Global Governance and the Politics of Crisis (original) (raw)

Global Governance in Crisis

New practices and institutions of global governance are often one of the most enduring consequences of global crises. The contemporary architecture of global governance has been widely criticized for failing to prevent the global financial crisis and Eurozone debt crises, for failing to provide robust international crisis management and leadership, and for failing to generate a consensus around new ideas for regulating markets in the broader public interest. Global Governance in Crisis explores the impact of the global financial crisis of 2008-2009 on the architecture and practice of contemporary global governance, and traces the long-term implications of the crisis for the future of the global order. Combining innovative theoretical approaches with rich empirical cases, the book examines how the impact of the global financial crisis has played out across a range of global governance domains, including development, finance and debt, trade, and security.

Global economic governance in the post-crisis world

Society and Economy, 2013

The definition of terms and categories is a widely recognized problem in social sciences. Researchers often work with analytically imprecise categories that are understood and applied differently by different disciplines, schools of thought or professions. Governance is such a rather vague category. Probably Thomas Payne was the very first who used and characterized the concept of "good governance" for domestic purposes:" Good Governance means the proper exercise of political, administrative and economic rights at all levels. It is almost impossible to trace the origins of the use of the category "global governance". Many politicians, academics and the prophets in the civil society raised the needs for world government even centuries ago. Global governance however as a more immediate or current task or action appeared probably only during the last decades of the 20th century. It was the dictionary of politicians or of the academic world, where this word appeared together. An American economist, Harlan Cleveland, was one of the first scholar, who defined and used the concept of global governance, in the early 1980s as the "management of the "nobody in charge world". NGOs have been also playing an important role in developing the idea. From among them, a group, called the Commission on Global governance proved to be particularly important. Lawrence Finkelstein an American social scientist in his paper published in the first issue of the journal, Global Governance in 1995 in an article "What is Global governance", wrote the following: "Does global mean what has been signified by international, interstate, intergovernmental or even often Transnational? If so why not use one of those terms, instead of choosing a more ambiguous one? Ambiguity affects not only what is meant by global but also what is meant by governance…At least it must be clear that it does not mean "government" or we would not say that instead. Since the international system notoriously lacks hierarchy and govern-A "Nagy Válság" ismét nyilvánvalóvá tette, hogy a világkereskedelem és a nemzetközi pénzügyek globalizálódása kisiklásának elkerülése, a világrend megvédése a széteséstől hatékonyabb, jelentősebb, rugalmasabb, globális együttműködést, szorosabb és átgondoltabb globális kormányzást követelnek. A válság utáni világban a globális kormányzás három, nemzeti, regionális és globális szinten folyik, amelyek között szoros kapcsolat alakult ki. A tanulmány a globális gazdasági kormányzás néhány főbb kérdésével foglalkozik. Megvilágítja, hogy a zavarnak és a nyugtalanságnak a XXI. század világában a válságnál mélyebbek a gyökerei és szélesebbek a forrásai. A globális kormányzásnak ezért lényegesen átfogóbb kihívásokra kell választ adnia szélesebb keretben és hosszabb távlatban.

The Global Economic Crisis and G20 Summit of April 2009: A Step Forward towards Better Global Governance or Global Government?

2009

The paper analyzes the implications of the current global economic crisis for the decision-making mechanisms and interactions among the major players. The analysis explores the possibility that the changes implied and required by the economic crisis may lead either to better global governance or even a step closer to a possible, virtual, global government. The latter hypothesis is approached in a different way as compared to similar topic papers in the sense that a possible global government is seen as a long term objective result of the various reactions and solutions taken by individual entities.

From Globalization to Global Governance?

This chapter presents critical evidence and analysis of debates about economic globalization and global governance during the world economic crisis. It concludes that leading developing states such as China and the other 'BRICS' have become incorporated within pre-existing western governance networks instead of presenting institutional or philosophical alternatives. Also there continues to be a regional concentration, rather than genuine globalization, of contemporary economic relations and governance within three key regions of western Europe, North America and East Asia.

Global Governance: The Next Frontier. Egmont Paper, no. 2, April 2004

In the past two decades, globalisation has proven to be not just economic. It is also a political, a cultural and a security phenomenon. Our collective ability to handle all these challenges has not progressed at the same pace as globalisation itself. Today’s rules, instruments and institutions are often inadequate and ineffective to tackle the scale of our challenges, new and old together. Notwithstanding this, serious talk about global governance has been scarce. The very word is sometimes judged divisive. Moreover, after 9/11 world attention seemed to turn to the sole issue of the combat of the threat of terrorism. Global governance suddenly seemed out of sync with today’s anxieties. But neglecting global issues today, spells trouble for tomorrow. No future is inevitable. Ultimately, our kind of future depends on the kind of choices that we are making – or not making – today. The Royal Institute for International Relations set up an informal working group with the aim of drafting...