Civil society and global governance : the possibilities for global citizenship

In this article we reassert the role of governance as well as of civil society in the analysis of citizenship. We argue that to analyse global civil society and global citizenship it is necessary to focus on global governance. Just as states may facilitate or obstruct the emergence and development of national civil society, so too global governance institutions may facilitate or obstruct an emerging global civil society. Our key contention is that civil society at the global level thrives through its interaction with strong facilitating institutions of global governance. We start with a discussion of civil society and citizenship within the nation-state, and from there develop a model of global civil society and citizenship. Through analysing the impacts of various modes of global governance, we identify strategically appropriate forms of political and social engagement that best advance the prospects for global citizenship.

Good global governance : custom, the cosmopolitan and international law

International law has both less and more to offer to the cosmopolitan project than one might think. As currently understood, international law presages a global system of obligations comprising the convergent systems of universal customary international laws and near-universal conventional instruments (treaties), both of which legal forms are characterised by natural law tendencies. From the point of view of a pluralistic cosmopolitanism, this is a dead end. Thinking beyond these formulae requires that international law be treated as a species of general law rather than state-centred law.

Reconsidering the state : cosmopolitanism, republicanism and global governance

Cosmopolitan arguments for global forms of democracy and governance have intensified in the last decade because of the increasing significance of transnational interconnections and the increased impact of global problems. However, questions remain as to how cosmopolitan structures are going to be realized in practice, given the continued significance of the state in global politics. This paper advocates the importance of considering republican arguments for redeveloping the state alongside the proposals for global democratic structures advocated by political cosmopolitans such as David Held. It contends that many forms of cosmopolitan thought are too quick to dismiss the state as a potential locus of ethical global governance and that republican conceptions of the state and political practice are important counterpoints to political cosmopolitanism. Consequently, this paper critically considers the assumptions embedded in the literature of political cosmopolitanism in relation to the proposals for global democracy and governance. Then the paper considers republican arguments that developing civically minded citizens and responsive state institutions could be a crucial foundation for transnational forms of governance to be realized in practice. The paper then concludes by considering the practical tensions between republican and cosmopolitan proposals.

Global governance in the collective interest : between complex multilateralism and networked governance

This paper navigates the theoretical landscape between the concepts of Robert O’Brien et al’s ‘Complex Multilateralism’ and Anne-Marie Slaughter’s ‘Networked Governance’ to make both an empirical and normative argument about the practices of Global Governance. By incorporating state and non-state actors, as well as overlapping international regimes and institutions in the practices of Global Governance, this paper argues that the transition from traditional multilateralism, based almost solely on the activity of states, towards varying degrees of complex multilateralism is both clearly evident and gathering pace. A stronger form of complex multilateralism would appear to be heading towards what Slaughter describes as ‘Networked Governance’ that would see a rejection of a centralized approach to global governance. The paper takes this concept into consideration and maps out how this may, or may not, be an effective approach to Global Governance.

The prospects of deliberative global governance in the G20: legitimacy, accountability, and public contestation

This article contends that the ‘G’ system struggles to play a legitimate and effective role in global governance and argues that the G20 could play a important role if the forum was more publically accountable. This article argues that because of increasing forms of public contestation, the broadening agenda of the G8 and G20 and the uncertain status of global cooperation, that the legitimacy of the ‘G’ system is being questioned. As such, it is appropriate to consider deliberative avenues whereby public views could be considered by the G20 in a systematic way to foster forms of accountability. This consideration is animated by deliberative democracy theory and republican theory which advance a normative agenda which seeks to transform governance structures by enhancing the role of deliberation and public reasoning in political life. The article outlines the development of the ‘G’ system's legitimacy, considers possible modes of accountability and public involvement with respect to the G20 and examines the implications of more formalised public deliberation with respect to the G20.

Liberty beyond neo-liberalism: a republican critique of liberal governance in a globalising age

Steven Slaughter examines whether liberals can govern in a way that promotes liberty and moderates the significant social dislocation associated with neo-liberalism and economic globalisation. This book critically evaluates the potential of various liberal arguments to adequately address the harmful social aspects of economic globalisation in three distinct stages. First, it examines the configuration of contemporary economic globalisation and the consequences of this process for liberal thought and governance. Second, it examines contemporary liberal approaches by critically examining a series of liberal texts that provide practical alternative schemes of governance. Third, in finding these contemporary liberal arguments insufficient to the task of a socially responsible regulation of economic globalisation, the book concludes with an innovative scheme that stems from neo-Roman republican political theory.
This alternate approach is termed global civic republicanism and seeks to retrieve the public and civic character of the state in order to provide its citizens protection from economic vulnerability and thereby constitute a resilient form of individual liberty. As such, the philosophical and practical resources that support the idea of republican states are outlined and contrasted with cosmopolitan modes of thought. The legacy of republican ideas in respect to political economy, world politics and global governance are also examined.

Global social justice at the WTO? The role of NGOs in constructing global social contracts

Over the past decade, international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have been contesting the neo-liberal economic order in international politics by campaigning for normative conditions to bring about what Richard Falk calls 'humane governance'. However, the degree to which NGOs have contributed to the formation of global social contracts remains controversial. While NGO activists and various scholars advocate the establishment of such contracts, empirical testing of this normative argument is underdeveloped. Drawing upon this lack of empirical support, critics dismiss the global social contract concept and question the roles played by NGOs in international politics. This article addresses the controversy through a review, refinement and application of global social contract theory and an empirical study of two prominent international NGO campaigns directed at the World Trade Organization (WTO), an institution that represents a 'hard test case'. It explores the ways in which NGOs and their networks are challenging the neo-liberal basis of WTO agreements and contributing to the emergence of global social contracts. The article concludes that in some circumstances, NGOs have the capacity to inject social justice into international economic contracts and there is some basis for optimism regarding the formation of global social contracts involving NGOs, nation-states and international organizations.

Reconsidering institutional cosmopolitanism : global poverty and the importance of the state in international political theory

Cosmopolitan scholarship has been at the forefront of efforts to consider political structures capable of realising justice in a more robust manner than prevailing global governance arrangements. In particular, the arguments of Thomas Pogge have contributed significantly to scholarly thinking about global poverty and his scheme of 'institutional cosmopolitanism' aspires to institutionalise human rights in the structures of global governance. This essay critiques the capacity of Pogge's cosmopolitan approach to productively guide political action in relation to global poverty by questioning whether global institutions generated by human rights are sufficient to address global poverty. The argument in this essay is that a viable guide to political action which alleviates global poverty must also take account of the potential utility of the state. This essays draws upon republican ideas to contend that cosmopolitanism needs to encompass a robust account of local institutions such as the state.

Gillian Brock, Global justice : a cosmopolitan account

This is a review of Gillian Brock’s new book, Global justice: a cosmopolitan account (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009) which sets out the central theses of the book and then offers a critical appraisal of its central arguments. My specific concern is that Brock gives an insufficiently robust account of human rights with which to define the nature of global justice and thereby leaves cosmopolitanism too vulnerable to the normative pull of local and traditional moral conceptions that fall short of the universalism that cosmopolitans should be able to embrace.

Debating the international legitimacy of the G20: global policymaking and contemporary international society

There have been growing debates about the legitimacy and the future of the G20 (the Group of Twenty) leaders forum despite this forum playing a prominent role in response to the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. While states within the G20 assert the legitimacy of the G20, states outside the G20 actively question this forum’s legitimacy. This article contends that while the G20 is important to contemporary global governance and efforts to create a common framework of rules for global capitalism, this ongoing debate demonstrates that the legitimacy of the G20 is fundamentally uncertain and problematic because the G20’s membership and connection to existing forms of multilateralism remain contentious. This article contends that G20 leaders need to consider these issues in light of the prevailing expectations of states in contemporary international society.