Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:51:03.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Non-state actors and international outcomes*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

P. A. Reynolds
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In an earlier paper Dr. R. D. McKinlay and I argued that the concept of interdependence was useless as a research tool since it was used to cover such wide and disparate ranges of phenomena that it virtually became a summary description of the current state of the international system, in which it was impossible to disentangle cause, consequence, and manifestation. We suggested that the varieties of literature subsumed under the term did none the less call attention to a number of important questions that need to be explored, among them the following:

Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , July 1979 , pp. 91 - 111
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 1979

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

page 91 note 1 McKinlay, R. D. and Reynolds, P. A., ‘The Concept of Interdependence: its uses and misuses’ in Goldmann, K. and Sjoberg, G. (eds.), Power, Capabilities, Interdependence (forth coming)Google Scholar.

page 91 note 2 Ibid.

page 91 note 3 Rosenau, J. N., ‘Pre-theories and Theories of Foreign Policy’ in Farrell, R. B. (ed.), Approaches to Comparative and International Politics (Evanston, 1968)Google Scholar.

page 92 note 1 Ruggie, J. G., ‘International responses to technology’ in International Organization 29, (1975), p. 589Google Scholar.

page 94 note 1 Blake, D. H. and Walters, R. S., The Politics of Global Economic Relations (New Jersey 1976), p. 116Google Scholar.

page 95 note 1 Although the desire of part of the British delegation to have the distinction between status and function formally recognized in the Principles of the United Nations Charter was not accepted at the San Francisco Conference in 1945. See Reynolds, P. A. and Hughes, E. J., The Historian as Diplomat (London, 1976), p. 45.Google Scholar

page 97 note 1 Ruggie, op. cit. pp. 579–81.

page 99 note 1 Allison, G. T., Essence of Decision (Boston, 1971), pp. 144–85Google Scholar.

page 102 note 1 Wallerstein, I., The Modern World System (New York, 1974)Google Scholar.

page 102 note 2 Cooper, R. N., The Economics of Interdependence(New York, 1968), p. 82Google Scholar

page 103 note 1 The extensive literature that now exists in this field includes the following: Behrman, J. N., National Interests and the Multinational Enterprise (New Jersey, 1970)Google Scholar; Dunning, J. H. (ed.), The Multinational Enterprise (London, 1972)Google Scholar; Gilpin, R., United States Power and Multinational Corporation (London, 1976)Google Scholar; Kindleberger, C. P., The Multinational Corporation (Boston, 1970)Google Scholar; Paquet, G., The Multinational Firm and the Nation State (New York, 1972)Google Scholar; Murray, R., Multinational Companies and Nation States (Spokesman Books, 1975)Google Scholar; Vernon, R., Sovereignty at Bay (New York, 1969)Google Scholar; Vernon, R., Multinational Enterprise and National Security, Adelphi Papers, No. 74 (Institute for Strategic Studies, London, 1971)Google Scholar.

page 104 note 1 For a fuller development of this argument see Diaz-Alejandro, C. F., ‘North-South Relations: the Economic Component’ in Bergsten, G. F. and Krause, Lawrence B. (eds.), World Politics and International Economics (New York, 1975), pp. 213–243Google Scholar.

page 104 note 2 These issues are extensively discussed in Skolnikoff, E. B., The International Imperative of Technology (Institute of International Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 1972)Google Scholar, upon which much of the argument in this section relies.

page 107 note 1 Pendley, R. and Scheinman, L.‘International Safeguarding as Institutionalized Collective Behaviour’ in International Organization, 29 (1975), pp. 585–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

page 107 note 2 For a full discussion of the politics-technology nexus involved in the establishment of Intelsat see Levy, S. A., ‘INTELSAT: technology, politics and the transformation of a regime’ in International Organization, 29 (1975), pp. 655–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

page 108 note 1 Blake, D. H., ‘Trade Unions and the Challenge of the MNC’ in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 403 (1972), p. 41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

page 109 note 1 Deutsch, K. W. and Singer, J. D.: ‘Multipolar Systems and International Stability’ in World Politics, xvi (1964), pp. 390–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar.