Towards a theory of inter-organizational networking

Biermann, Rafael

doi:10.1007/s11558-007-9027-9

Cited by 128 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Understanding and explaining how IOs and their member states navigate these entanglements by managing their inter-organizational relationships is a central part of the research agendas on regime complexity and fragmentation. Existing explanations of IO-IO relations' drivers focus on IOs' interests in gaining new or additional material (funding) or immaterial resources (knowledge, legitimacy, network access;Biermann 2008;Koops 2013). It is, thus, the functional necessities of IOs that explain the dyadic, triadic or network-like cooperative structures of IOs that define field-specific governance architectures.…”

Section: The Discursive Intertwinement Of Metagovernance Norms Govermentioning

confidence: 99%

Governing effectively in a complex world? How metagovernance norms and changing repertoires of knowledge shape international organisation discourses on institutional order in global health

Pantzerhielm

Holzscheiter

Bahr

2019

Cambridge Review of International Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article approaches the field of global health governance from the vantage point of shared discourses and norms on the good governance of governance amongst multiple international organizations (IOs). Conceptually, we introduce metagovernance norms as constitutive, reflexive beliefs concerned with institutional order and IO interactions in a given governance field. We argue that such norms are entangled with causal beliefs and problem perceptions that form part of contingent, contested repertoires of knowledge. Moreover, we illustrate how IO 'expert' groups form an authoritative subject position from which truth claims about governance are advanced. Empirically, we trace metagovernance norms in discourse(s) amongst eight health IOs since the 1970s. We show how metagovernance norms have been The research presented in this article was conducted by members of the Research Group 'Governance for Global Health' which is jointly funded by WZB Berlin Social Science Center and Freie Universit€ at Berlin through the German Research Council's (DFG) Excellence Initiative. An earlier version of the manuscript was presented at the 11 th Pan-European Conference on International Relations The Politics of International Studies in an Age of Crises in Barcelona 2017. The authors wish to thank Lisbeth Zimmermann, Katharina Glaab, Alejandro Esguerra and the other participants in the 4 th European Workshops in International Studies (EWIS) workshop on The Politicisation of Expertise: Contentious Knowledge Politics in International Organizations in Cardiff 2017 for providing helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. We thank our colleagues from the WZB Global Governance unit for their feedback and ideas on the larger research project in which this article's arguments are embedded. We are grateful to the three anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions which helped improve and clarify our article. Finally, we wish to thank Markus Sperl, Marleen Boschen and Martha van Bakel for their editing and research assistance.

show abstract

Section: The Discursive Intertwinement Of Metagovernance Norms Govermentioning

confidence: 99%

Governing effectively in a complex world? How metagovernance norms and changing repertoires of knowledge shape international organisation discourses on institutional order in global health

Pantzerhielm

Holzscheiter

Bahr

2019

Cambridge Review of International Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The success of the concept has been contemporaneous to the identification of regime complexes in an increasing number of international domains, such as peace building, FS or trade, to cite but a few. This success also led to the development of numerous similar concepts in the scientific literature, such as 'institutional interactions', 'institutional linkages', 'interorganisationalism' or 'institutional fragmentation' (for a synthesis see Zelli and van Assel 2013;Biermann 2008).…”

Section: A Brief State Of the Art On Regime Complexesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Food Security and Biofuels Regulations: the Emulsifying Effect of International Regime Complexes

Orsini

Godet

2018

JCER

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International institutions are proliferating over a wide range of issue areas, creating what have recently been described as regime complexes. More than complicated arrangements, regime complexes are structures: they are more than the sum of their parts, i.e. individual international regimes. While the concept of international regimes holds strong promise in this direction, academic research on regime complexes has mostly focused on how agents shape regime complexes but less on how complexes influence agents. This contribution aims at filling this gap by studying the effects that regime complexes might have on global governance, focusing more narrowly on the effects of regime complexes on non-state actors' (NSAs) strategies with regard to agenda setting for new international regulations. More precisely, we hypothesise that regime complexes create an 'emulsifying effect' for pro-active NSAs to push for new regulations whereby the collective effect of non-state actors within and across regime complexes become greater than the sum of their individual effects within individual regimes. We use the examples of food security and biofuels regulations at the international level as a case study with a special focus on the European Union. KeywordsBiofuels; European Union; food security; non-state actors; regime complexes; renewable energy directive International institutions are proliferating over a wide range of issue areas, creating what has recently been described as 'regime complexes' (Orsini, Morin and Young 2013). For instance, no fewer than five key international institutions including the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the G20 deal with food security 1 (FS) at the international level. The analytical added value of regime complexes, with respect to the former conceptualisation of world politics, is to focus on the structure in which international institutions are embedded. More than complicated arrangements, regime complexes are structures: they are more than the sum of their parts, i.e. individual international regimes. While the concept of international regimes holds strong promise in this direction, academic research on regime complexes has mostly focused on how agents shape regime complexes most of the time through forum shopping, forum shifting or forum linking strategies (Orsini 2013). For example, Florian Rabitz explains how states influence the different elements of the regime complex of genetic resources to maintain their privileged position in managing worldwide genetic resources (Rabitz 2016). However, there is far less focus on how complexes influence agents. What does it mean for international actors to evolve in a context of regime complexes? Do regime complexes change the strategies of international actors? And if so, in what ways?This contribution seeks to fill this gap by studying the effects that regime complexes have on global governance. While this research ambition is vast, we narrow it down by looking at the effects of regime complexes on non-stat...

show abstract

“…Some International Relations research has begun to utilize concepts and methods developed in other social-science disciplines to explore co-operation and competition among IOs and the resulting outcomes. 37 This research frequently draws on organization studies in economics and social-network analysis originally developed by sociologists. The analysis of networks of actors in transnational and international politics has of course also been used by historians including in the field of European integration history, 38 although they have usually employed a less formal methodology.…”

Section: Understanding Co-operation and Competition Among Internationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple connections in European co-operation: international organizations, policy ideas, practices and transfers 1967–92

Kaiser¹,

Patel

2017

European Review of History: Revue européenne d'histoire

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International organizations are ubiquitous in contemporary Europe and the wider world. This special issue takes a historical approach to exploring their relations with each other in Western Europe between 1967 and 1992. The authors seek to 'provincialize' and 'de-centre' the European Union's role, exploring the interactions of its predecessors with other organizations like NATO, the OECD and the Council of Europe. This article develops the new historical-research agenda of cooperation and competition among IOs and their role in European cooperation. The first section discusses the limited existing work on such questions among historians and in adjacent disciplines. The second section introduces the five articles and their main arguments. The third section goes on to elaborate common findings, especially regarding what the authors call the vectors for the development of policy ideas and practices and their transfer across different institutional platforms. International organizations (IOs) are ubiquitous in contemporary Europe and the wider world. They are even highly active in policy fields like education that are usually seen as closely connected with sensitive issues of culture and identity and often regarded as an exclusive national, or even in federal or unevenly decentralized states, sub-national competence. Thus, to give but a few examples, the global United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization promotes Holocaust education in cooperation with the formally international, but European-dominated, International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. 1 The equally global Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) seeks to compare the success of different education systems, coordinating member-states in joint evaluation programmes like PISA for testing the skills of 15-year-old pupils in mathematics, reading and the natural sciences. 2 The pan-European Council of Europe in turn fosters the comparison and convergence of history-teaching methods and content and the development of European school textbooks. 3 Finally, the European Union (EU), with its smaller membership and only subsidiary competences in education, nevertheless runs multiple programmes for strengthening transnational cooperation and mobility, such as the Erasmus student exchanges, launched in 1987. 4

show abstract

Towards a theory of inter-organizational networking

Abstract: Inter-organizational relations, Organizational theory, Social network theory, Institutionalism, Euro-Atlantic security institutions, Balkans, Crisis management, D 74, D 85, N 44,

Cited by 128 publications

References 37 publications

Governing effectively in a complex world? How metagovernance norms and changing repertoires of knowledge shape international organisation discourses on institutional order in global health

Governing effectively in a complex world? How metagovernance norms and changing repertoires of knowledge shape international organisation discourses on institutional order in global health

Food Security and Biofuels Regulations: the Emulsifying Effect of International Regime Complexes

Multiple connections in European co-operation: international organizations, policy ideas, practices and transfers 1967–92

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About