Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tpknm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T00:00:35.083Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

There is no global public: the idea of the public and the legitimation of governance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 June 2013

Stein Sundstøl Eriksen  and
Ole Jacob Sending
Stein Sundstøl Eriksen*
Affiliation:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, NUPI, Oslo, Norway
Ole Jacob Sending
Affiliation:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, NUPI, Oslo, Norway
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Scholars of global governance have made much use of the public–private distinction in their exploration of the power of non-state actors and the constitution of authority beyond the state. But is this distinction analytically adequate? We subject the public–private distinction to analytical scrutiny and argue that it does not hold when analysing phenomena beyond the domestic setting. State actors are universal at the domestic level, but they are particularistic at the global level, being responsible primarily to its territorially defined constituency. The difference between public and private actors qua participants in global governance is thus overstated. We differentiate between public as a category of analysis and a category of practice. As a category of analysis, public denotes a particular configuration of accountability and capacity, which can, in principle, be found at the global level. As a category of practice, public is a claim to universality and responsibility that different types of actors use to legitimize what they do. We illustrate the added value of this conceptualization through a discussion of possibly emerging global public actors, and of how actors’ claim to ‘publicness’ in an incomplete public sphere serves to conceal their particularistic character, thereby undermining ‘publicness’ at the global level.

Keywords

global governancepublic-private distinctionglobal publicauthorityaccountabilitypublic sphere
Type
Original Papers
Information
International Theory , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , July 2013 , pp. 213 - 237
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abrams, Philip. 1988. “Notes on the Difficulty of Studying the State.” Journal of Historical Sociology 1:58–89.Google Scholar
Archibugi, Daniele. 2004. “Cosmopolitan Democracy and its Critics: A Review.” European Journal of International Relations 10(3):437–473.Google Scholar
Avant, Deborah, Finnemore, MarthaSell, Susan K., eds. 2010. Who Governs the Globe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Balakrishnan, Gopal. 2004. “The Age of Warring States.” New Left Review, No. 26, 148–160.Google Scholar
Bartelson, Jens. 2006. “Making Sense of Global Civil Society.” European Journal of International Relations 12(3):371–395.Google Scholar
Bello, Judith H. 1996. “The WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding: Less is More.” The American Journal of International Law 90(3):416–418.Google Scholar
Bernstein, StevenCashore, Benjamin. 2007. “Can Non-state Global Governance be Legitimate? An Analytical Framework.” Regulation and Governance 1(4):347–371.Google Scholar
Berry, CraigGabay, Clive. 2009. “Transnational Political Action and ‘Global Civil Society’ in Practice: The Case of Oxfam.” Global Networks 9(3):339–358.Google Scholar
Bexell, MagdalenaMörth, Ulrika, eds. 2010. Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships in Global Governance. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biersteker, Thomas J. 2002. “State, Sovereignty, and Territory.” In Handbook of International Relations, edited by Walter Carlsnaes, Beth Simmons and Thomas Risse, 157–175. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Börzel, TanyaRisse, Thomas. 2005. “Public-Private Partnerships: Effective and Legitimate Tools of International Governance?” In Complex Sovereignty. Reconstituting Political Authority in the Twenty-first Century, edited by E. Grande and L. Pauly, 195–216. Toronto: Toronto University Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1987. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brubaker, Rogers. 1992. Citizenship and Nationhood in Germany and France. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Calhoun, Craig. 2002. “The Class Consciousness of Frequent Travellers: Toward a Critique of Actually Existing Cosmopolitanism.” The South Atlantic Quarterly 101(4):869–897.Google Scholar
Castells, Manuel. 2008. “The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616(1):78–93.Google Scholar
Cohen, JeanArato, Andrew. 1992. Civil Society and Political Theory. Cambridge Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cutler, Claire. 2003. Private Power and Global Authority, Transnational Merchant Law in the Global Political Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Eriksen, Stein Sundstøl. 2011. “Failed States in Theory and Practice: The Idea of the State and the Contradictions of State Formation.” Review of International Studies 37(1):229–247.Google Scholar
Ferguson, James. 2006. Global Shadows: Africa in the Neoliberal World Order. Durham and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy. 1990. “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy.” Social Text, No. 25/26, 56–80.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy 2007. “Transnationalizing the Public Sphere: On the Legitimacy and Efficacy of Public Opinion in a Post-Westphalian World.” Theory, Culture & Society 24(4):7–30.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony. 1985. The Nation-State and Violence. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Grant, RuthKeohane, Robert. 2005. “Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics.” American Political Science Review 99(1):29–43.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1986. The Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1992. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hall, Rodney BruceBiersteker, Thomas, eds. 2002. The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haufler, Virginia. 2001. A Public Role for the Private Sector: Industry Self-Regulation in a Global Economy. Washington D.C: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
Held, DavidMcGrew, Anthony, eds. 2002. Governing Globalization: Power, Authority and Global Governance. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hindess, Barry. 2005. “Investigating International Anti-Corruption.” Third World Quarterly 26(8):1389–1398.Google Scholar
Hopgood, Stephen. 2006. Keepers of the Flame. Understanding Amnesty International. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hopgood, Stephen 2009. “Moral Authority, Modernity and the Politics of the Sacred.” European Journal of International Relations 15(2):229–255.Google Scholar
Hurd, Ian. 1999. “Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics.” International Organization 52(2):379–408.Google Scholar
Jackson, John H. 2004. “International Law Status of WTO Dispute Settlement Reports: Obligation to Comply or Option to ‘Buy Out’?” The American Journal of International Law 98(1):109–125.Google Scholar
Jessop, Bob. 1990. State Theory. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Keck, Margareth E.Sikkink, Kathryn. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. 2003. “Global Governance and Democratic Accountability.” In Taming Globalization: Frontiers of Governance, edited by David Held and Mathias Koenig-Archibugi, 130–156. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O.Nye, Joseph, eds. 1971. Transnational Relations and World Politics. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kingsbury, Benedict, Krisch, NicoStewart, Richard B.. 2005. “The Emergence of Global Administrative Law.” Law and Contemporary Problems 68(15):15–61.Google Scholar
Mattli, W.Büthe, T.. 2005. “Global Private Governance: Lessons from a National model of Setting Standards in Accounting.” Law and Contemporary Problems 225:225–262.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. 1991. “The Limits of the State: Beyond Statist Approaches and their Critics.” American Political Science Review 85(1):77–96.Google Scholar
Mitzen, Jennifer. 2005. “Reading Habermas in Anarchy: Multilateral Diplomacy and Global Public Spheres.” American Political Science Review 99(3):401–417.Google Scholar
Mitzen, Jennifer 2013. Power in Concert: The 19th Century Origins of Global Governance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Nanz, PatricaSteffek, Jens. 2004. “Global Governance, Participation and the Public Sphere.” Government and Opposition 39(2):314–335.Google Scholar
Ougaard, Morten. 2008. “Private Institutions and Business Power in Global Governance.” Global Governance 14(3):387–403.Google Scholar
OECD. 2007. DAC Action-Oriented Policy Paper on Human Rights and Development. PARIS: OECD.Google Scholar
Price, Richard. 2003. “Transnational Civil Society and Advocacy in World Politics.” World Politics 55(4):579–606.Google Scholar
Risse, Thomas. 2002. “Transnational Actors and World Politics.” In Handbook of International Relations, edited by Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse and Beth Simmons, 255–274. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Rosenau, James. 1992. “Governance, Order and Change in World Politics.” In Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics, edited by James Rosenau and E.O. Czempiel, 1–29. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenau, James 2002. “Governance in a New Global Order.” In Governing Globalization: Power, Authority and Global Governance, edited by David Held and Anthony McGrew, 70–86. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Rosenau, James 2004. “Governing the Ungovernable: The Challenge of Global Disaggregation of Authority.” Paper presented at the International Society for New Institutional Economics, Tucson, Arizona, September 30–October 2.Google Scholar
Rosenau, James 2006. The Study of World Politics: Globalization and Governance, vol. 2. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ruggie, John G. 2004. “Reconstituting the Global Public Domain – Issues, Actors, and Practices.” European Journal of International Relations 10(4):499–531.Google Scholar
Scheuerman, William. 2009. “Postnational Democracies Without Postnational States? Some Skeptical Reflections.” Ethics and Global Politics 2(1):41–63.Google Scholar
Scholte, Jan Aart. 2004. “Civil Society and Democratically Accountable Global Governance.” Government and Opposition 39(2):211–233.Google Scholar
Sending, Ole JacobNeumann, Iver B.. 2006. “Governance to Governmentality: Analyzing NGOs, States, and Power.” International Studies Quarterly 50:651–672.Google Scholar
Steffek, Jens. 2003. “The Legitimation of International Governance: A Discourse Approach.” European Journal of International Relations 9(2):249–275.Google Scholar
Wapner, Paul. 1995. “Politics Beyond the State: Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics.” World Politics 47(3):311–340.Google Scholar
Weintraub, Jeff. 1997. “The Theory and Politics of the Private/Public Distinction.” In Public and Private in Thought and Practice, edited by Jeff Weintraub and Krishnan Kumar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Wolf, Klaus Dieter. 1999. “The New Raison d'Etat as a Problem for Democracy in World Society.” European Journal of International Relations 5(3):333–363.Google Scholar