Non-State Actors: NGOs and IOs, matter in IR?

Question 1

NSA

Answer 1

Non-State actor

Question 2

piracy and IR

Answer 2

start study of NSAs (which has foundations in international law)

pirates are foundational for international law and states

since 1990s increase of piracy and armed robbery at sea with increasing maritime flows

piracy is anti-sovereign -> helps define sovereignty + reach of sovereign power

Question 3

e.g. NSAs

Answer 3

• pirates
• cyber-hackers
• terrorists
• MNCs
• International banks
• IOs (debatable)
• NGOs
• psuedo-states

Question 4

definitions NSA

Answer 4

textbook: any actor that is not a government

focus on actors which aren’t part of government
- NGOs, MNCs, transnational militias, terrorist groups

focus on NSAs which have an impact on IR events
- influential, transnational or international actors

Question 5

complications definition NSAs

Answer 5

what to do with:
Sub-national actors
- actors within the disaggregated state

IOs:
- intergovernmental & suprantational institutions
- independence is key (NGOs, IOs are often reliant on states and other actors for funding)

Question 6

categories NSA

Answer 6

• INGOs
• violent NSAs (VNSAs)
• private economic actors
• ethnic/religious actors
• civil society
• pseudo/de facto/quasi-states

Question 7

INGOs

Answer 7

International Non-Governmental Organization

IOs with some degree of autonomy

not directly dependent on the state for funding and agenda

Question 8

VNSAs

Answer 8

• terrorist organizations, militias, paramilitary forces, insurgents, mercenary armies, warlords, pirates, drug traffickers, cyber-hacktivists
• been around for millennia
• dwarfed by state consolidation
• re-emergence in a post-cold war period
• provide and supported by noncombatant infrastructure
• can become states

Question 9

private economic actors

Answer 9

• MNCs, trade associations, rating agencies
• not a new phenomenon: VOC, East India Company
• thrived when sovereign states were weak
• declined as global geopolitical competition increased

questions
- comeback in age of globalization?
- completely independent?

Question 10

Ethnic/religous actors

Answer 10

• diasporas
• refugees
• religious movements
• Holy See

groups that have ethnic/religious communities that aren’t related to states/borders

Question 11

civil society

Answer 11

transnational social movements

Question 12

pseudo/de facto/quasi-state

Answer 12

• Somaliland
• Transnistria
• Abkhazia
• Chechnya
• Nagorno-Karabahk
• Turkish Republic of Norhtern Cyprus

have reached more autonomy, statelikeness than VNSAs

Question 13

sub-national actors

Answer 13

debatable if they are non-state actors
Blarel doesn’t see them as non-state actors

Question 14

NSAs + realism

Answer 14

NO, don’t matter
- except if power derived from states: proxies
- except if NSAs have aspiration to be states (act/talk like states, e.g. national interest, balancing, security dilemma)

Question 15

NSAs + liberalism

Answer 15

Mainly don’t matter
- IOs seen as key actors
- IOs facilitate collective action
- IOs have some autonomy (principal-agent problem)
- role of NGOs, lobbies, organized interests in domestics politics

liberal internationalism: IOs as means of advancing international peace + common interests

neofunctionalism: international cooperation can lead to political integration (cooperation spills over)
*neofunctionalism abandoned in the 70s: regional integration and world government didn’t function as predicted

Question 16

NSAs + constructivism

Answer 16

• NSAs as norm entrepreneurs
• NSAs as ideological, social movements, identity movements

Question 17

NSAs + marxism

Answer 17

dominant transnational economic interests
(marxism = theory that emphasizes non-state actors: classes, not states)

NSAs control state and IOs agenda

IOs help construct and reproduce the global capitalist system + advance capitalist interests

Question 18

NSAs + critical theories

Answer 18

distinction(s) are problematic

mind the stateless within, outside and beyond the state: marginalized matter even if not ‘‘subjects’’ of IR, IL, IOs

Question 19

questions and debate NSAs

Answer 19

IR still state-centered

vacuum of power/governance in certain regions, issue areas: opportunities for NSAs
- e.g. climate action: states aren’t doing enough (UN pushes national debates)

varying actors with different objectives, strategies, actions relationships with states

increasingly subjects of IR (rights and responsibilities, theories of IR are applicable under some conditions)

Hybrid governance: multiple actors have authority over certain areas of governance

Question 20

hybrid international organizations

Answer 20

IOs that also have non-state actors in their decision-making structure
- e.g. ILO and ISO

Question 21

emanation

Answer 21

way for IOs to be formed: members of a pre-exiting IO can vote in favor to establish a ‘‘spin off’’ IO

Question 22

PIU

Answer 22

Public International Union

apolitical technical organizations created to devise solutions to differing standards among states

Question 23

Why are IOs important?

Answer 23

• once established, they tend to endure
• activities of IOs increasingly affect countless aspects of individuals’ lives, reaching down into domestic political processes in ways they never have before
• affect how states respond to complex issues including regional and international stability

Question 24

informal multilateralism

Answer 24

states meet as groups, rather than creating a permanent structure in which they establish rules and procedures for their interactions (e.g. G7, G20)
- not established by an international treaty, no permanent secretariat, no headquarters

benefits:
- quick decisions
- change direction as circumstances warrant
- avoid being bound by international pledges
- not having to ratify agreements domestically

Question 25

IOs + principle-agent model

Answer 25

principle = member states - agent = IOs agents have been empowered to act on behalf of the principles - agency slack = IO may shirk its activities - agency slippage = IO redirects efforts to its own preferred activities rather than meet the preferences of its principles

Question 26

NGO

Answer 26

non-governmental organization independent from states, aspirations to work for the common good rather than for profit don't have international legal personality *identities aren't fixed: socially constructed and shaped both by the organizations themselves and their environment

Question 27

TNC

Answer 27

transnational company work for profit

Question 28

TSMO

Answer 28

transnational social movement organizations - informal coalitions of mass publics, individuals and organizations dedicated to social change - no formal structure

Question 29

how do different actors work together?

Answer 29

MSDs - TNCs, states and TNGOs participate together in multi-stakeholder dialogues PPPs - TNGOs, states and TNCs cooperate in public-private partnerships *PPP offers TNC reputation effects *cooperation with TNCs can be costly for TNGOs (loss of independence and credibility)

Question 30

for-profit TNGO

Answer 30

professionalization (permanent staff instead of volunteers) + commercialization (e.g. branding or selling merchandise to generate income)

Question 31

TAN

Answer 31

transnational advocacy network - compose out of TNGOs, but sometimes also other actors - amplify the voices of weaker organizations, enable TNGOs to engage in a division of labor - participants often disagree over strategy (e.g. through state institutions or not) - TANs frequently exhibit and reinforce power asymmetries between gatekeeper NGOs (resource rich, often from the global west) and follower NGOs (mostly from the global south)

Question 32

phases of INGO engagement at the international level (don't memorize)

Answer 32

- Emergence (18th century) - Engagement (interwar period, within the network of the League of Nations) - Disengagement (world war) - Formalization (establishment UN + recognition TNGOs) - Underachievement (cold war) - Intensification (arms control and environmental problems) - Empowerment (from the 1990s to now)

Question 33

TNGOs and IR

Answer 33

understudied until the mid-1970s changed since the end of the cold war: came to the center of IR

Question 34

TNGO consultative status

Answer 34

some IOs offer TNGOs consultative status - UN has to be treated with care: - subject to politicization - rules of access have been moulded and augmented by informal practices - rules don't apply equally to all UN bodies, nor do they guarantee access across the policy cycle for all TNGOs (role mostly in the agenda-setting phase) - not all TNGOs are capable of maintaining a continuous presence at the UN

Question 35

how do NSAs make their voices heard

Answer 35

- information politics - symbolic politics - leverage politics - naming and shaming - accountability politics (ensure that actors hold their commitments by monitoring)