LEC 1: Introduction to IOs - concepts & characteristics
Topic of course:
International organisations - what are they?
● secular gods
● frankenstein monsters
● symbol of imperial internationalism
● club for people to get together, talk and have a good time
IGOs: established by states
- intergovernmental organisations
- global level: UN IMF WB
- regional: EU OAS AU, ASEAN
NGOs: established by non-state actors
- profit-orientated: apple microsoft GM Shell
- Advocacy-oriented: Greenpeace, Amnesty International
What are IOs?: a specific class of international institutions
● Permanent bureaucracy / headquarters
● Formal rules and procedures
● Regular state meetings
● At least 3 member states
● Formal treaty base
Categorisation:
1) Membership
a) universal: every state can become a member (UN)
b) Limited: only some state can become a member (EU)
2) Competence
a) comprehensive / general purpose: IO deals with many different issues and
topics (UN)
b) Limited / issue-specific: IO focuses on a specific theme (WTO)
3) Function
a) rule-making organisations: making policy and sets rules (UN)
b) Operational organization: executes policy (IAEA)
4) Decision-making authority
a) Intergovernmental: decision taken by all member states based on horizontal
authority => pooled sovereignty
b) Supranational: decision taken by organisational body designated by members
states based on vertical authority => delegated sovereignty
Characteristics of IOs
● Most IOs are regional
● Europe is region with highest density of IOs
● Number of IOs significantly increased after WWII
● More issue-specific than general-purpose IOs
Three forces of IOs in world politics
● Obligation:
, ○ direct: known when becoming member
○ indirect: resolutions agreed upon in the future
● Compliance:
○ explicit: decide to be part or not
○ implicit: IOs influence states leading to compliant behaviour by shaping
environment
● Enforcement:
○ direct: very few have this power: UNSC / EU / WB. Yet states often comply
○ indirect: public shaming
Three views on the role of IOs in world politics (to be seen together / interlinked)
1) IOs as Actors
a) legally: IGOs are independent entities with legal personality
i) ICJ and ICC operate under immunity
b) Politically: independent actorness through social recognition
i) collective actors that are able to do what their constituent parts are
unable to do on their own
ii) empirically evident through practices of influencing world politics (ICC
arrest warrants; UN GA resolutions)
2) IOs as Fora
a) Physical forum / arena for debate and negotiation
i) exchange of interests and information
ii) policy-making
=> states as relevant actors (eg UN GA)
3) IOs as Instruments
a) IGOs as instruments in the hands of their member states pursue their own
personal interests
i) eg UNSC and US invasion of Iraq 2003
ii) IMF
iii) WHO
,LEC 2: IOs and IR theory
recap slide lec 1
The great debates:
- Why do states cooperate, i.e. create and join IOs?
- What is the role of IOs in world politics?
1) (Neo-) Realism
2) (Neoliberal-) Institutionalism
3) Liberalism
4) Social constructivism
5) Critical theories
(Neo-)Realism and IOs
● The international system is anarchic, i.e. without superior authority (eg poolballs los)
● States: unitary actors (all have same interest)
● Power - national interest
● IOs are ‘instruments’ for (powerful /hegemonic) states to pursue their national
interests (Theory of Hegemonic Stability)
● States make cost benefit calculations and then decide whether it is wise to ‘use’ and
IO or not
(Neoliberal)-Institutionalism and IOs
● States: unitary actors but interdependent (eg poolballs inframed)
● IOs enable cooperation among states by reducing transaction costs
○ different types of “cooperation games” (game theory)
Liberalism and IOs
● Open up the black box: states as plural actors (democracies-autocracies)
○ domestic institutions (parliament, media, lobby groups, civil society etc.)
○ states might have different national interests than merely pursuing power
● Cooperation because of:
○ Learning from own and others’ mistakes (UN better than League of Nations)
○ Shared values (idealism)
○ Economic interdependence
● Foundations:
○ Human reason and belief in progress (Grotius; Enlightenment)
○ Immanuel Kant: democratic states will peacefully cooperate
○ Woodrow Wilson: creation of the lEague of Nations (importance of
International Law)
Constructivism and IOs
● “Anarchy is what states make of it” (Wendt 1999) very young theory. System is not
anarchic but states make it so.
● Norms, ideas, discourse and culture matter.
● IOs are autonomous actors who shape (socially construct) world politics
○ Constitutive power
● Important actors: norm entrepreneurs, advocacy networks; epistemic communities
, ○ taking non-state actors into consideration
Critical theories and IOs
● Wide range: (neo-) Marxism, neo-gramscianism; world systems theory; feminist
theories; post-colonial theory
● Core aim is to uncover dynamics of the existing system to overcome it, not merely
analyse
● Constitution of the international structure shaped by:
○ economics; financial systems; structures of production (gramscianism)
○ transnational elites (gramscianism)
○ masculinity (feminist)
● IOs embed global capitalism, patriarchic and imperial structures and are
representatives of hegemonic states (eg Washington Consensus)
SEE SUMMARY SLIDE W/ SCHEME OF IO/IR THEORIES
Int. System Relevant actors Origins of IOs Role of IOs
Neo-realism Anarchy, security States Hegemonic marginal
dilemma, balance interest,
of power relational gains
Neo-institution Anarchy but States, IOs Interest Reduction of
. interdependent constellations, uncertainty and
principal-agent transaction
relations costs
Liberalism State IOs / States’ Preference Divers;
preferences domestics formation commercial to
constituencies, world peace
Constructivism social; norms and states, IOs and Advocacy Transformative;
ideas non-state actors coalitions, norm independent;
entrepreneurs bureaucratic
authority
Critical/Femin. Material / transnational neo-liberal Replicate
gender-based elites, IOs elites, material/gender
imbalance patriarchal based power
hegemony structures
Topic of course:
International organisations - what are they?
● secular gods
● frankenstein monsters
● symbol of imperial internationalism
● club for people to get together, talk and have a good time
IGOs: established by states
- intergovernmental organisations
- global level: UN IMF WB
- regional: EU OAS AU, ASEAN
NGOs: established by non-state actors
- profit-orientated: apple microsoft GM Shell
- Advocacy-oriented: Greenpeace, Amnesty International
What are IOs?: a specific class of international institutions
● Permanent bureaucracy / headquarters
● Formal rules and procedures
● Regular state meetings
● At least 3 member states
● Formal treaty base
Categorisation:
1) Membership
a) universal: every state can become a member (UN)
b) Limited: only some state can become a member (EU)
2) Competence
a) comprehensive / general purpose: IO deals with many different issues and
topics (UN)
b) Limited / issue-specific: IO focuses on a specific theme (WTO)
3) Function
a) rule-making organisations: making policy and sets rules (UN)
b) Operational organization: executes policy (IAEA)
4) Decision-making authority
a) Intergovernmental: decision taken by all member states based on horizontal
authority => pooled sovereignty
b) Supranational: decision taken by organisational body designated by members
states based on vertical authority => delegated sovereignty
Characteristics of IOs
● Most IOs are regional
● Europe is region with highest density of IOs
● Number of IOs significantly increased after WWII
● More issue-specific than general-purpose IOs
Three forces of IOs in world politics
● Obligation:
, ○ direct: known when becoming member
○ indirect: resolutions agreed upon in the future
● Compliance:
○ explicit: decide to be part or not
○ implicit: IOs influence states leading to compliant behaviour by shaping
environment
● Enforcement:
○ direct: very few have this power: UNSC / EU / WB. Yet states often comply
○ indirect: public shaming
Three views on the role of IOs in world politics (to be seen together / interlinked)
1) IOs as Actors
a) legally: IGOs are independent entities with legal personality
i) ICJ and ICC operate under immunity
b) Politically: independent actorness through social recognition
i) collective actors that are able to do what their constituent parts are
unable to do on their own
ii) empirically evident through practices of influencing world politics (ICC
arrest warrants; UN GA resolutions)
2) IOs as Fora
a) Physical forum / arena for debate and negotiation
i) exchange of interests and information
ii) policy-making
=> states as relevant actors (eg UN GA)
3) IOs as Instruments
a) IGOs as instruments in the hands of their member states pursue their own
personal interests
i) eg UNSC and US invasion of Iraq 2003
ii) IMF
iii) WHO
,LEC 2: IOs and IR theory
recap slide lec 1
The great debates:
- Why do states cooperate, i.e. create and join IOs?
- What is the role of IOs in world politics?
1) (Neo-) Realism
2) (Neoliberal-) Institutionalism
3) Liberalism
4) Social constructivism
5) Critical theories
(Neo-)Realism and IOs
● The international system is anarchic, i.e. without superior authority (eg poolballs los)
● States: unitary actors (all have same interest)
● Power - national interest
● IOs are ‘instruments’ for (powerful /hegemonic) states to pursue their national
interests (Theory of Hegemonic Stability)
● States make cost benefit calculations and then decide whether it is wise to ‘use’ and
IO or not
(Neoliberal)-Institutionalism and IOs
● States: unitary actors but interdependent (eg poolballs inframed)
● IOs enable cooperation among states by reducing transaction costs
○ different types of “cooperation games” (game theory)
Liberalism and IOs
● Open up the black box: states as plural actors (democracies-autocracies)
○ domestic institutions (parliament, media, lobby groups, civil society etc.)
○ states might have different national interests than merely pursuing power
● Cooperation because of:
○ Learning from own and others’ mistakes (UN better than League of Nations)
○ Shared values (idealism)
○ Economic interdependence
● Foundations:
○ Human reason and belief in progress (Grotius; Enlightenment)
○ Immanuel Kant: democratic states will peacefully cooperate
○ Woodrow Wilson: creation of the lEague of Nations (importance of
International Law)
Constructivism and IOs
● “Anarchy is what states make of it” (Wendt 1999) very young theory. System is not
anarchic but states make it so.
● Norms, ideas, discourse and culture matter.
● IOs are autonomous actors who shape (socially construct) world politics
○ Constitutive power
● Important actors: norm entrepreneurs, advocacy networks; epistemic communities
, ○ taking non-state actors into consideration
Critical theories and IOs
● Wide range: (neo-) Marxism, neo-gramscianism; world systems theory; feminist
theories; post-colonial theory
● Core aim is to uncover dynamics of the existing system to overcome it, not merely
analyse
● Constitution of the international structure shaped by:
○ economics; financial systems; structures of production (gramscianism)
○ transnational elites (gramscianism)
○ masculinity (feminist)
● IOs embed global capitalism, patriarchic and imperial structures and are
representatives of hegemonic states (eg Washington Consensus)
SEE SUMMARY SLIDE W/ SCHEME OF IO/IR THEORIES
Int. System Relevant actors Origins of IOs Role of IOs
Neo-realism Anarchy, security States Hegemonic marginal
dilemma, balance interest,
of power relational gains
Neo-institution Anarchy but States, IOs Interest Reduction of
. interdependent constellations, uncertainty and
principal-agent transaction
relations costs
Liberalism State IOs / States’ Preference Divers;
preferences domestics formation commercial to
constituencies, world peace
Constructivism social; norms and states, IOs and Advocacy Transformative;
ideas non-state actors coalitions, norm independent;
entrepreneurs bureaucratic
authority
Critical/Femin. Material / transnational neo-liberal Replicate
gender-based elites, IOs elites, material/gender
imbalance patriarchal based power
hegemony structures
