Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T20:59:35.412Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - International Bureaucracies

from Part I - The Building Blocks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 April 2020

By
Dominique De Wit ,
Abby Lindsay Ostovar ,
Steffen Bauer  and
Sikina Jinnah
Edited by
Frank Biermann  and
Rakhyun E. Kim
Frank Biermann
Affiliation:
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
Rakhyun E. Kim
Affiliation:
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
Get access

Summary

A growing literature recognizes treaty secretariats and other international bureaucracies as distinctive actors in global environmental governance. These actors exhibit varying degrees of autonomy, authority and influence on environmental governance processes and outcomes. This chapter reviews recent scholarship on international bureaucracies and highlights the distinct ways in which they exert influence beyond their narrow functional mandates. More specifically, this chapter highlights how international bureaucracies influence governance processes by deriving authority from structural characteristics of the international system, exerting influence from their ability to deliver specific administrative and governance functions and leveraging their organizational autonomy. The chapter outlines empirical and conceptual gaps in our understanding of how international bureaucracies function in global environmental governance, and argues that the dynamics of change in world politics may open new pathways of influence for these actors moving forward.

Keywords

Secretariatstransnational actorsbureaucratic authorityinternational bureaucracies
Type
Chapter
Information
Architectures of Earth System Governance
Institutional Complexity and Structural Transformation
 , pp. 57 - 74
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D., & Zangl, B. (eds.) (2015). International organizations as orchestrators. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D., & Zangl, B. (2016). Two logics of indirect governance: Delegation and orchestration. British Journal of Political Science, 46 (4), 719–29.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2010). International regulation without international government: Improving IO performance through orchestration. Review of International Organizations, 5 (3), 315–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allan, J. I., & Hadden, J. (2017). Exploring the framing power of NGOs in global climate politics. Global Environmental Politics, 26 (4), 600–20.Google Scholar
Andonova, L. B., Betsill, M. M., & Bulkeley, H. (2009). Transnational climate governance. Global Environmental Politics, 9 (2), 52–73.Google Scholar
Andresen, S., & Rosendal, K. (2009). The role of the United Nations Environment Programme in the coordination of multilateral environmental agreements. In Biermann, F, Siebenhüner, B, & Schreyögg, A (eds.), International organisations in global environmental governance (pp. 133–50). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. N., & Finnemore, M. (1999). The politics, power, and pathologies of international organizations. International Studies Quarterly, 53 (4), 699–732.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. N., & Finnemore, M. (2004). Rules for the world: International organizations in global politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, M. W., & Ege, J. (2017). A matter of will and action: The bureaucratic autonomy of international public administrations. In Bauer, M. W., Knill, C, & Eckhard, S (eds.), International bureaucracy: Challenges and lessons for public administration research (pp. 13–41). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bauer, S., Andresen, S., & Biermann, F. (2012). International bureaucracies. In Biermann, F, & Pattberg, P (eds.), Global environmental governance reconsidered (pp. 27–44). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, S., Busch, P. O., & Siebenhüner, B. (2009). Treaty secretariats in global environmental governance. In Biermann, F, Siebenhüner, B, & Schreyögg, A (eds.), International organisations in global environmental governance (pp. 174–91). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bauer, S. (2009). The secretariat of the United Nations Environment Programme: Tangled up in blue. In Biermann, F, & Siebenhüner, B (eds.), Managers of global change: The influence of international environmental bureaucracies (pp. 169–202). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, S. (2006). Does bureaucracy really matter? The authority of intergovernmental treaty secretariats in global environmental politics. Global Environmental Politics, 6 (1), 23–49.Google Scholar
Bauer, S., & Weinlich, S. (2011). International bureaucracies: Organizing world politics. In Reinalda, B (ed.), The Ashgate research companion to non-state actors (pp. 251–62). Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Betsill, M. M., & Corell, E. (2008). NGO diplomacy: The influence of nongovernmental organizations in international environmental negotiations. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Beetham, D. (1987). Bureaucracy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., & Siebenhüner, B. (2009). Managers of global change: The influence of international environmental bureaucracies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., Betsill, M. M., Gupta, J. et al. (2009). Earth system governance: People, places and the planet. Science and implementation plan of the Earth System Governance Project. Bonn: Earth System Governance Project.Google Scholar
Biermann, F. (2014). Earth system governance: World politics in the Anthropocene. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bulkeley, H., Andonova, L. B., Betsill, M. M. et al. (2014). Transnational climate change governance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burch, S., Gupta, A., Inoue, C. Y. A. et al. (2019). New directions in earth system governance research. Earth System Governance, 1.Google Scholar
Busch, P. O. (2009). The climate secretariat: Making a living in a straitjacket. In Biermann, F, & Siebenhüner, B (eds.), Managers of global change: The influence of international environmental bureaucracies (pp. 75–99). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busch, P. O. (2014). Independent influence of international public administrations: Contours and future directions of an emerging research strand. In Kim, S, Ashley, S, & Lambright, W. H. (eds.), Public administration in the context of global governance (pp. 45–62). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Chan, S., Brandi, C., & Bauer, S. (2016). Aligning transnational climate action with international climate governance: The road from Paris. Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, 25 (2), 238–47.Google Scholar
Cutler, C., Haufler, V., & Porter, T. (1999). Private authority in international affairs. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Depledge, J. (2005). The organization of global negotiations: Constructing the climate change regime. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Depledge, J. (2007). A special relationship: Chairpersons and the secretariat in the climate change negotiations. Global Environmental Politics, 7 (1), 45–68.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, K., & Pattberg, P. (2009). Actors, arenas, and issues in global governance. In Whitman, J (ed.), Palgrave advances in global governance (pp. 41–65). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. S. (2017). The meanings of life for non-state actors in climate politics. Environmental Politics, 26 (4), 789–99.Google Scholar
Earth System Governance Project (2018). Earth system governance: Science and implementation plan of the Earth System Governance Project. Utrecht: Earth System Governance Project.Google Scholar
Eckhard, S., & Ege, J. (2016). International bureaucracies and their influence on policy-making: A review of empirical evidence. Journal of European Public Policy, 23 (7), 960–78.Google Scholar
Ege, J. (2017). Comparing the autonomy of international public administrations: An ideal-type approach. Public Administration, 95 (3), 555–70.Google Scholar
Elsig, M. (2010). The World Trade Organization at work: Performance in a member-driven milieu. Review of International Organizations, 5 (3), 345–63.Google Scholar
Gehring, T. (2011). The institutional complex of trade and environment: Toward an interlocking governance structure and a division of labor. In Oberthür, S & Schram Stokke, O (eds.), Managing institutional complexity: Regime interplay and global environmental change (pp. 227–54). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gordon, D. J., & Johnson, C. A. (2017). The orchestration of global urban climate governance: Conducting power in the post-Paris climate regime. Environmental Politics, 26 (4), 694–714.Google Scholar
Green, J. F. (2013). Rethinking private authority: Agents and entrepreneurs in global environmental governance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gruber, J. E. (1987). Controlling bureaucracies. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hadden, J. (2015). Networks in contention. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, T. (2016). All hands on deck: The Paris Agreement and non-state climate action. Global Environmental Politics, 16 (3), 12–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, T., & Roger, C. (2014). Orchestration and transnational governance. Review of International Organization, 9 (1), 59–82.Google Scholar
Hall, N. (2016). Displacement, development, and climate change: International organizations moving beyond their mandates. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.) (2006). Delegation under anarchy: States, international organizations and principal-agent theory. In Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.), Delegation and agency in international organizations (pp. 3–38). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, D. G., & Jacoby, W. (2006). How agents matter. In Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.), Delegation and agency in international organizations (pp. 199–228). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickmann, T. (2015). Rethinking authority in global climate governance: How transnational climate initiatives relate to the international climate regime. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hickmann, T., & Elsässer, J. (2018). New alliances in global environmental governance: Intergovernmental treaty secretariats and sub- and non-state actors. Paper presented at the General Conference of the European Consortium for Political Research, Hamburg.Google Scholar
Hickmann, T., Widerberg, O., Lederer, M., & Pattberg, P. (2019). The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat as an orchestrator in global climate policymaking. International Review of Administrative Sciences, in press.Google Scholar
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2015). Delegation and pooling in international organizations. Review of International Organizations, 10 (3), 305–28.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S., & Morin, J. F. (Forthcoming 2020). Greening through trade: How American trade policy has promoted environmental protection abroad. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S., & Lindsay, A. (2015). Secretariat influence on trade-environment politics: NAFTA’s Commission on Environmental Cooperation. Review of Policy Research, 32 (1), 124–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2010). Overlap management in the World Trade Organization: Secretariat influence on trade-environment politics. Global Environmental Politics, 11 (2), 54–79.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2011). Marketing linkages: Secretariat governance of the climate-biodiversity interface. Global Environmental Politics, 11 (3), 23–43.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2014). Post-treaty politics: Secretariat influence in global environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, T. (2013). Looking beyond states: Openings for international bureaucrats to enter the institutional design process. Review of International Organizations, 8, 499–519.Google Scholar
Johnson, T., & Urpelainen, J. (2014). International bureaucrats and the formation of intergovernmental organizations: Institutional design discretion sweetens the pot. International Organization 68, 177–209.Google Scholar
Jönsson, C. (2017). IR paradigms and inter-organizational theory: Situating the research program within the discipline. In Koops, J, & Biermann, R (eds.), Palgrave handbook of inter-organizational relations in world politics (pp. 49–62). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Jordan, A. J., Huitema, D., Hildén, M. et al. (2015). Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects. Nature Climate Change, 5, 977–82.Google Scholar
Jörgens, H., Kolleck, N., & Saerbeck, B. (2016).Exploring the hidden influence of international treaty secretariats: Using social network analysis to analyse the Twitter debate on the ‘Lima Work Programme on Gender’. Journal of European Public Policy, 23 (7), 979–98.Google Scholar
Jörgens, H., Kolleck, N., Saerbeck, B., & Well, M. (2016). Orchestrating (bio-)diversity: The secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity as an attention-seeking bureaucracy. In Bauer, M, Knill, C, & Eckhard, S (eds.), International Bureaucracy (pp. 73–95). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Knill, C., Eckhard, S., & Grohs, S. (2016). Administrative styles in the European Commission and the OSCE secretariat: Striking similarities despite different organizational settings. Journal of European Public Policy, 23 (7), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littoz-Monnet, A. (2017). Expert knowledge as a strategic resource: International bureaucrats and the shaping of bioethical standards. International Studies Quarterly, 0, 1–12.Google Scholar
Morin, J. F., & Jinnah, S. (2018). The untapped potential of preferential trade agreements for climate governance. Environmental Politics, 27 (3), 541–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholson, S., Jinnah, S., & Gillespie, A. (2018). Solar radiation management: A proposal for immediate polycentric governance. Climate Policy, 18 (3), 322–34.Google Scholar
Pattberg, P. H. (2007). Private Institutions and Global Governance: The New Politics of Environmental Sustainability. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Prideaux, M. (2015). Wildlife NGOs: From adversaries to collaborators. Global Policy, 6 (4), 379–88.Google Scholar
Raustiala, K., & Victor, D. G. (2004). The regime complex for plant genetic resources. International Organization, 58 (2), 277–309.Google Scholar
Reinalda, B., & Verbeek, B. (eds.) (2003). Autonomous policy making by international organizations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reinalda, B. (2011). The Ashgate research companion to non-state actors. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Roger, C., Hale, T., & Andonova, L. B. (2017). The comparative politics of transnational climate governance. International Interactions, 43 (1), 1–25.Google Scholar
Siebenhüner, B. (2009). The biodiversity secretariat: Lean shark in troubled waters. In Biermann, F, & Siebenhüner, B (eds.), Managers of global change: The influence of international environmental bureaucracies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Stone, D., & Ladi, S. (2015). Global policy and transnational administration. Public Administration, 93 (4), 839–55.Google Scholar
Weinlich, S. (2014). The UN secretariat’s influence on the evolution of peacekeeping. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2017). Governing complex systems: Social capital for the Anthropocene. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R., Underdal, A., Kanie, N., & Kim, R. E. (2017). Goal setting in the Anthropocene: The ultimate challenge for planetary stewardship. In Kanie, N, & Biermann, F (eds.), Governing through goals: Sustainable Development Goals as governance innovation (pp. 53–74). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Zelli, F., & van Asselt, H. (2013). The institutional fragmentation of global environmental governance: Causes, consequences, and responses. Global Environmental Politics, 13 (3), 1–13.Google Scholar
Zürn, M. (1998). The rise of international environmental politics: A review of current research. World Politics 50 (4), 617–49.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×