in major shifts in resource‐related actor constellations and their impact on the autonomy of IOs; adjustments to budgeting procedures; and functional differentiation within IOs and the emergence of new types of IOs that are partly driven by resourcing. These observations invite an analytical perspective in the study of IOs that pays systematic attention to the administrative governance dimension of IOs; the entrepreneurial character of many IOs; and organizational fields as a focus of analysis. Read together, the 11 contributions to the special issue underline that paying attention to their resourcing can advance our understanding of IOs.