Hale & Held (2011) - Editors’
introduction: Mapping Changes
in Transnational Governance
The Rise and Evolution of Governance beyond the State
After Second World War → increasing organization and institutionalization of
international politics. → expension of transnational relations and
interdependence → anomaly to neorealism (because there was authority for
international relations, no structural barriers).
By the early 1990s, the terms of this debate had shifted from ‘whether’
international institutions matter to ‘how’ they matter.
Five key trends regarding international politics:
1. The merging of ‘domestic’ and ‘international’ politics
2. The increased role of non-state actors in global politics
3. The emergence of private governance
4. The shift to new modes of eliciting compliance with transborder standards
5. The growing complexity of the institutional landscape
Domestic politics and transgovernmentalism
traditional: study of international politics seperated from domestic issues.
Governments face two sided strategic interaction: a domestic one (societal),
and an international one (other states)
Another strand of research attacked the unitary actor assumption in a way
by which they examined how domestic actors became increasingly engaged
in transnational relations.
Non-state transnational actors
Non-state actors increasingly participate in transnational governance.
1970s: ‘non-state actors as central features in world-politics.’
1980s: lesser interest because of state-centric neoliberal institutionalism
Hale & Held (2011) - Editors’ introduction: Mapping Changes in Transnational Governance 1
, Transnational actors (i.e.NGOs) can influence national institutions directly
Private governance
Difference between ‘delegated’ and ‘entrepreneurial’ private authority
remains under-explored in governance mechanisms created by private
actors themselves.
Private authority has grown significantly in some areas, but overall
quantification of this trend remains elusive.
The means and meaning of enforcement
Traditional model: formal international laws are supposed to be enforced
through the imposition of some sort of sanction on violators.
Today: rules are not necessarily formal. because
1. Private actors promulgate their own regulations more and more
2. The concept of regulation has evolved beyond a ‘command and control’
model in which standards are set and then enforced. → focus on
improvement
3. Transparancy might be bordered by punishment
Institutional complexity
‘traditional’ literature on transborder institutions: ‘institutions can be grouped
in cohesive regimes’ → not the case anymore, complexity.
Innovative transnational governance institutions contribute to this growing
complexity of world politics.
Mapping Innovations in Transnational Governance
We understand governance as the processes and institutions, formal and
informal, whereby rules are created, compliance is elicited, goods are provided
in pursuit of collective goals.
A clear decision of state-to-state activities vs ‘international’ activities is often hard
to make.
Hale & Held (2011) - Editors’ introduction: Mapping Changes in Transnational Governance 2
introduction: Mapping Changes
in Transnational Governance
The Rise and Evolution of Governance beyond the State
After Second World War → increasing organization and institutionalization of
international politics. → expension of transnational relations and
interdependence → anomaly to neorealism (because there was authority for
international relations, no structural barriers).
By the early 1990s, the terms of this debate had shifted from ‘whether’
international institutions matter to ‘how’ they matter.
Five key trends regarding international politics:
1. The merging of ‘domestic’ and ‘international’ politics
2. The increased role of non-state actors in global politics
3. The emergence of private governance
4. The shift to new modes of eliciting compliance with transborder standards
5. The growing complexity of the institutional landscape
Domestic politics and transgovernmentalism
traditional: study of international politics seperated from domestic issues.
Governments face two sided strategic interaction: a domestic one (societal),
and an international one (other states)
Another strand of research attacked the unitary actor assumption in a way
by which they examined how domestic actors became increasingly engaged
in transnational relations.
Non-state transnational actors
Non-state actors increasingly participate in transnational governance.
1970s: ‘non-state actors as central features in world-politics.’
1980s: lesser interest because of state-centric neoliberal institutionalism
Hale & Held (2011) - Editors’ introduction: Mapping Changes in Transnational Governance 1
, Transnational actors (i.e.NGOs) can influence national institutions directly
Private governance
Difference between ‘delegated’ and ‘entrepreneurial’ private authority
remains under-explored in governance mechanisms created by private
actors themselves.
Private authority has grown significantly in some areas, but overall
quantification of this trend remains elusive.
The means and meaning of enforcement
Traditional model: formal international laws are supposed to be enforced
through the imposition of some sort of sanction on violators.
Today: rules are not necessarily formal. because
1. Private actors promulgate their own regulations more and more
2. The concept of regulation has evolved beyond a ‘command and control’
model in which standards are set and then enforced. → focus on
improvement
3. Transparancy might be bordered by punishment
Institutional complexity
‘traditional’ literature on transborder institutions: ‘institutions can be grouped
in cohesive regimes’ → not the case anymore, complexity.
Innovative transnational governance institutions contribute to this growing
complexity of world politics.
Mapping Innovations in Transnational Governance
We understand governance as the processes and institutions, formal and
informal, whereby rules are created, compliance is elicited, goods are provided
in pursuit of collective goals.
A clear decision of state-to-state activities vs ‘international’ activities is often hard
to make.
Hale & Held (2011) - Editors’ introduction: Mapping Changes in Transnational Governance 2
