Structuring power: business and authority beyond the nation state

Abstract

What is the relationship between globalization and the political power of business? Much of the existing literature focuses on the ability of mobile capital to threaten exit in order to press for more business friendly rules. In this article, we refine arguments about exit options in global markets by arguing that the relative exit options available to business and other actors are neither fixed, nor exogenous consequences of some generically conceived process of globalization. Instead, they themselves are the result of struggles between actors with different interests and political opportunities. Since exit options play a crucial role in determining the relative structural power of business vis-à-vis other actors, we dub the power to shape exit optionsstructuring power, distinguishing it from structural power, and argue that it is crucial to explaining it. We identify two channels through which actors can shape exit options – extending jurisdictional reach and reshaping the rules of other jurisdictions – and the factors that will make regulators and business more or less capable of exercising structuring power. We then use two exploratory case studies – one involving privacy regulation, the other accountancy standards – to illustrate how structuring power can work to shape exit options, and thus structural power. We conclude by considering the relationship between structuring power, structural power, and the existing literature in comparative and international political economy.

Legal Culture and Human Rights System in the Era of Globalization

“…The concept of legal culture implies an assessment of the quality of the legal life of a society in comparison with its ideals, values and the most developed legal models where these values and ideals are realized [6][7][8][9][10][11]. The most important criterion for assessing the level of legal culture is the level of human and civil rights and freedoms in a given society [12][13][14][15].…”

Structural power and political science in the post-crisis era

“…22 Whether in the closed or open economy formulations, however, the constant of structural power is that it is perceived as a one-way street: capital holders exercise power over politicians 20 Farrell and Newman (2015). 21 Lindblom (1977); Block (1980); Przeworski and Wallerstein (1988).…”

“…41 Abdelal's 39 Emmenegger (2015); Culpepper and Reinke (2014);and Young (2012). 40 Farrell and Newman (2015). 41 Abdelal (2015).…”

The structural-informational power of business: credibility, signalling and the UK banking reform process

“…In reality, the threat of disinvestment is an option available to very few firms because the costs of 'exit' are prohibitively high. Moreover, such threats are neither fixed nor exogenously determined; rather, they are discursively constructed by business (Farrell and Newman 2015). A more fine-grained analysis of business agency is needed to explain how firms make credible structural claims to policy-makers (Young 2015).…”