National democratization theory and global governance: civil society and the liberalization of the Asian Development Bank

Abstract

Contributing to a growing literature on democracy beyond the nation-state, this article draws on aspects of national democratization theory in order to analyse empirical processes of democracy. By combining insights from transition theory and the theory of political opportunity structures, the article examines the case of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). While the ADB for a long time has been described as a closed, unresponsive and unaccountable international organization, a recent evaluation praised the Bank for its good practices concerning transparency, participation and accountability. The article uses the analytical framework to highlight the interaction between hard-liners and soft-liners within the ADB and explores the role of different transnational civil society actors in the processes that seem to have strengthened the democratic credentials of the ADB. While finding significant divisions within the ADB as well as amongst civil society actors targeting the bank, overall the article argues that transnational civil society actors, interacting with soft-liners within the ADB, have contributed to the implementation of reforms, which in turn create political opportunities for further civil society activism. The reform processes, however, are best described as processes of liberalization -rather than democratization.

Emergence of multilateral proto-institutions in global health and new approaches to governance: analysis using path dependency and institutional theory

“…The scholarly literature has often claimed that efforts to strengthen governance processes are the product of individual interests among agency presidents and governing boards, to enhance organizational effectiveness in policy-making [1-3,5,6,8,9]. In contrast, others have argued that the well-organized pressure from civil society and transnational activist groups have influenced these transformations.…”

“…In contrast, others have argued that the well-organized pressure from civil society and transnational activist groups have influenced these transformations. These groups, it is argued, have effectively use the media to disseminate information on the transparency of multilateral agencies, and actively report instances of corruption and succeed in pressuring multilateral agencies into pursuing these outcomes [5]. …”

“…Earlier studies indicate that multilateral funders, such as the World Bank, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Global Fund), and the Global Alliance for Vaccines Initiative (GAVI) have attempted to reform their governance arrangements in order to improve transparency, accountability, and responsiveness to countries and citizens’ healthcare needs in response to pressures from governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) [1-5]. However, extant research also highlights wide variation in the outcomes of governance reforms undertaken by multilateral donor agencies, with studies suggesting that the governing boards of these agencies have failed to improve transparency in their decision-making, to consistently engage NGOs and other stakeholders in decision-making, and to expand broad representation and voting influence within governing boards; suggesting obfuscation and use of ‘immunity’ privileges have hampered change efforts and to hold individuals within these agencies accountable for wrongdoing, underperformance or mismanagement [6].…”

“…In this article, in contrast to studies which have explored the importance of endogenous organizational interests for achieving these governance outcomes within multilateral donor agencies, often kindled by well organized, pro-active civic mobilization and pressures [1-3,5,6,8,9], we draw on research on institutional origins, proto-institutions, and path dependency theory to explain the creation and implementation of strengthened governance processes within multilateral donor agencies. While institutional origins and proto-institutional theory help to explain the initiating political actors, interests, and coalitional strategies involved in creating multilateral donor agencies, path dependency theory helps to explain how and why actors within these agencies behave the way they do after they have been created, e.g., why agency presidents and governing board members repeatedly were unable to change ineffective governance processes, rules and policies.…”

Global democracy and the democratic minimum: Why a procedural account alone is insufficient

“…The WTO has improved its relations with civil society organizations and broadened the range of information it makes available to the public. As a result, the once criticized transparency policies of the WTO are now lauded by some as a role model for other international organizations (Steffek and Kissling, 2006), with similar developments reported for other international organizations such as the Asian Development Bank (Uhlin, 2011). More systematically, studies have documented a significant expansion of civil society access in most international institutions over time (Tallberg et al, 2013) as well as an expansion of transparency and oversight mechanisms among international institutions (Grigorescu, 2007(Grigorescu, , 2010.…”