Book contents
- Organization outside Organizations
- Organization outside Organizations
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part 1 Rules, Sanctions, Membership
- Part 2 Organization in and around Markets
- Part 3 Networks and Other Social Relationships
- Part 4 Social Movements and Collective Action
- Part 5 The Partial Organization of Formal Organizations
- 17 Partial De-Organizing for Innovation and Strategic Renewal? A Study of an Industrial Innovation Programme
- 18 The Partial Organization of International Relations: International Organizations as Meta-Organizations
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
18 - The Partial Organization of International Relations: International Organizations as Meta-Organizations
from Part 5 - The Partial Organization of Formal Organizations
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 July 2019
Book contents
- Organization outside Organizations
- Organization outside Organizations
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part 1 Rules, Sanctions, Membership
- Part 2 Organization in and around Markets
- Part 3 Networks and Other Social Relationships
- Part 4 Social Movements and Collective Action
- Part 5 The Partial Organization of Formal Organizations
- 17 Partial De-Organizing for Innovation and Strategic Renewal? A Study of an Industrial Innovation Programme
- 18 The Partial Organization of International Relations: International Organizations as Meta-Organizations
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
In this chapter we argue that the key to an understanding of international governmental organizations (IGOs) is to conceptualize them not as standard forms of organizations with individuals as their members, but as meta-organizations comprising organized actors as members. Meta-organizations are paradoxical constructions: autonomous actors with autonomous actors as members. Organizational elements cannot be considered in isolation in meta-organizations; their combination are key factors; therefore meta-organizations are often partially organized. IGOs are permanently competing for actorhood with their member states and this competition has far-reaching implications for to what extent they can make use of all organizational elements. Using one element may require the avoidance of other elements or certain forms of decision-making. This helps to explain why IGOs have problems achieving co-ordinated organizational action and why they are less powerful actors than standard organizations are. Yet IGOs are strong in other respects. The most important organizational element in IGOs is membership. The strengths of IGOs can be understood in relation to their creation, their expansion, and their long-term influence on their members.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Organization outside OrganizationsThe Abundance of Partial Organization in Social Life, pp. 390 - 418Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Abbott, K. & Snidal, D. (1998) Why States Act Through Formal International Organizations. Journal of Conflict Resolution 42(1): 3–32.Google Scholar
Ahrne, G. (1994) Social Organizations: Interaction inside, outside, and between Organizations. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
Ahrne, G. & Brunsson, N. (2005) Organizations and Meta-Organizations. Scandinavian Journal of Management 21(4): 429–49.Google Scholar
Ahrne, G. & Brunsson, N. (2011) Organization outside Organizations: The Significance of Partial Organization. Organization 18(1): 83–104.Google Scholar
Ahrne, G., Brunsson, N., & Kerwer, D. (2016) The Paradox of Organizing States: A Meta-Organization Perspective on International Organizations. Journal of International Organizations Studies 7(1): 5–24.Google Scholar
Alter, K. J. (2001) Establishing the Supremacy of European Law: The Making of an International Rule of Law in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alter, K. J. & Meunier, S. (2009) The Politics of International Regime Complexity. Perspectives on Politics 7(1): 13–24.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. N. (2002) Eyewitness to a Genocide: The United Nations and Rwanda. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. N. & Finnemore, M. (1999) The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations. International Organization 53(4): 699–732.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. N. & Finnemore, M. (2004) Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Berkowitz, H. & Dumez, H. (2015) La dynamique des dispositifs d´action collective entre firmes: le cas des méta-organisations dans le secteur pétrolier. L´Année sociologique 65(2): 333–56.Google Scholar
Biermann, F. & Siebenhüner, B. (2009) Managers of Global Change: The Influence of International Environmental Bureaucracies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biersteker, T. J. & Weber, C. (1996) State Sovereignty as Social Construct. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Boli, J. & Thomas, G. M. (1999) INGOs and the Organization of World Culture. In Boli, J. and Thomas, G. M. (eds.), Constructing World Culture: International Nongovernmental Organizations Since 1875. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 13–49.Google Scholar
Borrás, S. & Jacobsson, K. (2004) The Open Method of Co-Ordination and New Governance Patterns in the EU. Journal of European Public Policy 11(2): 185–208.Google Scholar
Brunsson, N. (2007) Organized Hypocrisy. In Brunsson, N. (ed.), The Consequences of Decision-Making. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 111–34.Google Scholar
Brunsson, N. & Jacobsson, B. (2000) A World of Standards. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brütsch, C. & Lehmkuhl, D. (eds.) (2007) Law and Legalization in Transnational Relations. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carreau, D. (1994) Why Not Merge the International Monetary Fund (IMF) with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank)? Fordham Law Review 62(7): 1989–2000.Google Scholar
Checkel, J. T. (2005) International Institutions and Socialization in Europe: Introduction and Framework. International Organization 59(3): 801–26.Google Scholar
Chwieroth, J. M. (2010) Capital Ideas: The IMF and the Rise of Financial Liberalization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Codding, G. A. & Rutkowski, A. M. (1982) The International Telecommunication Union in a Changing World. Dedham: Artech House.Google Scholar
Cox, R.W. and Jacobson, H. K. (eds.) (1973) The Anatomy of Influence: Decision Making in International Organization. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Deitelhoff, N. (2009) The Discursive Process of Legalization: Charting Islands of Persuasion in the ICC Case. International Organization 63(1): 33–65.Google Scholar
Drezner, D. W. (2009) The Power and Peril of International Regime Complexity. Perspectives on Politics 7(1): 65–70.Google Scholar
Drori, G. S., Meyer, J. W., & Hwang, H. (2006) Introduction. In Drori, G. S., Meyer, J.W., & Hwang, H. (eds.), Globalization and Organization: World Society and Organizational Change. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. 1–22.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. S. (2006) Deliberative Global Politics: Discourse and Democracy in a Divided World. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Ellis, D. C. (2010) The Organizational Turn in International Organization Theory. Journal of International Organizations Studies 1(1): 11–28.Google Scholar
Finke, D., Koenig, T., Proksch, S. O., & Tsebelis, G. (2012) Reforming the European Union: Realizing the Impossible. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goldstein, J., Kahler, M., Keohane, R. O., & Slaughter, A.-M (eds.) (2001) Legalization and World Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grant, R. W. & Keohane, R. O. (2005) Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics. American Political Science Review 99(1): 29–43.Google Scholar
Hatch, M. J. (2011) Organizations: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.) (2006) Delegation and Agency in International Organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heidenreich, M. & Zeitlin, J. (2009) Changing European Employment and Welfare Regimes: The Influence of the Open Method of Coordination on National Reforms. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, C. & Smith, M. (2011) International Relations and the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hix, S. & Høyland, B. K. (2011) The Political System of the European Union. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Hülsse, R. & Kerwer, D. (2007) Global Standards in Action: Insights from Anti-Money Laundering Regulation. Organization 14(5): 625–42.Google Scholar
Hurd, I. (2008) Myths of Membership: The Politics of Legitimation in UN Security Council Reform. Global Governance 14(2): 199–217.Google Scholar
Jacobsson, B. & Sundström, G. (2006) Från hemvävd till invävd: europeiseringen av svensk förvaltning och politik. Malmö: Liber.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (1984) After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. & Nye, J. S. (2002) The Club Model of Multilateral Cooperation and Problems of Democratic Legitimacy. In Keohane, R. O. (ed.), Power and Governance in a Partially Globalized World. London: Routledge. 219–44.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O., Macedo, S., & Moravcsik, A. (2009) Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism. International Organization 63(1): 1–31.Google Scholar
Kerwer, D. (2013) International Organizations as Meta-Organizations: The Case of the European Union. Journal of International Organizations Studies 4 (Special Issue: Sociological Perspectives on International Organizations and the Construction of Global Order): 40–52.Google Scholar
Koch, M. (2009) Autonomization of IGOs. International Political Sociology 3(4): 431–48.Google Scholar
Krasner, S. D. (1999) Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lake, D. A. (2003) The New Sovereignty in International Relations. International Studies Review 5(3): 303–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lake, D. A. (2009) Hierarchy in International Relations. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Lindblom, C. E. (2001) The Market System: What It Is, How It Works, and What to Make of It. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lindley-French, J. (2007) The North Atlantic Treaty Organization: The Enduring Alliance. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lipson, M. (2007) Peacekeeping: Organized Hypocrisy? European Journal of International Relations 13(1): 5–34.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N. ([1964]1976) Funktion und Folgen formaler Organisation. Berlin: Duncker & Humblodt.Google Scholar
Malone, D. M. (2007) Security Council. In Weiss, T. G. & Daws, S. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook on the United Nations. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 117–35.Google Scholar
Mearsheimer, J. J. (1994) The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security 19(3): 5–49.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., Thomas, G. M., & Ramirez, F. O. (1997) World Society and the Nation-State. American Journal of Sociology 103(1): 144–81.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W., Drori, G. S., & Hwang, H. (2006) World Society and the Proliferation of Formal Organization. In Drori, G. S., Meyer, J. W., & Hwang, H. (eds.), Globalization and Organization: World Society and Organizational Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 25–49.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W. & Jepperson, R. L. (2000) The ‘Actors’ of Modern Society: The Cultural Construction of Social Agency. Sociological Theory 18(1): 100–20.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (1998) The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Mörth, U. (ed.) (2004) Soft Law in Governance and Regulation: An Interdisciplinary Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Ness, G. D. & Brechin, S. R. (1988) Bridging the Gap: International Organizations as Organizations. International Organization 42(2): 245–73.Google Scholar
Oberthür, S. & Gehring, T. (2011) Institutional Interaction: Ten Years of Scholarly Development. In Oberthür, S. & Schram Stokke, O. (eds.), Managing Institutional Complexity. Regime Interplay and Global Environmental Change. Boston: MIT Press. 25–58.Google Scholar
Rittberger, V., Zangl, B., & Kruck, A. (2011) International Organization: Polity, Politics and Policies. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Schäfer, A. (2006) A New Form of Governance? Comparing the Open Method of Co-ordination to Multilateral Surveillance by the IMF and the OECD. Journal of European Public Policy 13(1): 70–88.Google Scholar
Schimmelfennig, F. (2003) The EU, NATO and the Integration of Europe: Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schimmelfennig, F., Engert, S., & Knobel, H. (2006) International Socialization in Europe: European Organizations, Political Conditionality, and Democratic Change. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Scott, W. R., Gerald, F. D. (2007) Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural, and Open System Perspectives. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.Google Scholar
Shanks, C., Jacobson, H. K., & Kaplan, J. H. (2009) Inertia and Change in the Constellation of International Governmental Organizations, 1981–1992. International Organization 50(4): 593–627.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. ([1945]1997) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Steffek, J. (2010) Public Accountability and the Public Sphere of International Governance. Ethics & International Affairs 24(1): 45–68.Google Scholar
Trondal, J. (2010) An Emergent European Executive Order. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Trondal, J., Marcussen, M, Larsson, T. & Veggeland, F. (2010) Unpacking International Organizations: The Dynamics of Compound Bureaucracies. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, G. (2002) Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Usherwood, S. & Starting, N. (2013) Euroscepticism as a Persistent Phenomenon. Journal of Common Market Studies 51(1): 1–16.Google Scholar
Vifell, Å. (2006) Enklaver i staten. Internationalisering, demokrati och den svenska statsförvaltningen. Stockholm Studies in Politics 113. Stockholm University: Department of Political Science.Google Scholar
Weaver, C. (2008) Hypocrisy Trap: The World Bank and the Poverty of Reform. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wendt, A. (1999) Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wessels, W. (1997) An Ever Closer Fusion? A Dynamic Macropolitical View on Integration Processes. Journal of Common Market Studies 35(2): 267–99.Google Scholar
Zürn, M. (2004) Global Governance and Legitimacy Problems. Government and Opposition 39(2): 260–87.Google Scholar
- 2
- Cited by