DEVLETLERARASI EKONOMİK İLİŞKİLERİ DÜZENLEYEN ULUSLARARASI ÖRGÜTLERİN POLİTİK EKONOMİSİ: DEVLETLER, ÇIKAR GRUPLARI VE ÖRGÜT BÜROKRASİSİ KISKACINDA KÜRESEL YÖNETİŞİM

Year 2020, , 1 - 35, 28.01.2020

İmran Demir

https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.676405

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Uluslararası örgütlerin politik ekonomisi, devletlerin ekonomik çıkarlarını optimize etmek için kurdukları uluslararası örgütlerin kuruluşunu, yapısını ve çıktılarını etkileyen ekonomik ve politik süreçlerin etkileşimini sistematik olarak izah etme çabasındadır. Bu çalışma uluslararası politik ekonominin bir alt dalı olan uluslararası örgütlerin politik ekonomisi üzerine genel bir değerlendirme niteliğindedir. Amaç, bu alanda, geçmişten, günümüze önem arz eden sorular ve tartışmalar üzerinden disiplinin gelişimine ışık tutmak ve güncel konular hakkında bilgi vermektir. Çalışma disiplinin gelişimine paralel olarak üç temel konu üzerinde durmaktadır. Politik ekonomi ve uluslararası politik ekonomi kavramları üzerinden alanın çerçevesi çizildikten sonra devletler arası ekonomik ilişkileri düzenleyen uluslararası kurumların kuruluş nedenleri ve etkinlikleri üzerine yapılan paradigmatik tartışmalara değinilmektedir. Devletlerin neden uluslararası organizasyonlara katıldığı ve neden bu organizasyonların kurallarına uyduğunun kısa bir değerlendirmesini uluslararası örgütlerin yapısını ve dizaynını etkileyen faktörlerin irdelenmesi takip etmektedir. Makale ikinci aşamada, uluslararası kuruluşların kendilerini kuran devletlerden ne kadar bağımsız hareket edebilme kabiliyetine sahip oldukları sorusuna yanıt aramaktadır. Bu bağlamda çeşitli uluslararası ekonomik örgütlerin ürettiği politikaların arkasındaki siyasi etkiler üzerine yapılan tartışmalar incelemektedir. Çıkar grupları ve örgüt bürokrasisinin kurumsal iş birliği süreçlerindeki rolü ve etkinlikleri çalışmanın üçüncü temel sorunsalını oluşturmaktadır. Bürokratik otonomi bağlamında yerel aktörler, siyasetçiler ve uluslararası örgüt bürokrasisinin karşılıklı etkileşimini ve bunun sonucu meydana gelen çıktıları konu alan çalışmalar irdelenmektedir

Keywords

Uluslararası İş Birliği, Kolektif Eylem Sorunları, Rasyonel Dizayn, , Enformel Güç, Çıkar Grupları ve Örgüt Bürokrasisi

POLITICAL ECONOMY OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: GLOBAL GOVERNANCE IN THE GRIP OF STATES, INTEREST GROUPS AND ORGANİZATİONAL BUREAUCRACY

Abstract

Political economy of international organizations, a subfield of international political economy, seeks to systematically explain the interaction of economic and political processes that shape the foundation, structure and outputs of international institutions created by states for the maximization of their interests. This study aims at providing an overview of the discipline. The goal is to explore past and present debates and questions that have guided research on the problem of interstate cooperation. The study, in line with the evolution of the discipline, focuses on three major topics. The study, following a conceptual discussion of political economy and international political economy to establish the boundary of the field, explores paradigmatic debates on the role and influence of international institutions. Attention is devoted to the question of why states join international organizations and abide by their rules. This section also explores factors that influence the structure and design of international organizations. The article, in the second place, explores institutional autonomy and the degree of independence enjoyed by international institutions. It examines debates over political factors that influence policy outputs of institutions. The role and impact of interest groups and institutional bureaucracy on the process of institutional cooperation comprise the third concern of the study. The interaction between local actors, national politicians and institutional bureaucracy is explored in relation to the issue of bureaucratic autonomy and its implications.

Keywords

International Cooperation, Collective Action Problems, Rational Design, Informal Power, Interest Groups and Organizational Bureaucracy

References

• Abbot, K. & Snidal, D. (1998). Why states act through formal organizations. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42, 3-32.
• Aldenhoff, F. (2007). Are economic forecasts of the International Monetary Fund politically biased? A public choice analysis. Review of International Organizations, 2(3), 239-260.
• Axelrod, R. & Keohane, R. O. (1985). Achieving cooperation under anarchy: Strategies and institutions. World Politics, 38(1), 226-254.
• Baccini, L. & Urpelainen, J. (2014). International institutions and domestic politics: Can preferential trading agreements help leaders promote economic reform? Journal of Politics, 76(1), 195-2014.
• Baldwin, D. A. (1993). Neoliberalism, neorealism and world politics. Baldwin, D. A. (Ed.) Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Columbia University Press.
• Barnett, M. & Finnemore, F. (1999). The politics, power and pathologies of international organizations. International Organization, 53 (4), 699-732.
• Bearce, D. H. & Bondanella, S. (2007). Intergovernmental organizations, socialization, and member-state interest convergence. International Organization, 61(4), 703-733.
• Bernauer, T., Kalbhenn, A., Koubi, V., & Spilker, G. (2013). Is there a ‘depth versus participation’ dilemma in international cooperation? Review of International Organization, 8(1), 477-497.
• Blake, D. J. & Payton, A. L. (2015). Balancing Design Objectives: Analyzing new data on voting rules international organizations. Review of International Organizations 10(3), 377-402.
• Breen, M. (2013). The Politics of IMF Lending. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
• Bueno de Mequita, B., Morrow, J. D., Smith, A. & Siverson, R. M. (2003). The Logic of Political Survival. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Busch, M. L. & Reinhardt, E. (2003). Developing countries and general agreement on tariffs and trade/world trade organization dispute settlement. Journal of World Trade 37(4), 719-736.
• Caporaso, J. A. & Levine, D.P. (2003). Theories of Political Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Checkel, J. T. (2005). International institutions and socialization in Europe: Introduction and framework. International Organization, 59 (4), 801-826
• Chwieroth, J. M. (2013). The silent revolution: How the staff exercise informal governance over IMF lending. Review of International Organizations, 8(2), 265-90.
• Commons, J. R. (1931). Institutional economics. American Economic Review, 21(4), 648-657.
• Conybeare, J. A. C. (1984). Public goods, prisoners’ dilemma and international political economy. International Studies Quarterly 28 (1), 5-22.
• Deutsch, K. W. (1954). Political community at the international level: Problems of definitions and measurement. New York: Doubleday & Company.
• Downs, G. W., Rocke, D. M. & Barsoom, P. N. (1996). Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation? International Organization, 50 (3), 379–406.
• Dreher, A. & Michaelowa, K. (2008). The political economy of international organizations. Review of International Organizations, 3 (4), 331-334.
• Dreher, A. & Lang, V. F. (2016). The political economy of International organizations. CESifo Working Paper, No. 6077.
• Dreher, A., Sturm, J & Vreeland, J. R. (2009a). Global horse trading: IMF loans for votes in the United Nations Security Council. European Economic Review, 53 (7), 742-757.
• Dreher, A., Sturm, J. & Vreeland, J. R. (2009b). Development aid and international politics: Does membership on the UN Security Council influence World Bank decisions? Journal of Development Economics 88 (1), 1-18.
• Eichengreen, B. & Frankel, J. A. (1995). Economic regionalism: Evidence from two twentieth- century episodes. North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 6 (2), 89-106.
• Evans, P. (1995). Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Fearon, J. D. (1998). Bargaining, enforcement, and international cooperation. International Organization, 52 (2), 269-305.
• Finnemore, M. & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization 52 (4), 887–917.
• Frey, B. S. (2008). Outside and inside competition for international organizations: From analysis to innovations. Review of International Organizations 3(4), 335-350.
• Frohlich, N. & Oppenheimer, J. A. (1970). I get by with a little help from my friends. World Politics, 23(1), 104-120.
• Gilligan, J.M. (2009). The transaction costs approach to international institutions. Milner, H. V. & Moravcsik, A. (Eds.), Power, Interdependence, and Nonstate Actors in World Politics. Princeton University Press.
• Gilligan, M. J. (2004). Is there a broader-deeper trade-off in international multilateral agreements? International Organization, 58(3), 459-484.
• Gilpin, R. (1971). The politics of transnational economic relations. International Organization, 25 (3), 398-419.
• Gilpin, R. (1975). U.S. Power and the Multinational Corporation. New York: Basic.
• Gilpin, R. (1987). The political economy of international relations. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
• Gowa, J. (1994). Allies, Adversaries, and International Trade. Princeton, Nj: Princeton University Press.
• Grieco, J. (1993). The relative gains problem for international cooperation. American Political Science Review, 87 (3), 729-736.
• Grossman, G. M. & Helpman, E. (1994). Protection by sale. American Economic Review, 84 (4), 833-50.
• Grossman, G. M. & Helpman, E. (1995). The politics of free trade agreements. American Economic Review, 85 (4), 667-690.
• Hardin, R. (1982). Collective Action. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Harrigan, J., Wang, C. & El-Said, H. (2006). The Economic and political determinants of IMF and World Bank lending in the Middle East and North Africa. World Development, 34 (2), 247–270.
• Hawkins, D. G. & Jacoby, W. (2006) How agents matter. Hawkins, D., Lake, D., Nielson, D. & Tierney, M. J. (Eds.), Delegation and Agency in International Organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Heywood, A. (2019). Politics. London: MacMillan International.
• Johns, L. (2014). Depth versus rigidity in the design of international trade agreements. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 26(3), 468–495.
• Kahler, M. (1992). Multilateralism with small and large numbers. International Organization 46 (3), 681-708.
• Katzenstein, P. J., Keohane, R. O. & Krasner, S. (1998). International organization and the study of world politics. International Organization, 52 (4), 645-658.
• Keohane, R. O. (1982). The demand for international regimes. International Organization, 36(2), 325–355.
• Keohane, R. O. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Kindleberger, C. (1974). The World in Depression, 1929-39. Berkley: University of California Press.
• Kleine, M. (2013). Knowing your limits: Informal governance and judgment in the EU. Review of International Organizations, 8(2), 245-264.
• Koremenos, B. (2013). What’s left out and why? Informal provisions in formal international law. Review of International Organizations, 8(2), 137-62.
• Koremenos, B., Lipson, C. & Snidal, D. (2001). The rational design of international institutions. International Organization, 55 (4), 761-799.
• Krasner, S. D. (1978). Defending National Interest: Raw Materials Investments and US Foreign Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Krasner, S. D. (1983). Structural causes and regime consequences: Regimes as intervening variables. Krasner, S. D., (Ed.), International Regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
• Krasner, S. D. (1976). State power and the structure of international trade. World Politics, 28(3), 317-347.
• Kucik, J. & Reinhardt, E. (2008). Does flexibility promote cooperation? An application to the global trade regime. International Organization, 62(3), 477-505.
• Laswell, H. D. (1936). Politics: Who Gets What, When and How. New York: McGraw Hill.
• Mansfield, E. (1998). The proliferation of preferential trading arrangements. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42(5), 523-43.
• Mansfield, E. D. & Reinhardt, E. (2003). Multilateral determinants of regionalism: The effects of GATT/WTO on the formation of preferential trading agreements. International Organization, 57(4), 829-862.
• Mansfield, E. D. & Milner, H. V. (1999). The new wave of regionalism. International Organization, 53(3), 589-627.
• March, J. G. & Olson, J. P. (1998). The institutional dynamics of international political orders. International Organization, 52(4), 943-969.
• Marcoux, C. & Urpelainen, J. (2013). Non-compliance by design: Moribund hard law in international institutions. Review of International Organizations, 8(2), 163–191.
• Martin, L. L. (2017). Institutions and the global political economy. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics: http://politics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/ 9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-170.
• McCalman, P. (2002). Multi-lateral trade negotiations & the most favored nation clause. Journal of International Economics, 57(1), 151–176.
• Mearsheimer, J. (1994). The false promise of international institutions. International Security, 19 (3), 5-49.
• Milner, H. V., Rosendorff, B. P. & Mansfield, E. D. (2004). International trade and domestic politics: The domestic sources of international trade agreements and institutions. Benvenisti, E. & Hirsch, M. (Eds.), The Impact of International Law on International Cooperation: Theoretical Perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Morrison, K.M., (2013). Membership no Longer has its Privileges: The declining informal influence of board members on IDA lending. Review of International Organizations 8(2), 291-312.
• North, D.C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Oatley, T. (2012). International Political Economy. London: Routledge.
• Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action Problems: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Oye, K. A. (1985). Explaining cooperation under anarchy: Hypothesis and strategies, World Politics, 38(1), 1-24.
• Pelc, K. (2011). Why do some countries get better WTO accession terms than others? International Organization, 65(4), 639-672.
• Polak, J.J. (1994). The World Bank and the IMF: A Changing Relationship. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press.
• Polanyi, K. (2001). The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. Boston: Beacon.
• Pop‐Eleches, G. (2009). Public goods or political pandering: Evidence from IMF programs in Latin America and Eastern Europe. International Studies Quarterly, 53(3), 787-816.
• Posner, E.A. & Goldsmith, J. L. (2003). International Agreements: A rational choice approach. Virginia Journal of International Law, 44(1): 113-144.
• Przeworski, A. (2003). States and Markets: A Primer in Political Economy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The Logic of Two Level Games. International Organization, 42 (3), 427-460.
• Rickard, S. (2010). Democratic differences: Electoral institutions and compliance with GATT/WTO agreements. European Journal of International Relations, 16(4), 711–729.
• Rodrik, D. (2018). What do trade agreements really do? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32 (2), 73–90.
• Rosendorff, B. P. (2015). Domestic politics and international disputes. Martin, L. L. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Political Economy of International Trade. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Rosendorff, B.P. & Helen, V.M. (2001). The optimal design of international trade institutions: Uncertainty and escape. International Organization, 55(4), 829-857.
• Schimmelfennig, F. (2001). The community trap: liberal norms, rhetorical action, and the eastern enlargement of the European Union. International Organization, 55 (1), 47-80.
• Snidal, D. (1979). Public goods, property rights, and political organizations. International Studies Quarterly, 23(4), 532-566.
• Snidal, D. (1985a). Coordination versus prisoners’ dilemma: Implications for international regimes and cooperation. American Political Science Review, 79 (4), 923-942.
• Snidal, D. (1985b). The limits of hegemonic stability theory. International Organization, 39(4), 579-60.
• Snidal, D. (1991). International Cooperation among relative gains maximizers. International Studies Quarterly, 35(4), 387-402.
• Stein, A.A. (1982). Coordination and collaboration: Regimes in an anarchic world. International Organizations, 36 (2), 299-326.
• Steinberg, R. H. 2002. In the shadow of law or power? Consensus-based bargaining and outcomes in the GATT/WTO. International Organization, 56(2), 339-374.
• Stone, R. W. (2013). Informal Governance in International Organizations: Introduction to the Special Issue. The Review of International Organizations, 8(2), 121-36.
• Stone, R.W. (2004). The political economy of IMF lending in Africa. American Political Science Review, 98(4), 577-591.
• Tallberg, J. (2013). Transnational access to international institutions: Three Approaches. Jönsson, C. & Tallberg, J. (Eds.), The Opening Up of International Organizations:
• Transnational Access in Global Governance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Urpelainen, J. (2011). Early birds: Special interests and the strategic logic of international cooperation. Review of International Organizations, 6(2), 113-140.
• Vaubel, R. (2006). Principal-agent problems in International Organizations, Review of International Organizations 1(2), 125-138.
• Vaubel, R. (1986). A public Choice approach to international organization. Public Choice. 51(1), 39-57.
• Viner, J. (1948). Power vs. plenty as objectives of foreign policy in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. World Politics, 1(1), 1–29.
• Vreeland, J. R. (2007). The politics of IMF conditional lending. World Economics 8 (3), 185-93.
• Vreeland, J. R. (2008). Political institutions and human rights: Why dictatorships enter into the United Nations Convention Against Torture. International Organization 62 (1), 65-101.
• Waltz, K. N. (1986). Reflections on theory of international politics: A response to my critics. Keohane, R. O. (Ed.), Neorealism and Its Critics. New York Columbia University Press.