Ordering global governance complexes: The evolution of the governance complex for international civil aviation

Abstract

Many observers worry that growing numbers of international institutions with overlapping functions undermine governance effectiveness via duplication, inconsistency and conflict. Such pessimistic assessments may undervalue the mechanisms available to states and other political agents to reduce conflictual overlap and enhance inter-institutional synergy. Drawing on historical data I examine how states can mitigate conflict within Global Governance Complexes (GGCs) by dissolving or merging existing institutions or by re-configuring their mandates. I further explore how “order in complexity” can emerge through bottom-up processes of adaptation in lieu of state-led reform. My analysis supports three theoretical claims: (1) states frequently refashion governance complexes “top-down” in order to reduce conflictual overlap; (2) “top-down” restructuring and “bottom-up” adaptation present alternative mechanisms for ordering relations among component institutions of GGCs; (3) these twin mechanisms ensure that GGCs tend to (re)produce elements of order over time–albeit often temporarily. Rather than evolving towards ever-greater fragmentation and disorder, complex governance systems thus tend to fluctuate between greater or lesser integration and (dis)order.

The Shadow of History in Inter-Organizational Cooperation for the Environment

“…Whereas orchestration literature often takes a one-time snapshot of orchestration, this paper underlines the importance of tracing an orchestrator-intermediaries relationship over time. In relation to inter-institutional coordination, this paper suggests that different forms of ordering may be suitable for different pairs of institutions (Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, 2022). Top-down restructuring (treaty reform or the creation of cross-cutting institutions tasked with managing complexity) may be more effective than bottom-up adaptation (ordering through mutual accommodation in ongoing interactions between institutions) but inhibited by conflicting preferences of member states.…”

“…That is, the complexes of institutions provide states with opportunities for forum shopping or regime shifting, which could undermine the overall effectiveness of governance (Morse & Keohane, 2014; Orsini et al, 2013; Raustiala, 2012). Increasingly, studies are exploring how political actors (states, IOs, and private actors) seek to set inter-institutional coordination and collaboration to correct overlaps, and how this process interacts with states’ interests (Clark, 2021; Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, 2022; Eilstrup-Sangiovanni & Westerwinter, 2022; Gehring & Faude, 2013; 2014; Henning, 2017; Pratt, 2018). Thus, inter-institutional coordination is related to the cooperation between IOs, given that both entail a similar coordination process.…”

The global governance complexity cube: Varieties of institutional complexity in global governance

“…Climate change governance involves many types of institutions, including formal interstate agreements and IGOs, such as the United Nations (UN) Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol, as well as public-private and purely private governance arrangements (Abbott, 2012;Abbott et al, 2016;Keohane & Victor, 2011). The GGC for international civil aviation consists of a few IGOs flanked by a larger number of private regulatory bodies and industry associations (Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, 2022). Other GGCs are more homogenous in terms of the institutions and actors they bring together.…”

“…We think that it depends. Institutionled differentiation requires access to resources in the form of demand for new forms of regulation, availability of funding and access to professional expertise in order to alter institutional practices and build new expertise (Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, 2022). Importantly, it also requires a measure of institutional autonomy that allows bureaucratic agents to pursue strategies of specialization independently of their principals who may prefer to retain options for forum-shopping.…”

“…This points toward the need for more nuanced theories of how different configurations of governance complexity empower or weaken different types of actors (Verdier, 2022). It also opens avenues to explore how the systemic features of GGCs may be strategically manipulated by the state and nonstate actors maneuvering within them (Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, 2022). At the intersection of agency and the structural characteristics of GGCs lies a host of under-explored questions related to complexity management.…”