The Pragmatism of Global and European Governance: Emerging Forms of the Political `Beyond Westphalia'

Albert, Mathias; Kopp-Malek, Tanja

doi:10.1177/03058298020310030501

Cited by 19 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Policy practice is moving faster than its paradigmatic parallels. The Westphalian conceptual cage of a nation-state system has incapacitated critical thinking (Albert & Kopp-Malek, 2002). Multilevel polycentric forms of public policy in which a plethora of institutions and networks negotiate within and between international agreements and private regimes have emerged as pragmatic responses in the absence of formal global governance.…”

Section: Global Public Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Public Policy, Transnational Policy Communities, and Their Networks

Stone

2008

Policy Studies Journal

391

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public policy has been a prisoner of the word 'state'". The state is re-configured by globalization. Through 'global public-private partnerships' and 'transnational executive networks' new forms of authority are emerging through global and regional policy processes that co-exist alongside nation-state policy processes. Accordingly, this paper asks what is 'global public policy'? The first part of the paper identifies new public spaces where global policies occur. These spaces are multiple in character and variety and will be collectively referred to as the 'global agora'. The second section adapts the conventional policy cycle heuristic by conceptually stretching it to the global and regional levels to reveal the higher degree of pluralization of actors and multiple authority structures than is the case at national levels. The third section asks: Who is involved in the delivery of global public policy? The focus is on transnational policy communities. The global agora is a public space of policy-making and administration, although it is one where authority is more diffuse, decision making is dispersed and sovereignty muddled. Trapped by methodological nationalism and an intellectual agoraphobia of globalization, public policy scholars have yet to examine fully global policy processes and new managerial modes of transnational public administration.

show abstract

Section: Global Public Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Public Policy, Transnational Policy Communities, and Their Networks

Stone

2008

Policy Studies Journal

391

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However fruitful these investigations have been in better defining the extent of globalization or distilling the actual implications of the Peace of Westphalia, we remain stuck with the Westphalia concept in mainstream IR literature and likely will be for some time to come. In fact, some authors, while explicitly recognizing the inadequacy of the concept, nonetheless applied it to some extent in their own work (see, for example, Albert and Kopp‐Malek 2002; Brenner 2004; Goodhart 2007; Watson 2007). Krasner of course did this self‐consciously in defining the term “Westphalian sovereignty” (1999) 34…”

Section: Implications and Potential Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

To Order the Minds of Scholars: The Discourse of the Peace of Westphalia in International Relations Literature1

Schmidt

2011

International Studies Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

References to the Peace of Westphalia have played an important role in the discourse of international relations. Originally referred to as a concrete historical event and associated with a variety of meanings, such as the triumph of state sovereignty, the establishment of a community of states, and even the beginnings of collective security, the Peace was later transformed into a conceptualization of the international system. Beginning in the late 1960s, phrases like “Westphalian system” came to convey a package of ideas about international politics limited to the supremacy of state sovereignty, territoriality, and nonintervention, to the exclusion of other meanings. This conceptualization serves as a popular and convenient contrast to a more globalized order, but there are problems with its use: first, because the Westphalian system is an ideal‐type that might never have actually existed, the impact of globalization may be exaggerated by scholars who employ it. Second, its use implies a linear progression from some Westphalian configuration toward some “post‐Westphalian” state of affairs, whereas actual system change is likely to be more complex.

show abstract

“…insights (here I refer particularly to his formulation of the logic of enquiry) provide the groundwork for an original and promising analytical framework to address political and sociological questions, including cultural evolution (Wiley 2006). This is particularly the case for the study of the European Union, arguably the pragmati(ci)st political enterprise par excellence (Albert and Kopp-Malek 2002).…”

Section: -Cultures Of Border Control and Their Evolution: An Analyticmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultures of Border Control

Zaiotti¹

2011

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dissertation examines one of the most remarkable and controversial developments in the recent history of European integration, namely the institutionalization of a regional policy regime to manage the continent's frontiers. By adopting this regime (known in policy circles as ‗Schengen'), European governments have in fact relinquished part of their sovereign authority over the politically sensitive issue of border control, thereby challenging what for a long time was the dominant national approach to policy-making in this domain. In order to account for the regime's emergence and success, a constructivist analytical framework centred on the notion of ‗cultures of border control' is advanced. From this perspective, the adoption of a regional approach to govern Europe's frontiers is the result of the evolution of a nationalist (‗Westphalian') culture-or set of background assumptions and related practices about borders shared by a given policy community-into a post-nationalist one (‗Schengen'). The cultural Channel. This rhetorical move seemed well founded. Indeed, it was in continental Europe that the modern ‗national' conception of borders first emerged (Anderson 1996). According to this conception (which has its roots in the early phases of the modern state-system in 17 th century Europe), borders are continuous territorial lines marking the outer limits of a state's authority and a key foundation around which the principle of sovereignty in the international system is built. Borders represent the very essence of statehood (delimiting its authority in the international system) and one of its most visible embodiments (its ‗skin', according to an oft used biological metaphor). At the same time, borders are a powerful symbol of identity and historical continuity, both for the state as institution and for the peoples they contain. Their protection is therefore a matter of ‗national security', and the exclusive responsibility of central governments. This perspective has long imbued official arguments and practices in the border control domain in Europe (and elsewhere), and it has been widely accepted by both decision-makers and the population at large. Thatcher's take on border control should have resonated well with a European audience. But it didn't. On the contrary, while she was delivering her speech, something extraordinary was under way in the heart of Europe. Since the mid-1980s, a group of European countries (France, Germany, the Benelux) had been taking the first steps towards the abolition of controls over their shared frontiers. The goal of the emerging border control regime (which would be known as ‗Schengen', from the name of the Luxembourg town where the founding agreement was originally signed) was the creation of a common space where, not only goods and capital, but also individuals would be free to circulate. Schengen did not imply that borders were to completely disappear or lose importance. In order to compensate for the perceived security deficit stemming from the elimination of controls at comm...

show abstract

The Pragmatism of Global and European Governance: Emerging Forms of the Political `Beyond Westphalia'

Cited by 19 publications

References 0 publications

Global Public Policy, Transnational Policy Communities, and Their Networks

Global Public Policy, Transnational Policy Communities, and Their Networks

To Order the Minds of Scholars: The Discourse of the Peace of Westphalia in International Relations Literature1

Cultures of Border Control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About