theoretical approaches to international organizations
Sociological neo-institutionalism operates with a notion of institution that is more closely connected to features of organizations and their emergence. Roles, Types, and Definitions of International Organizations Some of the occupants of boundary roles are grasped as key persons (Rese, Gemnden, & Baier, 2013) who occupy distinct roles. theoretical approaches will be questions about the normative perspective, we . approach, international organizations are crucial for fur thering normative . Today, IR scholars interested in global order can choose among at least five theoretical approaches for examining inter-organizational relations: sociological neo-institutionalism, resource dependence, network accounts, regime complexity, and classical pragmatism. The resource dependence approach has been applied to security issues and aspects of economic development. This maxim implies that speakers, for instance, do not have the meaning of what they say at their own disposal just as sculptors do not have the meaning of their sculptures at theirs. Whereas both institutional and organizational approaches were originally formulated for domestic structures, institutionalists have been more receptive to exploring domestic-international analogies and contrasts. However, the principle of coordination turned out to be an unmet goal (Hensell, 2015, p. 13)a rational myth invoked to gain acceptance. Whereas environments are introduced as broad, given, or pre-established, the term organizational fields is used to denote those parts of environments that consist of organizations with similar tasks. Their examination starts from the following assumption: both structures of corporate practice and what is brought about by those who operate in and for them can be conceived as ideas to which human beings are loyal (Roos, 2015, pp. They are social creations per se. 9899). Sociological neo-institutionalism is known as the Stanford School approach, at least in organization studies. New institutional economics perspective on organizations such as firms in terms of efficiency, profit, and transaction costs (Coase, 1960; Williamson, 1979) is considered too tight. It shows that the Secretariat of the International Air Transport Association, a nongovernmental organization of then 120 (and today 250) airlines mainly concerned with negotiating international airfares, successfully used its linking-pin position to mobilize the network against U.S. attempts to liberalize pricing (Jnsson, 1986, pp. PDF The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations and Ph.D. in Sociology. p.7028-7045 Abstract Contemporary approaches to the study of international organization in IR (International Relations) scholarship are subsumed and reviewed under three key words: institution, organization and governance. The present mode of presentation, however, does not deny the originality of these writings. Against this background, the inter-organizational account rooted in classical pragmatism also aims at transcending the rationalist-constructivist divide. Correspondingly, human beings are grasped as the only actors. 132144; Gehring & Faude, 2014, pp. In sociology, psychology, and administration science, but also in economics and business studies, sensitivity to the topic began to rise back in the 1960s and 1970s. The classical pragmatist attempt to examine inter-organizational relations draws on the concept of structures of corporate practice (Roos, 2010; Franke & Roos, 2010). The term space of possibilities refers to what single human beings can and cannot do. Aspects of external (military) intervention, for instance, are made sense of by means of the concept of decoupling (Lipson, 2007; Hensell, 2015). On the other hand, it is constrained by the opportunities to act provided by the structures of corporate practice in which a person is involved. 397399) andan elective affinitythe resource dependence approach (Gulati & Gargiulo, 1999; Cook, 1977; Galaskiewicz, 1985; Biermann, 2008). 183185). It is a kind of meta-structure that is embedding all human beings and binds them together. Combined, the process of life or politics makes up a dialectic relationship between actors and structures. In addition, the regime complexity approach is built upon the premise that state actors are strategic actors that rationally engage in regimes to realize their own goals and preferences (Betts, 2013, p. 78; Keohane & Victor, 2011, p. 8). In this case, the causal chain sets in on the level of organizations dependence on each other. The environment in which networks are embedded comes in as structure, too. Theoretical approaches. Finally, the international aviation network linking governments and airlines has been addressed in a pioneering study on transnational networking in the mid-1980s (Jnsson, 1986). The study of international organizations (IOs) has been described as lacking theoretical depth. Three theoretical traditions have emerged, dealing with institutions, organization, and governance. In addition to the terms regime and (global) governance, other key concepts of the regime complexity approach are: functional overlap, (regulative) competition, adaptation, differentiation, and division of labor. They are less fixed and stable but not unstable. . In the case of coercive isomorphism, the pressure to adapt may be felt as force, as persuasion, or as invitations to join in collusion (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983, p. 150). For sociological neo-institutionalists, organizations are embedded in world society and shaped by its norms, values, and other institutionalized elements referred to as powerful myths (Meyer & Rowan, 1977), mostly through rationalized others of whom world society is considered to be mainly made up of (Meyer, Boli, Thomas, & Ramirez, 1997, p. 162). They are: (i) the world must be divided into a number of states which function as independent political units, (ii) and a substantial measure of contact exists between them, (iii) The states must develop an awareness of problems which arise out of their coexistence, and, on this basis (iv) come to recognize the need for creation of institutional. It is of relevance in this context that the autonomy of organizational actors is conceptualized as being restricted. The introductory chapter situates the study of international organization in the English School theory of international society with additional inspiration from other approaches, especially constructivism. 4647, 5051, 55). 150154). . International Organization53, 4,Autumn 1999, pp. Sociological neo-institutionalism, as its name suggests, emanates from sociology exclusively; resource dependence is rooted in economics and sociology, while network accounts have their foundations in psychology and sociology. Theoretical Approaches to International Organization Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice). 161170)regardless of the prominent warning not to frame discussions in IR along philosophical issues (Fearon & Wendt, 2002, p. 53). This body of organization theory informs neoliberal and neorealist debates over international . 126127), but it can also be informed by Herbert Simons concept of bounded rationality (Alter & Meunier, 2009, p. 18). NATO and the UN, for instance, are found to exchange military capabilities with civilian expertise and legitimacy in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. 2830). From this angle, the regime complexity approach can also be grasped as a theoretical underpinning of global governance accounts. Furthermore, it clarifies the ontological status of fundamental institutions as inter-subjectively real. However, cooperation within it is mainly restricted to information sharing and impeded by situational and structural factors such as conflicting political views or members concerns about preserving their autonomy (Biermann, 2008, pp. Among the inhibitive consequences of functional overlaps are turf battles over the functional and geographic scope of institutions (Hofmann, 2009, p. 49), lack of hierarchy, and increasing costs of changing strategies over time (Struett, Nance, & Armstrong, 2013, p. 95). Stability in networks is provided by reciprocity. To prevent one-sided dependency, they strive for balanced exchange ratios and to maintain interdependence (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978, p. 42). The concept of inter-organizational relations supported by the resource dependence approach is compatible with competitive and cooperative organizational strategies and mostly characterized by differences in power (Cook, 1977, p. 75). These ideas materialize in the process of world politics and represent (potential) contributions to global order. The second type of rules is linked to the configuration of a structure of corporate practice. The first type refers to the constitutive problem of a structure of corporate practice (and its substructures) as well as to its relations with other structures of corporate practice. (PDF) Theories on the role of international organizations in As it enables (organizational) action, the structure of an inter-organizational network is considered an opportunity structure (Cook, 1977, p. 68, referencing Emerson). This chapter discusses the adoption of a multi-theoretical approach to studying international business (IB) strategy. Three types of rules for action are distinguished. Put differently, organizations face the following trade-off: organizations want to accomplish their tasks and to maintain their autonomy. For helpful comments on former versions of this article Id kindly like to thank Peter Mayer, Sebastian Mayer, Sebastian Streb, an anonymous reviewer, and the editors. 386388). 699-732 . The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) against money laundering established in 1989 on an initiative by the G-7, to begin with, is described as a problem-oriented and flexible, influential and effective, complex and legitimate network that successfully internationalizes U.S. legislation (Jakobi, 2012, pp. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice). State actors are considered to turn against this order only when the constellation of power and interests has changed or when governance functions are redistributed (Faude, 2015, pp. Created by the UN General Assembly in 1992, the IASC is a striking example of inter-organizational relations. When applied to inter-organizational relations, the pragmatist approach focuses on security and humanitarian issues. Inter-Organizational Relations: Five Theoretical Approaches Thus, the corresponding approach to analyze inter-organizational relations has its source in (political and social) philosophy as well as sociology. This paper 'International Organizations - Comparison of Theoretical Approaches" focuses on the fact that analysts can use the idea of global governance to describe the current world order and come up with the best strategy to visualize the idea. In terms of the Aristotelian differentiation between active (efficient and final) as well as constitutive (material and formal) causes (Kurki, 2006), the pragmatist approach operates on the following ascriptions of causality: what human actors bring about due to their competence to act is referred to as efficient causes. Inquiries into these kinds of inter-organizational relations and the patterns of world order they bring about will surely bear much fruit. First answers to these questions indicate that research is restricted by a focus on dyadic relations, the same policy field, or organizations of the same type, say intergovernmental organizations. However, this premise is modified in that the homogenizing effects of bureaucratization and rationalization are not primarily attributed to the need for efficiency (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983, p. 147), but to structural effects of the environment in which organizations operate. It was only after international organizations and their subunits had increasingly been addressed as autonomous (bureaucratic) actors (Finnemore, 1993; Pollack, 1997; Barnett & Finnemore, 1999) that IRs path was paved for the study of inter-organizational relations in the course of the 1990s. Organizations thus begin and maintain relations with others mostly to procure resources, as they seldom produce, control, or have available all the resources they need to accomplish their tasks. Moreover, the variety of approaches has entailed multifaceted knowledge of the internal workings as well as the global effects of IOs. Examinations of competition and conflict already take place but should be strongly encouraged and expanded. Regime complexes generate undesired regulatory competition among organizations (Gehring & Faude, 2014, p. 480; Alter & Meunier, 2009, p. 20) andas states can pick those organizations that fit their interests bestnew opportunities for strategic action (Gehring & Faude, 2013, p. 126; Raustiala & Victor, 2004, p. 299). introduces new cases in many chapters. Both stand in a relation of mutual constitution. 307 -8CrossRef Google Scholar. The latter is marked by uncertainty, scarce resources, and interdependence among its units. Neo-liberalists strongly argue that the very act of entering into an. However, the conceptual shift from environment to organizational fields reduces this problem (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). All Rights Reserved. 283285), this happens in a functional and non-intended way. Unlike negotiated and imposed orders (Young, 1982, pp. The pragmatist approach is built on Peirces premise that beliefs guide human action, mostly as routines. . 4243). The regime complexity approach relies on the theory of regimes. Such an adaptation process is considered to result in both a differentiation of organizational rule-making and an inter-organizational division of labor that facilitates state gains from cooperation (Faude, 2015, pp. The regime complexity approach starts from the assumption that inter-organizational relations significantly contribute to global order by intended and unintended effects of strategic state action (Faude, 2015, p. 297). Theoretical Background: Organizational Theories and the Research on Beliefs as rules for action are conceived as final causes. Network accounts are often fused with the resource dependence approach. It established the following policy aims: to emancipate ESDP from U.S. hegemony, to set up autonomous European security instruments beyond NATO, and to strengthen EU influence on NATOs design and operations (Roos, 2010, pp. In addition to security issues, the resource dependence approach has prominently been applied to explicate organizations openness for transnational actors (Liese, 2010) and cooperation in the anti-corruption realm (Gest & Grigorescu, 2010). The critical focus of my article, however, is not the modern IO literature per se but, rather, those strands in the IO and international relations literature that . This approach does not make our explanation ' ' mere descrip- . 1. Theoretical Tradition and Key Concepts. 220, 229). Finally, current research is restricted by the still dominant equation of (inter-organizational) relations with cooperation, coordination, or collaboration. Whereas Aldrichs focus is on relations between organizations of equal power or control over resources, other authors such as Cook, referring to Blau and Emerson, are more concerned with power differentials, dominance, and vertical relations among organizations (Cook, 1977, p. 77). Instead of considering this process to happen automatically, regime complexity theorists refer to it as functional emergence. 9, 8990). Since 1966, Stanford University's Department of Sociology has been the academic home to John Meyer, a leading scholar of this approach, and many of his collaborators.The term Stanford School helps distinguish this direction of thought from . State agencies, intergovernmental organizations, and nongovernmental organizations involved in re-building the failed state of Albania in the 1990s and 2000s decoupled their rhetoric from their day-to-day activity. In the study of domestic institutions, three major schoolsrational choice institutionalism, historical institutionalism, and sociological institutionalismhave emerged. Among the key concepts used in network accounts are: nodes, edges, size and density of the network structure, as well as (structural) positions. Reflexivity, in terms of Mead, stands for a human beings capability to think of oneself as of an object. For the same reasons, organizations favoring civilian instruments keep the alliance at distance (Biermann, 2014, pp. I will proceed by outlining two related ways of dividing the theoretical approaches to IR: the first between the orientations of Realism, Liberalism, and Social Constructivism, and the second sorting according to whether the main independent variables are located at the level of the individual, the state, or the international system, which . The study and practice of international relations has led international relations scholars to suggest different ways that . Whereas the latter focused on decision-making by individuals and organizations, bureaucratic functions and roles were emphasized at Columbia, where Meyer received a PhD for his reflections on Some Methodological Problems of Organizational Research in 1965 (Scott, 2004, pp. Due to its focus on beliefs that guide human beings interaction, the pragmatist account thus addresses the contributions that these beliefs make to global order. More specifically, sociological neo-institutionalism draws on both Max Webers thoughts about the power of bureaucracy and bureaucratizationthe iron cage (Weber, 2006b, p. 33)and on his thesis of a rationalization of culture (Weber, 2006a, p. 101). Organizational actors are motivated by several goals, such as the acquisition of money and authority (Benson, 1975, p. 231). As rationalized others, representatives of these associations and the state shape organizational life both directly by imposing constraints and requirements and indirectly by creating and promulgating new rational myths (Scott, 1987, p. 499). 219220). 378379) and govern the activity of their members, that is, sovereign states, in stipulated regulatory areas beyond these members jurisdiction (Young, 1982, p. 277). Network accounts have been applied to explicate trends in the realms of security as well as, mostly, economic cooperation and development. Reciprocity constitutes network relations. Inter-organizational relations are referred to as institutional or regime complexes, that is, systems of functionally overlapping international institutions that continuously affect each others operations (Gehring & Faude, 2013, p. 120; see also Young, 1996, p. 6). 510; Bergenholtz & Waldstrm, 2011, p. 542), networks primarily provide opportunities for transactions (Cook, 1977, p. 68). From the perspective of sociological neo-institutionalism, changes in the environment bring about changes in an organization. Copy this link, or click below to email it to a friend. The term universe of meaning refers to classical pragmatisms understanding of meaning or meaning-making as a social endeavor. 154, 165168). Even in terms of form, these trans- or interactional flows cover a broad spectrum of possibilities. Other optimists stress the flexibility and adaptability of regime complexes (Keohane & Victor, 2011, p. 7). 2, this chapter takes a theoretical stance and discusses approaches from organizational theory to address the above-mentioned research gap.In order to answer the research question of why the UNHCR approaches the topic of EDPs the way that it . 305306). The Stanford Schools core argument holds that organizations orient themselves toward institutionalized, societally accepted environmental elements such as formal or material characteristics of other organizations. PDF International Organizations and Institutions - Scholars at Harvard The concept of structures of corporate practice tends to universalize this pragmatist idea. As belief is a rule for action (Peirce, 1992, p. 129), pragmatisms focus is on what humans do, and this is held to be genuinely creative (Joas, 1996). In this way, sociological neo-institutionalisms perspective on inter-organizational relations turns more specific but is restricted to interaction among similar kinds. This, for instance, encompasses shaking hands between friends every time they meet. Moreover, the control over a resource is derived from a couple of factors in this context. Hence, coercive, mimetic, and normative mechanisms of institutional isomorphic change areconceptually rather than empiricallydistinguished from each other (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983, pp. In broadest terms, this concept of power resembles Webers, as power is not considered the attribute of individuals but a property of the social relation (Emerson, 1962, p. 32). International Relations Overview & Theories | What is International They are held to stand in a dialectical relationship with human beings, or more precisely: with those human beings who act in and for them. As specific constellations of inter-organizational relations (Whetten, 1981, pp. Regimes are dynamic (Young, 2010, pp. At the same time, the pragmatist approach portrays human beings as the only actors. In the conventional sense, an international organization is an institution or structure similar to Congress or to a city council; it has a definite set of rules, members, agenda, places and times of meeting.