Fault Lines and Issue Linkages at the G20: New Challenges for Global Economic Governance

Knaack, Peter; Katada, Saori N.

doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12046

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this way the G20 leaders have the opportunity to coordinate their national policies, make commitments and set agendas for the rest of the world to work collectively on the delivery of global public goods (Kirton, ; Van de Graaf, ). The G20 can also, in principle, act as a steering committee at the apex of the polycentric regime complex that governs the globe (Cooper, ; Downie, ; Knaack and Katada, ).…”

Section: Conceptualising the G20mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite this potential, the real impact of the G20 to date, aside from crisis management, has been relatively modest, being restricted to consensus building and agenda setting on a limited number of issues in a way that does not amount to global governance (Postel‐Vinay, ). This ineffectiveness arises from a combination of inter alia, a lack of resources, the infrequency of leaders’ meetings and the ever widening and contested nature of its agenda (Beeson and Bell, ; Knaack and Katada, ; Postel‐Vinay, ). A further challenge for the G20 relates to its legitimacy.…”

Section: Conceptualising the G20mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Role Can the G20 Play in Global Energy Governance? Implications for China's Presidency

Andrews‐Speed

Shi

2015

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prevailing architecture of global energy governance is fragmented, uncoordinated and failing to yield the required outcomes. This article examines the argument that the Group of 20 (G20) can provide a leadership role to improve the quality of global energy governance. Energy has characteristics of a global public good and the energy system resembles a complex adaptive system. These observations imply that the global governance of energy should be polycentric and this, in turn, entails a high level of coordination and trust between governing actors. Clubs and networks are institutions that can usefully enhance coordination and trust. In this respect, the G20 can be seen as a club at the hub of networks that can play a key role in improving the global governance of energy and China's presidency of the G20 in 2016 provides a unique opportunity for the G20 to prove its worth. Policy Implications• The effective governance of energy at a global scale requires a step change in the level of collective action between nations, but it is unrealistic to create a new institution to undertake this task. The institutions of global energy governance have a strong polycentric character that requires greater trust and coordination in order to be more effective.• As a club at the apex of multiple networks, the G20 is well placed to shoulder leadership, trust-building and coordinating roles in global energy governance, not least because its membership accounts for 75 per cent of global commercial energy consumption and 80 per cent of CO 2 emissions from energy use.• Key priorities for the G20 include improving the transparency of information relating to energy and enhancing coordination between existing international organisations in the field of energy.• China is the world's largest consumer of energy and is heavily dependent on international markets for energy commodities, investment and equipment. It is therefore well-placed and has the incentive to use its presidency of the G20 to push forward a global energy agenda.Energy is just one of many fields in which the call for effective global governance is becoming louder (Avant et al., 2010). Energy is of particular importance to all nations and societies as it is a vital ingredient for a modern economy, yet it is both under-provided and over-used. At the same time energy is creating serious negative environmental and social externalities, the most prominent of which is global climate change. Energy markets are increasingly global in reach, many of the external costs of energy production and use are regional or global in their geographic extent, and the issue of access to energy for the poor is now a global concern. Nevertheless, the architecture for global energy governance remains fragmented and incoherent.Given that it is unlikely for a truly global body to be created to manage all aspects of energy governance, it has been argued that the Group of 20 (G20) could play a role in building a higher degree of coordination between existing international organisations as well as be...

show abstract

Section: Conceptualising the G20mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conceptualising the G20mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Role Can the G20 Play in Global Energy Governance? Implications for China's Presidency

Andrews‐Speed

Shi

2015

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this case, as Figure 3.1 depicts on the outer right side, the link between the global political principal and the BCBS would subordinate the Basel Committee as a collective agent with collectively delegated authority from an internationally constructed principal, and would adopt harmonised standards according to the G7/20 directives. It is, however, more likely for the G7/20 to focus on ex post crisis policies of macroeconomic crisis management and redistributive measures, and to refrain from active intervention in ex ante regulatory policies designed to pre-empt future crises (Cooper 2010, Knaack & Katada 2013, Viola 2014). …”

Section: Global Political Principal and Ex Post Crisis Stabilisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ongoing debate rather indicates a less influential role of the G20, comparable to that of the G7/8 during the Basel II negotiations. Several authors consider the forum as a successful crisis committee (Cooper 2010), which, however, has lost momentum after crisis management had been secured during its first three summits (Knaack & Katada 2013). The debate at the moment focuses on the question whether the G20 is merely a crisis committee or whether it has the potential to be a steering committee of global economic governance (Viola 2014, Knaack & Katada 2013.…”

Section: The G20mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Governance and Regulatory Failure

Goldbach

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…6 e.g., Poast 2012Poast 2013. 7 For example, as Knaack and Katada (2013) show, the addition of issues to the G20 agenda has created impasse, rather than greater cooperation. 8 Aksoy 2012;Conceição-Heldt 2008;McKibben 2013;McKibben and Western 2014;Morgan 1990;Sebenius 1983;Tollison and Willett 1979. the current literature shows that the structure of the bargaining agenda affects states' bargaining interactions in important ways.…”

Section: The Strategic Use Of Issue Linkagementioning

confidence: 99%

To Link or Not to Link? Agenda Change in International Bargaining

McKibben¹

2014

Brit. J. Polit. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agendas shape the strategies states adopt in international bargaining and, therefore, the substantive nature of the resulting outcomes. They are also a dynamic feature of the process, as states add and subtract issues in order to shift the bargaining outcome in their favor. This article analyzes when and why states will use these different 'issue-linkage' strategies. Focusing on the effects of a successful agreement and the costs of failure, it highlights conditions under which states are likely to add or subtract issues from the bargaining agenda. It tests these arguments using an original dataset of the bargaining strategies states have adopted in climate-change negotiations. It concludes by highlighting the implications the argument has for understanding the outcomes of international negotiations.The agenda is a key part of all bargaining processes. It shapes the strategies actors adopt, as well as the substantive nature of any agreement that can be reached. It is not, however, simply an exogenous factor that structures bargaining interactions. It is dynamic and can change throughout the bargaining process as actors strategically manipulate the set of issues being negotiated in order to influence the resulting outcome. The use of such agenda-changing strategies is particularly prevalent in international bargaining, where institutions are rarely in place to set the bargaining agenda. Instead, states write and re-write that agenda for themselves.The study of 'issue linkage' provides important insights that can help us understand the role that the agenda plays in international bargaining. Analyzing issue linkage as a structure allows us to explore how the issues on the agenda influence states' strategies when bargaining over those issues, and the outcomes that result. Analyzing issue linkage as a strategy allows us to evaluate the bargaining agenda as something that can be strategically manipulated by states as they add and subtract issues from the discussion. Both aspects of issue linkage are key for understanding international bargaining processes.However, while we have a fairly robust understanding of issue linkage as a bargaining structure, we have relatively little understanding of issue linkage as a bargaining strategy. 1 This limits our understanding of how and why the bargaining agenda comes to be structured in a particular way, and also limits our ability to understand the outcomes that result. I seek to address this problem by explaining when and why states will try to change the bargaining agenda as a part of their overarching bargaining strategy. By doing so, our ability to understand the agenda as a dynamic feature of international bargaining processes is increased.

show abstract

Fault Lines and Issue Linkages at the G20: New Challenges for Global Economic Governance

Cited by 9 publications

References 29 publications

What Role Can the G20 Play in Global Energy Governance? Implications for China's Presidency

What Role Can the G20 Play in Global Energy Governance? Implications for China's Presidency

Global Governance and Regulatory Failure

To Link or Not to Link? Agenda Change in International Bargaining

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About