Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T19:59:10.753Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Surrogate international organization and the case of world food security, 1949–1969

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Jon McLin
Get access

Extract

Much of the discussion and study in the field of international organization has long been beset by a sterile encounter between the “uncritical lovers” and the “unloving critics” of formal intergovernmental organizations, of which the UN family is the preeminent example. The former have seen in those institutions and their procedures precursors of a regime of international law, if not of a world government, characterized by greater rationality, order, and cooperation and by less conflict in interstate relations; they have often been mentally fixed on a dominant image of international order, an image whose flaws and other characteristics were well analyzed by John Ruggie several years ago. The latter have seen them largely as shadow plays, at best reflecting and at worst having nothing to do with the power relations among states, which are the real determinants of state behavior in an anarchic system. The split between the two corresponds roughly, if not identically, to another fundamental divide among theorists of international relations, namely, that between idealists and realists.

Type
Articles
Information
International Organization , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , Winter 1979 , pp. 35 - 55
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation and Cambridge University Press 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

1 The terms are taken from a commencement address given by John Gardner in the late 1960s. He was discussing attitudes toward national institutions.

2 “The Structure of International Organization: Contingency, Complexity, and Post-Modern Form,” Peace Research Society Papers, XVIII, 1971.Google Scholar

3 I have detailed a number of these stories in AUFS Fieldstaff Reports, West Europe Series.

4 Strange, Susan, “The Study of Transnational Relations,” and “Who Runs World Shipping?,” International Affairs (London), 52, 3 (07 1976)Google Scholar; Ruggie, John Gerard, “International Responses to Technology: Concepts and Trends,” International Organization 29, 3 (Summer 1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Keohane, Robert O. and Nye, Joseph S., Power and Interdependence (Boston: Little, Brown, 1977).Google Scholar

5 Keohane, Robert O. and Nye, Joseph S., “Transgovernmental Relations and International Organizations,” World Politics 27, 1 (10 1974):39–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Bilder, Richard B., The Role of Unilateral State Action in Preventing International Environmental Injury, University of Wisconsin Sea Grant College Program, Madison, 1973.Google Scholar

7 See Olson, Mancur, “Increasing the Incentives for International Cooperation,” International Organization 25, 4 (Autumn 1971):866–74; Bruce M. Russett and John D. Sullivan, “Collective Goods and International Organization,” ibid.:845–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 A point discussed by Susan Strange. Works of Raymond Hopkins and Susan Strange have been very helpful in relation to the development of this schema. See Hopkins, Raymond, “The International Role of ‘Domestic’ Bureaucracy,” International Organization 30, 3 (Summer 1976):405–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and “Global Management Networks: The Internationalization of Domestic Bureaucracies,” paper delivered at the 1976 Edinburgh Congress of the International Political Science Association; and Strange, Susan, International Economic Relations of the Western World 1959–1971, Volume 2: International Monetary Relations (London: Oxford University Press for the R.I.I.A., 1976)Google Scholar; and “Who Runs World Shipping?,” International Affairs (London) 52, 3 (07 1976):346–367.Google Scholar

9 Stobaugh, Robert B., “The Oil Companies in the Crisis,” Daedalus 104, 4 (Fall 1975): 179–202.Google Scholar

10 Keohane and Nye, Power and Interdependence.

11 Kennan, George F., “To Prevent a World Wasteland: A Proposal,” Foreign Affairs 48, 3 (04 1970):401–413. Kennan may have been right on pollution, but for other environmental problems (desertification, e.g.) more comprehensive membership is needed, even on grounds of effectiveness. So I am not arguing that the creation of UNEP was a mistake.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 Speech of Secretary of the Treasury Michael Blumenthal to the International Monetary Conference, Tokyo, 24 05 1977Google Scholar; Speech of Arthur Burns to Columbia Graduate School of Business, 12 04 1977.Google Scholar

13 See the report on the speech of Olivier Long, and the editorial comment thereon, in the Financial Times, 7 02 1978.Google Scholar

14 Willrich, Mason and Conant, Melvin A., “The International Energy Agency: An Interpretation and Assessment,” American Journal of International Law 71, 2 (04 1977): 199–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 Lindberg, Leon, “The Energy Crisis: A Political Economy Perspective,” in The Energy Syndrome: Comparing National Responses to the Energy Crisis (Lexington: Heath Lexington, 1977).Google Scholar

16 Willrich and Conant, op. cit.

17 In the terms of the analysis of Keohane and Nye (Power and Interdependence, op. cit.), the U.S. Role is not only dominant in the overall power structure but also in the structure of many individual issue areas.

18 McCalla, Alex F., “Pricing in the World Feed Grain Market,” Agricultural Economics Research 19, 4 (10 1967):93–102Google Scholar; and Warley, T. K., “Western Trade in Agricultural Products,” in International Economic Relations of the Western World, 1959–1971, Vol. I, p. 369.Google Scholar

19 Texts of the three projects have been reproduced in Organization of Trade in Food Products (New York: Arno, 1976). They are discussed in the FAO Commodity Review and Outlook, 1974–1975.Google Scholar

20 For a sampling of the proposals, see the following: FAO Document ESC: CSP/75/2, Food Reserve Policies for World Food Security: A Consultant Study on Alternative Approaches, 01 1975Google Scholar; Trezise, Philip H., Rebuilding Grain Reserves (Washington: Brookings, 1976)Google Scholar; and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Analyses of Grain Reserves, A Proceedings, Washington, 1976.Google Scholar

21 Food and Agriculture Organization Commodity Policy Study No. 20, The Stabilization of International Trade in Grains (Rome 1970).Google Scholar

22 Law, Alton D., International Commodity Agreements (Lexington: Heath Lexington, 1975), p. 53.Google Scholar

23 United Nations World Food Conference Document E/CONF. 65/4, The World Food Problem: Proposals for National and International Action (Rome 1974), paragraph 539Google Scholar; and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, Foreign Agriculture Circular, 23 03 1977.Google Scholar

24 Singh, K. Suresh, The Indian Famine, 1967 (New Delhi: People's Publishing House, 1975)Google Scholar; and U.S. Congress, House Committee on Agriculture, Hearings, “Emergency Food Assistance to India,” 28 02, 2 03 1967.Google Scholar

25 FAO Document ESC: CSP/75/2, op. cit.; and Berman, Lewis, “A New Case for that Old Ever-Normal Granary,” Fortune, 04 1976.Google Scholar

26 Gittinger, J. Price, North American Agriculture in a New World (Washington: National Planning Association, 1970).Google Scholar

27 FAO Commodity Policy Study No. 20, op. cit.

28 Ibid.

29 McCalla, Alex F., “A Duopoly Model of World Wheat Pricing,” Journal of Farm Economics 48, 3 (Pt. 1):711–17Google Scholar; “Strategies in International Agricultural Marketing: Public vs. Private Sector,” for Symposium on International Trade and Agriculture, Tucson, Arizona, 17–20 04 1977.Google Scholar

30 Hamilton, W. E. and Drummond, W. M., Wheat Surpluses and Their Impact on Canada-United States Relations (Washington: National Planning Association for the Canadian-American Committee, 1959).Google Scholar

31 During the period under review. They were applied for one year in the early 1970s.

32 FAO Document CCP/CSD/74/102, “CSD: Adaption to Changing Conditions,” 31 07 1974.Google Scholar

33 FAO Commodity Review and Outlook, 1974–75.

34 Bard, Robert L., Food Aid and International Agricultural Trade (Lexington: Heath Lexington, 1972).Google Scholar

35 Op. cit., p. 357.Google Scholar

36 Gittinger, , op. cit.Google Scholar

37 Hadwiger, Don F., Federal Wheat Commodity Programs (Ames: Iowa State University, 1970).Google Scholar

38 Gittinger, , op. cit.Google Scholar

39 Lewis, Robert G., Deputy Administrator, Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Competition and Cooperation in the Pricing of U.S. Wheats in Export Markets,” Address delivered in Manhattan, Kansas, 5 11 1964.Google Scholar