International Organization and International Relations Year 1 – Block 3 & 4
Week 1: International Organization 1-2
Lecture 1 – The types, functions and policy-making of IOs
Lecture (p. 2-4)
Readings (p. 5-8)
Gutner – Chapter 1: Introduction
Gutner – Chapter 2: The evolution of IO theory
Cronin – Two faces of the UN: Tension between intergovernmentalism and
transnationalism
Lecture 2 – Regionalism and regional organisations
Lecture (p. 9-12)
Readings (p. 13-16)
Gutner – Chapter 11: International Organizations
Acharya – Comparative Regionalism: A Field Whose Time Has Come?
,International Organization 1 & 2 International Organization and International Relations
Week 1 – Lecture 2: The types, functions and policy-making of IOs
Lecture
Useful terms
- State: political community with permanent population, defined territory, government with
monopoly of force and capacity to enter into relations with other states
- Intergovernmental organisation (IGO): IO with membership made up of three or more states
- Transnational organisation: IO made up of private actors
- International institution: set of implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules and decision-making
procedures around which actors’ expectations converge in a given area of IR
-> transnational and intergovernmental organizations are institutions, but not all institutions are
organizations - for example the G7 summits; there is no treaty, staff, secretariat or even buildings,
but a way in which issues are taken care of by the 7 world’s most powerful states
- International relations: structural formal contacts between governments through bilateral and
multilateral diplomatic relations; and, of course, also an academic field
- Transgovernmental relations: structural informal contacts between (representatives of) ministries,
parliaments and other governmental bodies
- Transnational relations: structural contacts between private actors across state borders
Brief history of intergovernmental organisation
- Treaties of Westphalia (1648): creation of the states and the idea of co-existence. This made it
possible to create IOs, because states were - in some limited way - recognized as being equal
- Origins of modern IO in 19th century for cooperation in areas such as health, trade, transport and
communication
- ‘Diplomacy by conference’ established (e.g. Concert of Europe) as a norm for relations between
states
- League of Nations established in the aftermath of WWI
- Many of today’s most powerful IOs created in aftermath of WWII. Between 1944 and 1952, the UN,
IMF, the EU and the World bank were created
Why do states create and/or join international institutions?
- To bridge and ease the tension between - Monitor one another
individual and collective interests - To gain legitimacy for their actions
- Pursue common interests - Symbolic value
- Coordinate their actions - To adjudicate disputes
- Pool resources - To ‘tie-in’ and illustrate domestic
- Facilitate regular communication commitments
- Share and generate information - To ‘lock-in’ the international spoils of victory
Functions of IOs can evolve over time
The reasons for these changes is subject to debate. Examples of changes are:
1. UN established in 1945 to maintain international peace, and promote human rights and
international economic and social cooperation
-> since then, remit has expanded enormously (e.g. health, environment, development, etc.)
2. NATO established in 1949 to deter Soviet aggression
-> Post-Cold War remit includes peacekeeping, military interventions, anti-piracy missions. Rather
than decline or die, NATO expanded after Cold War ended
Types of IOs
- There are many ways in which IOs can be categorized: membership, size, issue area, powers, region,
function, global/regional, governmental/non-governmental, intergovernmental/supranational)
- In practice, most IOs fit into more than one category (e.g. UN)
2
,International Organization 1 & 2 International Organization and International Relations
- Typology, and definitions generally, are important because how we define and categorise IOs can
influence how we analyse them (see Mansfield and Pevehouse 2014)
Structure of intergovernmental organizations
Typical and general structure and features of IGOs:
- Founding treaty in which institutional structure, principles, functions and commitments are outlined
- Assembly (e.g. UN General Assembly): all members are represented
- Council (e.g. AU Executive Council, UNSC): only a few members - some elected some permanent
- Secretariat (e.g. EU Council Secretariat)
- Sometimes, IOs can also have parliaments, courts, organs for dealing with specific policy areas
IOs as autonomous sources of power/authority?
- Some argues IOs are ‘actors’ (this implies that IOs are autonomous source of power) and not just a
‘stage’ (this implies that IOs are only a venue)
- For example, according to Barnett and Finnemore, IOs can:
- Classify the world: creating categories of actors and actions, e.g. UNHCR that is viewed as the most
authoritative source on refugee issues (for example, the definition of a refugee)
- Fix meanings in the social world: meaning of things like development are defined by IOs, which in
the case of the IMF’s and World Bank’s development definition was a disaster for Africa. This
definition was created by international bureaucrats, not governments
- Articulate and diffuse new norms: denunciation and delegitimization of colonialism by UN
- Autonomy can lead to ‘pathologies’: irrational mandates; bureaucratic culture (too many rules);
isolation of IOs from the communities they are meant to be helping; ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to
conflicts and issues; impartiality (which can be both positive and negative)
- Others (e.g. Mearsheimer) argue IOs are ‘tools’ of powerful states with minimal autonomous
power; which is generally argued by (neo-)realists
The United Nations - History and structure
- Origins in the failures of the League of Nations and desire of WWII victors to achieve collective
security. Main problems: (1) unanimity was necessary to make decisions; (2) US did not join; (3)
ultimate failure: outbreak of WWII
- Built on ‘Four Policemen’ (Britain, US, China and Russia) concept, to maintain peace and security,
and foster international cooperation.
France joined later
- Atlantic Charter signed in 1941 (by
Churchill and Roosevelt), followed by
conferences at Dumbarton Oaks
(1944), Yalta (1945); (GB, US and USSR
met) and San Francisco (1945)
- Members committed to sovereign
equality and to keep the UN from
intervening in domestic affairs
-> particularly important to note that
last point
- Primary organs: General Assembly,
UNSC, Economic and Social Council,
Secretariat, ICJ
3
, International Organization 1 & 2 International Organization and International Relations
The United Nations - Policy-making
- What is UN policy?
- Actions and principles promoted through UN treaties, resolutions, programmes, projects, missions,
campaigns, mandates and recommendations
- Where is UN policy applied?
- Broadly speaking: international peace and security, human rights, humanitarian aid, sustainable
development and international law
- Who enacts UN policy?
- Secretary General, Secretariat, UN agencies, ICJ, International Criminal Court, UN tribunals,
peacekeeping forces, NGOs, member states, the private sector (particularly important in the context
of the environment)
- Who creates UN policy?
- Policy-making power unevenly distributed among UN organs
- Debate regarding intergovernmentalist/transnational influences (Cronin 2002):
- Intergovernmentalist perspective: states use UN for what they can get out of it. Therefore, policy
reflects distribution of international power
- Transnational perspective: elements of UN system operate with a high degree of autonomy from
states, with constituencies that go well beyond states, and have independent power to initiate
projects and policies. For example: Secretary General and Secretariat, UN’s legal personality. This
gives the UN an international identity and culture, separate from the MS
-> according to Cronin, the transnational perspective is mostly true, but only for all areas apart from
security issues
The study of IOs
- Theorising about IOs influenced over the years by broader debates in IR and real-world events
- Early studies often compared IOs by examining institutional blueprint without considering issues
like power or politics
- 1960s: behaviouralism popularised, focus on political behaviour of actors, verifying testable
propositions
- 1970s-1980s: ‘failures’ (1973 oil crisis, Vietnam war) of IOs decreases interest in IO research,
because of doubt about the ability of IOs
- 1980s-present: end of Cold War, decline of US hegemony leads to increased interest in IOs
Two broad cleavages in today’s in today’s scholarship - these are two very general categories:
- Rational choice institutionalism: developed from economics, self-interested rational actors,
pursuing stable, exogenous interests. Institutions can structure, constrain and condition individual
choices of states. Many approaches derive from this broad cleavage
-> e.g. neoliberal institutionalism; Robert Keohane: After hegemony
- Sociological institutionalism: developed from sociology; critiques efficiency/functionality
assumptions of RC (IOs are not only created to efficiently achieve goals, but also because of norms,
ideas etc.); emphasis on social factors (norms, ideas, culture, meanings); more receptive to idea that
IOs can develop autonomy, because of their attention to norms, ideas etc.
-> e.g. constructivism
Persistent debates in the study of IOs:
- Do IOs matter? If so, to what extent?
- Are IOs a stage, an actor or a tool?
- Can IOs become dysfunctional? (“pathologies” or issues that can arise from IO’s autonomy)
- Are IOs unaccountable?
- Better to analyse from outside-in or inside-out?
- Are economic or sociological perspectives more helpful?
- Is a priori theorising (un)helpful? (Schindler 2014; in additional readings)
4
Week 1: International Organization 1-2
Lecture 1 – The types, functions and policy-making of IOs
Lecture (p. 2-4)
Readings (p. 5-8)
Gutner – Chapter 1: Introduction
Gutner – Chapter 2: The evolution of IO theory
Cronin – Two faces of the UN: Tension between intergovernmentalism and
transnationalism
Lecture 2 – Regionalism and regional organisations
Lecture (p. 9-12)
Readings (p. 13-16)
Gutner – Chapter 11: International Organizations
Acharya – Comparative Regionalism: A Field Whose Time Has Come?
,International Organization 1 & 2 International Organization and International Relations
Week 1 – Lecture 2: The types, functions and policy-making of IOs
Lecture
Useful terms
- State: political community with permanent population, defined territory, government with
monopoly of force and capacity to enter into relations with other states
- Intergovernmental organisation (IGO): IO with membership made up of three or more states
- Transnational organisation: IO made up of private actors
- International institution: set of implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules and decision-making
procedures around which actors’ expectations converge in a given area of IR
-> transnational and intergovernmental organizations are institutions, but not all institutions are
organizations - for example the G7 summits; there is no treaty, staff, secretariat or even buildings,
but a way in which issues are taken care of by the 7 world’s most powerful states
- International relations: structural formal contacts between governments through bilateral and
multilateral diplomatic relations; and, of course, also an academic field
- Transgovernmental relations: structural informal contacts between (representatives of) ministries,
parliaments and other governmental bodies
- Transnational relations: structural contacts between private actors across state borders
Brief history of intergovernmental organisation
- Treaties of Westphalia (1648): creation of the states and the idea of co-existence. This made it
possible to create IOs, because states were - in some limited way - recognized as being equal
- Origins of modern IO in 19th century for cooperation in areas such as health, trade, transport and
communication
- ‘Diplomacy by conference’ established (e.g. Concert of Europe) as a norm for relations between
states
- League of Nations established in the aftermath of WWI
- Many of today’s most powerful IOs created in aftermath of WWII. Between 1944 and 1952, the UN,
IMF, the EU and the World bank were created
Why do states create and/or join international institutions?
- To bridge and ease the tension between - Monitor one another
individual and collective interests - To gain legitimacy for their actions
- Pursue common interests - Symbolic value
- Coordinate their actions - To adjudicate disputes
- Pool resources - To ‘tie-in’ and illustrate domestic
- Facilitate regular communication commitments
- Share and generate information - To ‘lock-in’ the international spoils of victory
Functions of IOs can evolve over time
The reasons for these changes is subject to debate. Examples of changes are:
1. UN established in 1945 to maintain international peace, and promote human rights and
international economic and social cooperation
-> since then, remit has expanded enormously (e.g. health, environment, development, etc.)
2. NATO established in 1949 to deter Soviet aggression
-> Post-Cold War remit includes peacekeeping, military interventions, anti-piracy missions. Rather
than decline or die, NATO expanded after Cold War ended
Types of IOs
- There are many ways in which IOs can be categorized: membership, size, issue area, powers, region,
function, global/regional, governmental/non-governmental, intergovernmental/supranational)
- In practice, most IOs fit into more than one category (e.g. UN)
2
,International Organization 1 & 2 International Organization and International Relations
- Typology, and definitions generally, are important because how we define and categorise IOs can
influence how we analyse them (see Mansfield and Pevehouse 2014)
Structure of intergovernmental organizations
Typical and general structure and features of IGOs:
- Founding treaty in which institutional structure, principles, functions and commitments are outlined
- Assembly (e.g. UN General Assembly): all members are represented
- Council (e.g. AU Executive Council, UNSC): only a few members - some elected some permanent
- Secretariat (e.g. EU Council Secretariat)
- Sometimes, IOs can also have parliaments, courts, organs for dealing with specific policy areas
IOs as autonomous sources of power/authority?
- Some argues IOs are ‘actors’ (this implies that IOs are autonomous source of power) and not just a
‘stage’ (this implies that IOs are only a venue)
- For example, according to Barnett and Finnemore, IOs can:
- Classify the world: creating categories of actors and actions, e.g. UNHCR that is viewed as the most
authoritative source on refugee issues (for example, the definition of a refugee)
- Fix meanings in the social world: meaning of things like development are defined by IOs, which in
the case of the IMF’s and World Bank’s development definition was a disaster for Africa. This
definition was created by international bureaucrats, not governments
- Articulate and diffuse new norms: denunciation and delegitimization of colonialism by UN
- Autonomy can lead to ‘pathologies’: irrational mandates; bureaucratic culture (too many rules);
isolation of IOs from the communities they are meant to be helping; ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to
conflicts and issues; impartiality (which can be both positive and negative)
- Others (e.g. Mearsheimer) argue IOs are ‘tools’ of powerful states with minimal autonomous
power; which is generally argued by (neo-)realists
The United Nations - History and structure
- Origins in the failures of the League of Nations and desire of WWII victors to achieve collective
security. Main problems: (1) unanimity was necessary to make decisions; (2) US did not join; (3)
ultimate failure: outbreak of WWII
- Built on ‘Four Policemen’ (Britain, US, China and Russia) concept, to maintain peace and security,
and foster international cooperation.
France joined later
- Atlantic Charter signed in 1941 (by
Churchill and Roosevelt), followed by
conferences at Dumbarton Oaks
(1944), Yalta (1945); (GB, US and USSR
met) and San Francisco (1945)
- Members committed to sovereign
equality and to keep the UN from
intervening in domestic affairs
-> particularly important to note that
last point
- Primary organs: General Assembly,
UNSC, Economic and Social Council,
Secretariat, ICJ
3
, International Organization 1 & 2 International Organization and International Relations
The United Nations - Policy-making
- What is UN policy?
- Actions and principles promoted through UN treaties, resolutions, programmes, projects, missions,
campaigns, mandates and recommendations
- Where is UN policy applied?
- Broadly speaking: international peace and security, human rights, humanitarian aid, sustainable
development and international law
- Who enacts UN policy?
- Secretary General, Secretariat, UN agencies, ICJ, International Criminal Court, UN tribunals,
peacekeeping forces, NGOs, member states, the private sector (particularly important in the context
of the environment)
- Who creates UN policy?
- Policy-making power unevenly distributed among UN organs
- Debate regarding intergovernmentalist/transnational influences (Cronin 2002):
- Intergovernmentalist perspective: states use UN for what they can get out of it. Therefore, policy
reflects distribution of international power
- Transnational perspective: elements of UN system operate with a high degree of autonomy from
states, with constituencies that go well beyond states, and have independent power to initiate
projects and policies. For example: Secretary General and Secretariat, UN’s legal personality. This
gives the UN an international identity and culture, separate from the MS
-> according to Cronin, the transnational perspective is mostly true, but only for all areas apart from
security issues
The study of IOs
- Theorising about IOs influenced over the years by broader debates in IR and real-world events
- Early studies often compared IOs by examining institutional blueprint without considering issues
like power or politics
- 1960s: behaviouralism popularised, focus on political behaviour of actors, verifying testable
propositions
- 1970s-1980s: ‘failures’ (1973 oil crisis, Vietnam war) of IOs decreases interest in IO research,
because of doubt about the ability of IOs
- 1980s-present: end of Cold War, decline of US hegemony leads to increased interest in IOs
Two broad cleavages in today’s in today’s scholarship - these are two very general categories:
- Rational choice institutionalism: developed from economics, self-interested rational actors,
pursuing stable, exogenous interests. Institutions can structure, constrain and condition individual
choices of states. Many approaches derive from this broad cleavage
-> e.g. neoliberal institutionalism; Robert Keohane: After hegemony
- Sociological institutionalism: developed from sociology; critiques efficiency/functionality
assumptions of RC (IOs are not only created to efficiently achieve goals, but also because of norms,
ideas etc.); emphasis on social factors (norms, ideas, culture, meanings); more receptive to idea that
IOs can develop autonomy, because of their attention to norms, ideas etc.
-> e.g. constructivism
Persistent debates in the study of IOs:
- Do IOs matter? If so, to what extent?
- Are IOs a stage, an actor or a tool?
- Can IOs become dysfunctional? (“pathologies” or issues that can arise from IO’s autonomy)
- Are IOs unaccountable?
- Better to analyse from outside-in or inside-out?
- Are economic or sociological perspectives more helpful?
- Is a priori theorising (un)helpful? (Schindler 2014; in additional readings)
4
