Institutional design for a post-liberal order: why some international organizations live longer than others

Abstract

Many international organizations (IOs) are currently under pressure and the demise of the liberal international order is the talk of town. We theorize that institutional characteristics help to explain why some IOs survive external pressures where others fail. We test this argument through a survival analysis of 150 IOs (1815–2014). We find that the only significant variable explaining the death of IOs is the size of the secretariat: IOs with large bureaucracies are good at coping with external pressures. In addition, IOs with diverging preferences among members and those that are less institutionalized are more likely to be replaced with successor organizations. We find that institutional flexibility included in the treaties does not have an effect on survival. This is surprising because the purpose of flexibility clauses is precisely to deal with external shocks. Finally, we also find that systemic and domestic factors do not explain IO failure. In conclusion, we should not write off the liberal international order all too quickly: large IOs with significant bureaucratic resources are here to stay.

COVID‐19 and Policy Responses by International Organizations: Crisis of Liberal International Order or Window of Opportunity?

“…While IOs with large bureaucracies may experience institutional pathology and not be flexible enough to grasp opportunities (Barnett and Finnemore, 2004 ), Gray ( 2018 ) finds that quality staff is critical for the vitality of IOs and Johnson ( 2014 ) shows how secretariat staff act opportunistically when designing new institutions. While some IOs – such as the EU, UN, and WHO – have substantial secretariat resources, many of the 75 major IOs have in fact rather limited staffs often below 50 officials (Debre and Dijkstra, 2021 ). If there are very few actual policy officers, they may simply be overwhelmed with guaranteeing the continuation of operations and may not have the ability to proactively propose new policy instruments.…”

Decision-making in international organizations: institutional design and performance

“…Future research, however, is necessary to more adequately understand how decision-making performance relates to other aspects of IO performance and regime effectiveness, such as goal attainment and problem-solving. In this respect, the study of decision-making performance can also contribute to the growing scholarship on the termination and death of IOs (Debre & Dijkstra, 2021;Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, 2021), by linking dynamics of policy output to the risk of organizational failure.…”

Forging Unity: European Commission Leadership in the Brexit Negotiations

“…Brexit is, of course, an exceptional case. Time will tell whether the context‐specific insights on the agential qualities of the Commission possess external validity (see Debre and Dijkstra, 2020 forthcoming; Schuette, 2020). The negotiations on the future relations that nominally started in March 2020 will provide the first test case for the continued cogency of the Commission's leadership.…”