Summary of the reading materials for the final exam (2024) for Accountability in Global Governance.
INCLUDES notes from (Total: 65 pages):
● See * Summary List * on page 1.
Accountability in Global Governance Notes on Readings
Table of Contents
* Summary List * 1
“Global Governance as a Perspective on World Politics” 2
“How to Get Away with Cholera: The UN, Haiti, and International Law” 4
“Don’t Argue, Reflect! Reflections on Introducing Reflective Writing into Political Science
Courses” 7
“Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics” 8
“Democratic Accountability in Global Politics: Norms, not Agents” 14
“The Meaning and Purposes of Transnational Accountability” 18
“Fostering Human Rights Accountability: An Ombudsperson for the United Nations?” 21
“Public Accountability and the Public Sphere of International Governance” 27
“Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework” 31
“Conceptualizing Accountability in International and European Law” 34
“The Spread of Bureaucratic Oversight Mechanisms across Intergovernmental
Organizations” 36
“Building Global Democracy? Civil Society and Accountable Global Governance” 38
1. Global governance, accountability and civil society 38
“Accountability In Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs” 42
“The Externalization of Peacekeeping: Policy, Responsibility, and Accountability” 47
“Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships In Global Governance” 51
4. Partnership Accountability Need Not be Democratic Accountability 51
“The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions” 55
“Pathologies of Accountability: ICANN and the Challenge of ‘Multiple Accountabilities
Disorder’” 61
, 1
* Summary List *
These notes include a summary of each of the following readings:
● Klaus Dingwerth and Philipp Pattberg’s article (2006) “Global Governance as a Perspective on
World Politics”, pp. 185-204.
● Mara Pillinger, Ian Hurd and Michael N. Barnett’s article (2016) “How to Get Away with
Cholera: The UN, Haiti, and International Law”, pp. 70-86.
● Jim Josefson’s article (2005) “Don’t Argue, Reflect! Reflections on Introducing Reflective
Writing into Political Science Courses”, pp. 763-767.
● Ruth W. Grant and Robert O. Keohane’s article (2005) “Accountability and Abuses of Power in
World Politics”, pp. 29-43.
● Michael Goodhart’s article (2011) “Democratic Accountability in Global Politics: Norms, not
Agents”, pp. 45-60.
● Kat Macdonald’s article (2014) “The Meaning and Purposes of Transnational Accountability”,
pp. 426-436.
● Florian Hoffmann & Frédéric Mégret’s article (2005) “Fostering Human Rights Accountability:
An Ombudsperson for the United Nations?”, pp. 43-63.
● Jens Steffek’s article (2010) “Public Accountability and the Public Sphere of International
Governance”, pp. 45-68.
● Mark Bovens’ article (2007) “Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual
Framework”, pp. 447-468.
● Deirdre Curtin and André Nollkaemper’s article (2005) “Conceptualizing Accountability in
International and European Law”, pp. 3-20.
● Alexandru Grigorescu’s article (2010) “The Spread of Bureaucratic Oversight Mechanisms
across Intergovernmental Organizations”, pp. 871-886.
● Jan Aart Scholte’s chapter “1. Global governance, accountability and civil society” (pp. 8-41)
in the book (2011) “Building Global Democracy? Civil Society and Accountable Global
Governance”.
● Alnoor Ebrahim’s article (2003) “Accountability In Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs”, pp.
813-829.
● Russel Buchan, Henry Jones and Nigel D. White’s article (2011) “The Externalization of
Peacekeeping: Policy, Responsibility, and Accountability”, pp. 281-315.
● Julia Steets and Laura Blattner’s chapter “4. Partnership Accountability Need Not be
Democratic Accountability” (pp. 55-78) in Magdalena Bexell and Ulrika Mörth’s book (2010)
“Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships In Global Governance”.
● Arthur Buchanan and Robert O. Keohane’s article (2006) “The Legitimacy of Global
Governance Institutions”, pp. 405-437.
● Jonathan G. Koppell’s article (2005) “Pathologies of Accountability: ICANN and the Challenge
of ‘Multiple Accountabilities Disorder’”, pp. 94-108.
, 2
“Global Governance as a Perspective on World Politics”
MAIN ARGUMENT = more careful use of the term global governance is necessary to overcome the
current confusion spawned by the variation in uses of the concept.
➔ Global Governance: Used as an analytical concept, providing a perspective on world politics
different from the more traditional notion of “international relations”.
Concepts as Tools
Concept: The most basic research tool social science has at its disposal. Its function lies in ordering &
structuring observations & experiences to allow for general propositions.
➔ Basic rules = concepts should NOT:
1. Group objects together that do NOT share similarities.
2. Invent new categories for each single observation that differs from the previous
ones (would rid the concepts of their capacity to structure & order observations).
What is Global Governance?
Disagreement about the meaning of “global” & “governance”. 2 different general uses of global
governance in literature:
1. Analytical concept = a set of observable phenomena.
➔ Global Governance (Rosenau): Conceived to include systems of rule (exerted how?)
at all levels of human activity (local → transnational), in which the (intentional)
pursuit of goals through the exercise of control has transnational repercussions.
➔ Departs from more traditional views:
International Relations Global Governance
Primary Interest Inclusion of non-state actors. “Politics among nations.”
International Can be analysed separately from World politics as a multilevel system in
Interactions interactions at other levels of social which local, national, regional & global
interaction. political processes are inseparably linked.
Power Relations Traditionally linked to power relations, A wide variety of forms of governance
interest-based interstate bargaining & the exist next to each other & that a hierarchy
role of norms & advocacy networks as the among these various mechanisms is hard
driving forces of politics beyond the state. to discern.
Research Focused on the phenomenon of authority Allows capturing the emergence of new
& its legitimation primarily in close spheres of authority in world politics
connection with the state’s ability to independently of sovereign nation-states.
pursue its rational self-interest.
2. Hegemonic/normative discourse = a political program, capturing a vision of how societies
should address the most pressing global problems.
➔ “Global civic ethic to guide action within the global neighbourhood, & leadership
infused with that ethic, is vital to the quality of global governance.”
➔ Global Governance (Gordenker & Weiss): Efforts to bring more orderly & reliable
responses to social & political issues that go beyond capacities of states to address
, 3
individually. A long-term project of global integration, for which the evolution of the
EU can be considered a model.
Global governance concept is useful as it combines 2 strengths:
1. Global includes the worldwide transboundary interactions among various policy levels.
2. Governance distinguishes itself from more traditional notions of international politics by
explicitly pointing to a greater variety of steering mechanisms & spheres of authority.
Global governance = specific perspective on world politics, guiding analysis of
political processes beyond the state.
INCLUDES notes from (Total: 65 pages):
● See * Summary List * on page 1.
Accountability in Global Governance Notes on Readings
Table of Contents
* Summary List * 1
“Global Governance as a Perspective on World Politics” 2
“How to Get Away with Cholera: The UN, Haiti, and International Law” 4
“Don’t Argue, Reflect! Reflections on Introducing Reflective Writing into Political Science
Courses” 7
“Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics” 8
“Democratic Accountability in Global Politics: Norms, not Agents” 14
“The Meaning and Purposes of Transnational Accountability” 18
“Fostering Human Rights Accountability: An Ombudsperson for the United Nations?” 21
“Public Accountability and the Public Sphere of International Governance” 27
“Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework” 31
“Conceptualizing Accountability in International and European Law” 34
“The Spread of Bureaucratic Oversight Mechanisms across Intergovernmental
Organizations” 36
“Building Global Democracy? Civil Society and Accountable Global Governance” 38
1. Global governance, accountability and civil society 38
“Accountability In Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs” 42
“The Externalization of Peacekeeping: Policy, Responsibility, and Accountability” 47
“Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships In Global Governance” 51
4. Partnership Accountability Need Not be Democratic Accountability 51
“The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions” 55
“Pathologies of Accountability: ICANN and the Challenge of ‘Multiple Accountabilities
Disorder’” 61
, 1
* Summary List *
These notes include a summary of each of the following readings:
● Klaus Dingwerth and Philipp Pattberg’s article (2006) “Global Governance as a Perspective on
World Politics”, pp. 185-204.
● Mara Pillinger, Ian Hurd and Michael N. Barnett’s article (2016) “How to Get Away with
Cholera: The UN, Haiti, and International Law”, pp. 70-86.
● Jim Josefson’s article (2005) “Don’t Argue, Reflect! Reflections on Introducing Reflective
Writing into Political Science Courses”, pp. 763-767.
● Ruth W. Grant and Robert O. Keohane’s article (2005) “Accountability and Abuses of Power in
World Politics”, pp. 29-43.
● Michael Goodhart’s article (2011) “Democratic Accountability in Global Politics: Norms, not
Agents”, pp. 45-60.
● Kat Macdonald’s article (2014) “The Meaning and Purposes of Transnational Accountability”,
pp. 426-436.
● Florian Hoffmann & Frédéric Mégret’s article (2005) “Fostering Human Rights Accountability:
An Ombudsperson for the United Nations?”, pp. 43-63.
● Jens Steffek’s article (2010) “Public Accountability and the Public Sphere of International
Governance”, pp. 45-68.
● Mark Bovens’ article (2007) “Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual
Framework”, pp. 447-468.
● Deirdre Curtin and André Nollkaemper’s article (2005) “Conceptualizing Accountability in
International and European Law”, pp. 3-20.
● Alexandru Grigorescu’s article (2010) “The Spread of Bureaucratic Oversight Mechanisms
across Intergovernmental Organizations”, pp. 871-886.
● Jan Aart Scholte’s chapter “1. Global governance, accountability and civil society” (pp. 8-41)
in the book (2011) “Building Global Democracy? Civil Society and Accountable Global
Governance”.
● Alnoor Ebrahim’s article (2003) “Accountability In Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs”, pp.
813-829.
● Russel Buchan, Henry Jones and Nigel D. White’s article (2011) “The Externalization of
Peacekeeping: Policy, Responsibility, and Accountability”, pp. 281-315.
● Julia Steets and Laura Blattner’s chapter “4. Partnership Accountability Need Not be
Democratic Accountability” (pp. 55-78) in Magdalena Bexell and Ulrika Mörth’s book (2010)
“Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships In Global Governance”.
● Arthur Buchanan and Robert O. Keohane’s article (2006) “The Legitimacy of Global
Governance Institutions”, pp. 405-437.
● Jonathan G. Koppell’s article (2005) “Pathologies of Accountability: ICANN and the Challenge
of ‘Multiple Accountabilities Disorder’”, pp. 94-108.
, 2
“Global Governance as a Perspective on World Politics”
MAIN ARGUMENT = more careful use of the term global governance is necessary to overcome the
current confusion spawned by the variation in uses of the concept.
➔ Global Governance: Used as an analytical concept, providing a perspective on world politics
different from the more traditional notion of “international relations”.
Concepts as Tools
Concept: The most basic research tool social science has at its disposal. Its function lies in ordering &
structuring observations & experiences to allow for general propositions.
➔ Basic rules = concepts should NOT:
1. Group objects together that do NOT share similarities.
2. Invent new categories for each single observation that differs from the previous
ones (would rid the concepts of their capacity to structure & order observations).
What is Global Governance?
Disagreement about the meaning of “global” & “governance”. 2 different general uses of global
governance in literature:
1. Analytical concept = a set of observable phenomena.
➔ Global Governance (Rosenau): Conceived to include systems of rule (exerted how?)
at all levels of human activity (local → transnational), in which the (intentional)
pursuit of goals through the exercise of control has transnational repercussions.
➔ Departs from more traditional views:
International Relations Global Governance
Primary Interest Inclusion of non-state actors. “Politics among nations.”
International Can be analysed separately from World politics as a multilevel system in
Interactions interactions at other levels of social which local, national, regional & global
interaction. political processes are inseparably linked.
Power Relations Traditionally linked to power relations, A wide variety of forms of governance
interest-based interstate bargaining & the exist next to each other & that a hierarchy
role of norms & advocacy networks as the among these various mechanisms is hard
driving forces of politics beyond the state. to discern.
Research Focused on the phenomenon of authority Allows capturing the emergence of new
& its legitimation primarily in close spheres of authority in world politics
connection with the state’s ability to independently of sovereign nation-states.
pursue its rational self-interest.
2. Hegemonic/normative discourse = a political program, capturing a vision of how societies
should address the most pressing global problems.
➔ “Global civic ethic to guide action within the global neighbourhood, & leadership
infused with that ethic, is vital to the quality of global governance.”
➔ Global Governance (Gordenker & Weiss): Efforts to bring more orderly & reliable
responses to social & political issues that go beyond capacities of states to address
, 3
individually. A long-term project of global integration, for which the evolution of the
EU can be considered a model.
Global governance concept is useful as it combines 2 strengths:
1. Global includes the worldwide transboundary interactions among various policy levels.
2. Governance distinguishes itself from more traditional notions of international politics by
explicitly pointing to a greater variety of steering mechanisms & spheres of authority.
Global governance = specific perspective on world politics, guiding analysis of
political processes beyond the state.
