Book contents
- The Power of Global Performance Indicators
- The Power of Global Performance Indicators
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Ratings, Rankings, and Regulatory Behavior
- Part II The Normative Influence of Ratings and Rankings
- Part III Beyond and Within State
- Part IV Skeptical Voices
- 11 Third-Party Policymakers and the Limits of the Influence of Indicators
- 12 The Millennium Development Goals and Education
- 13 Global Performance Indicators: Themes, Findings, and an Agenda for Future Research
- Index
- Chapter 3: Appendices
- Chapter 4: Appendices
- Chapter 5: Appendix
- Chapter 6: Appendix
- Chapter 7: Appendix
- Chapter 8: Appendix
- Chapter 10: Appendix
- Chapter 11: Appendix
- Chapter 12: Appendix
- References
13 - Global Performance Indicators: Themes, Findings, and an Agenda for Future Research
from Part IV - Skeptical Voices
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 February 2020
Book contents
- The Power of Global Performance Indicators
- The Power of Global Performance Indicators
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Ratings, Rankings, and Regulatory Behavior
- Part II The Normative Influence of Ratings and Rankings
- Part III Beyond and Within State
- Part IV Skeptical Voices
- 11 Third-Party Policymakers and the Limits of the Influence of Indicators
- 12 The Millennium Development Goals and Education
- 13 Global Performance Indicators: Themes, Findings, and an Agenda for Future Research
- Index
- Chapter 3: Appendices
- Chapter 4: Appendices
- Chapter 5: Appendix
- Chapter 6: Appendix
- Chapter 7: Appendix
- Chapter 8: Appendix
- Chapter 10: Appendix
- Chapter 11: Appendix
- Chapter 12: Appendix
- References
Summary
Globalization, accountability, and technology are changing important aspects of global governance. While coercion, enforcement, and material sanctions have often taken pride of place as major movers of interstate relations, scholars and policy agents alike have come to appreciate the multifaceted nature of power exerted more subtly and gradually.
The proliferation of global performance indicators (GPIs) is one example of such power. They contain ideas and worldviews, and they attempt to “regulate” through non-coercive but nonetheless powerful means. They do not merely measure qualities and practices in order to understand or inform, they pressure their targets to perform and conform. In wielding such tools, a diverse set of actors insert themselves in the governing process, in some cases even shifting policy parameters. When promulgated by authoritative actors, GPIs can name and categorize information in new ways and have what anthropologists like Merry and others have referred to as “knowledge effects,” or the ability to influence how people think about socially legitimate or best practice. Their proliferation and evolution define and contest what is worth knowing, measuring and achieving.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Power of Global Performance Indicators , pp. 409 - 424Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Avant, Deborah D., Finnemore, Martha, and Susan, K. Sell, eds. 2010. Who Governs the Globe? Cambridge Studies in International Relations; 114. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bäckstrand, Karin. 2006. Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships for Sustainable Development: Rethinking Legitimacy, Accountability and Effectiveness. European Environment 16 (5):290–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, David A. 2016. Power and International Relations: A Conceptual Approach. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael, and Duvall, Raymond. 2005. Power in International Politics. International Organization 59 (1):39–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Börzel, Tanja, and Risse, Thomas. 2005. Public-Private Partnerships: Effective and Legitimate Tools of International Governance. In Complex Sovereignty, edited by Pauly, Lou and Grande, Edgar, 195–216. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Büthe, Tim. 2012. Beyond Supply and Demand: A Political-Economic Conceptual Model. In Governance by Indicators: Global Power Through Classification and Rankings, edited by Davis, Kevin, Fisher, Angelina, Kingsbury, Benedict and Merry, Sally Engle. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 29–51.Google Scholar
Creamer, Cosette D., and Simmons, Beth A.. 2018. The Dynamic Impact of Periodic Review on Women’s Rights. Law and Contemporary Problems 81 (4):31–72.Google Scholar
Creamer, Cosette D., and Simmons, Beth A.. forthcoming, 2020. Do Self-Reporting Regimes Matter? Evidence from the Convention Against Torture. International Studies Quarterly.Google Scholar
Davis, Kevin E., Kingsbury, Benedict, and Engle Merry, Sally. 2012. Indicators as a Technology of Global Governance. Law & Society Review 46 (1):71–104.Google Scholar
De Búrca, Gráinne, Keohane, Robert O., and Sabel, Charles. 2014. Global Experimentalist Governance. British Journal of Political Science 44 (3):477–86.Google Scholar
Grant, Ruth W., and Keohane, Robert O.. 2005. Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics. American Political Science Review 99 (1):29–43.Google Scholar
Hale, Thomas, and Held, David. 2011. Handbook of Transnational Governance. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Hale, Thomas, and Roger, Charles. 2014. Orchestration and Transnational Climate Governance. The Review of International Organizations 9 (1):59–82.Google Scholar
Halliday, Terence C. 2012. Legal Yardsticks: International Financial Institutions as Diagnosticians and Designers of the Laws of Nations. In Governance by Indicators: Global Power Through Quantification and Rankings, edited by Davis, Kevin E., Angelina, Fisher, Kingsbury, Benedict, and Engle Merry, Sally. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kelley, Judith. 2017. Scorecard Diplomacy: Grading States to Influence their Reputation and Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kelley, Judith, and Simmons, Beth A.. 2015. Politics by Number: Indicators as Social Pressure in International Relations. American Journal of Political Science 59 (1):1146–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, Judith G., Simmons, Beth A, and Doshi, Rush. this volume. The Power of Ranking: The Ease of Doing Business and Global Regulatory Behavior. Chapter 2 in The Power of Global Performance Indicators.Google Scholar
Kijima, Rie and Lipscy, Phillip Y. this volume. International Assessments and Education Policy: Evidence from an Elite Survey.Google Scholar
Löwenheim, Oded. 2008. Examining the State: A Foucauldian Perspective on International “Governance Indicators”. Third World Quarterly 29 (2):255–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Rourke, Dara. 2006. Multi-Stakeholder Regulation: Privatizing or Socializing Global Labor Standards? World Development 34 (5):899–918.Google Scholar
Osborne, Stephen. 2002. Public-Private Partnerships: Theory and Practice in International Perspective. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schäferhoff, Marco, Campe, Sabine, and Kaan, Christopher. 2009. Transnational Public-Private Partnerships in International Relations: Making Sense of Concepts, Research Frameworks, and Results. International Studies Review 11 (3):451–74.Google Scholar
Szyszczak, Erika. 2006. Experimental Governance: The Open Method of Coordination. European Law Journal 12 (4):486–502.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael. 2018. A Theory of Global Governance: Authority, Legitimacy, and Contestation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by