The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of Fundamental Institutions

Reus-Smit, Christian

doi:10.1162/002081897550456

Cited by 364 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 80 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We believe that this more granular understanding of authority relations serves as a corrective both to the literature on anarchy and also to the emerging 10 One such example is the contrast between ancient Greek city-states and the contemporary international system in Reus-Smit (1997). While Reus-Smit described these cases as different anarchies, if we are right about the authoritative nature of rules and institutions in constituting actors, these cases can be reconceived as (non-multistakeholder) homogeneous polyarchies.…”

Section: Forms Of Multistakeholder Governancementioning

confidence: 93%

“…The Ruggie article and others in the special issue were not the first International Relations (IR) work on multilateralism. However, Ruggie's article, in particular, catalyzed the emergence of a literature studying the phenomenon across a range of issue areas, 1 and was enormously influential in the development of literatures on global governance and the structure of the international system (Reus-Smit 1997;Ikenberry 2001). In the ensuing decades, multilateral diplomacy has remained both an important object of scholarly inquiry and an enduring international institution.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multistakeholderism: anatomy of an inchoate global institution

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building on John Ruggie's pioneering study of multilateralism, this paper presents an analogous study of multistakeholder governance, or multistakeholderism. Its central argument is that multistakeholderism is, as yet, a much less well-defined institutional form. Cases exhibit significant variation both in the combinations of actor classes entitled to participate and the nature of authority relations among those actors. The first section discusses multistakeholderism as an institutional form, and proposes a taxonomy of its types. This section also briefly addresses the implications of the analysis for International Relations theory. The paper then conducts a comparative analysis of multistakeholderism, applying the taxonomy to five illustrative cases. It demonstrates the degree of inter-case variation, and the range of issue-areas across which the institutional form is employed and invoked by actors. Three cases are drawn from the increasingly contentious area of Internet governance; the paper thus makes a secondary contribution to this growing literature. The paper's most striking finding in this regard is that Internet governance often fails to live up to its multistakeholder rhetoric. Other cases include governance of securities regulation and the governance of corporate social responsibility. The paper concludes by examining the implications of our argument, and identifying areas for further research.

show abstract

Section: Forms Of Multistakeholder Governancementioning

confidence: 93%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multistakeholderism: anatomy of an inchoate global institution

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…256 Ruggie (1998: 185) 257 Lefebvre (1991: 17) 258 Little (2002: 48) 259 For example, Reus-Smit's (1997) arguments about the different meaning o f anarchy for the ancient Greek city-state system and the modern state system. Lefebvre's arguments lead towards the conclusion that in order to understand how societies change we have to examine how the spaces that they produce change.…”

Section: The Social Production O F Spacementioning

confidence: 99%

Global cities and the transformation of the International System

Curtis¹

2010

Rev. Int. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence of a new urban form, the global city, has attracted little attention from International Relations (IR) scholars, despite the fact that much progress has been made in conceptualising and mapping global cities and their networks in other fields. This article argues that global cities pose fundamental questions for IR theorists about the nature of their subject matter, and shows how consideration of the historical relationship between cities and states can illuminate the changing nature of the international system. It highlights how global cities are essential to processes of globalisation, providing a material and infrastructural backbone for global flows, and a set of physical sites that facilitate command and control functions for a decentralised global economy. It goes on to argue that the rise of the global city challenges IR scholars to consider how many of the assumptions that the discipline makes about the modern international system are being destabilised, as important processes deterritorialise at the national level and are reconstituted at different scales.

show abstract

“…In particular, states and the system of states are being problematized within the emerging constructivist perspective, which provides powerful sociological and historical insight and analysis, and which, along with Critical theory, is perhaps the most signi cant theoretical innovation to enable a space for WHS. Constructivist writers of note here include Kratochwil (1989), Wendt (1997), Biersteker and Weber (1995), Inayatullah (1995Inayatullah ( , 1997, Strang (1991Strang ( , 1995, Katzenstein (1996) and Reus-Smit (1997.…”

Section: T H E C a Se F O R B R I Ng In G N Eo -W Eb E R Ia N H Ismentioning

confidence: 99%