Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:52:23.222Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Deliberative global governance and the question of legitimacy: what can we learn from the WTO?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2010

RICHARD HIGGOTT  and
EVA ERMAN
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The integration of the global economy through the liberalisation of the trade regime, the deregulation of financial markets and the privatisation of state assets has led to what we now commonly call ‘globalisation’. These processes, however, have not been accompanied by a comparable development of the global polity. At the same time, it is increasingly recognised in policy circles that without the development of norms, institutions and processes to manage globalisation many of the advantages it has brought the world could be undone by a failure to mitigate the excesses and negative consequences that emanate from it, especially for large sections of the world's poor. This article addresses two broad questions: what might we understand by global governance in an era of increasingly contested globalisation and what role might international organisations play in making it more (democratically) legitimate? It addresses these questions in three steps. First, it proposes a heuristic definition that identifies two key strands of ‘governance’ in the contemporary debate. It is argued that global governance understood as effective and efficient collective decision-making and problem solving is insufficient for normative reasons and must, in addition, be complemented by global governance understood as the democratic legitimation of policy-making. In a second step, as an example of this latter type of governance, the article develops a deliberative two-track view of transnational legitimacy. It argues that deliberative democracy offers some fruitful theoretical tools in this context since it is equipped to address some of the qualitative problems of international decision-making as well as accommodate a plausible notion of political agency. Thirdly, from the point of view of this two-track view, the article examines the WTO and discusses its strengths and vulnerabilities, not only as a vehicle for trade liberalisation but also as an instrument of better global governance.

Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 36 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 449 - 470
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2010

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 Pascal Lamy, ‘Humanising Globalisation’, Santiago, 30 January 2006, available at: {http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/sppl_e/sppl16_e.htm}.

2 Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw Hill, 1979).

3 Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1977); Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1977).

4 David Held, Global Covenant: The Social Democratic Alternative to the Washington Consensus (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2004).

5 See Phillippe Pattberg, ‘Global Governance: Reconstructing a Contested Social Science Concept’, Working Paper No. 6, Warwick University: EUFP6 Network of Excellence on Global Governance, Regionalisation and Regulation: Role of the EU, 2006.

6 Martin Wolf, Financial Times (24 January 2007), p. 7.

7 Walden Bello, Deglobalization: Ideas for a New World Economy (London: Zed Press, 2004); Martin Khor Rethinking Globalisation: Critical Issues and Popular Choices (London: Zed Books, 2001).

8 Jagdish Bhagwati, In Defence of Globalization (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004); Joseph Stiglitz Globalisation and its Discontents (London: Penguin. 2002); Martin Wolf Why Globalization Works (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004).

9 For an early formulation of this argument see Ilan Kapoor, ‘Deliberative democracy and the WTO’, Review of International Political Economy, 11:3 (2004), pp. 522–41.

10 Morten Ougaard and Richard Higgott (eds), Towards a Global Polity? (London: Routledge, 2002).

11 See for example Jürgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. W. Rehg, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996); Jürgen Habermas, in C. Cronin and P. de Greiff (eds), The Inclusion of the Other (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1998a); Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000); Jon Elster, ‘Deliberation and Constitition Making’, in J. Elster (ed.), Deliberative Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998); James Bohman and William Rehg, ‘Introduction’, in J. Bohman and W. Rehg (eds), Deliberative Democracy: Essays in Reason and Politics (Cambridge, MA: the MIT Press, 1997); Joshua Cohen, ‘Deliberative Democracy’, in S. W. Rosenberg (ed.), Deliberation, Participation and Democracy: Can the People Govern? (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).

12 Jon Elster, ‘Deliberation and Constitition Making’, in Elster (ed.), Deliberative Democracy (1998).

13 John Dryzek, Deliberative Global Politics: Discourse and Democracy in a Divided World (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2006).

14 Young, ‘Inclusion and Democracy’ (2000).

15 Habermas, ‘Between Facts and Norms’ (1996); Elster, ‘Deliberative Democracy’ (1998).

16 Jürgen Habermas, ‘Remarks on Legitimation through Human Rights’, Philosophy & Social Criticism, 24:2/3 (1998b), pp. 159–61.

17 William Smith and James Brassett, ‘Deliberation and Global Governance: Liberal, Cosmopolitan, and Critical Perspectives’, Ethics & International Affairs, 22:1 (2008), pp. 69–92.

18 Robert Brandom, ‘Some Pragmatist Themes in Hegel's Idealism’, European Journal of Philosophy, 7: 2 (1999), pp. 168–71.

19 Kenneth Baynes, ‘Practical Reason, the “Space of Reasons”, and Public Reason’, in J. Bohman and W. Rehg (eds), Pluralism and the Pragmatic Turn: The Transformation of Critical Theory (Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press, 2001), pp. 63–4.

20 Brandom, ‘Some Pragmatist Themes in Hegel's Idealism’ (1999), p. 168.

21 See for example John Dryzek, Deliberative Global Politics: Discourse and Democracy in a Divided World (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2006).

22 Habermas, ‘Between Facts and Norms’ (1996), pp. 486–87.

23 Ibid., p. 365.

24 Ibid., p. 375.

25 Robert Dahl, ‘Can international organisations be democratic?,’ in I. Shapiro and C. Hacker Gordon (eds), Democracy's Edge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).

26 Daniele Archibugi, ‘Cosmopolitical democracy’, New Left Review, 4 (2000), pp. 143–6.

27 Ibid., 13 (2002), p. 32.

28 David Held, ‘Law of States, Law of Peoples: Three Models of Sovereignty’, Legal Theory, 8:1 (2002), p. 24.

29 Held, ‘Law of States, Law of Peoples: Three Models of Sovereignty’ (2002), p. 32.

30 Brandom, ‘Some Pragmatist Themes in Hegel's Idealism’ (19990, p. 171.

31 David Chandler, ‘New Rights for Old? Cosmopolitan Citizenship and the Critique of State Sovereignty’, Political Studies, 51:2 (2003), pp. 332–49; Bruce Robbins, ‘What's Left of Cosmopolitanism?’, Radical Philosophy, 116 (2002), pp. 30–37.

32 Cohen, ‘Deliberative Democracy’, p. 596.

33 Anne-Marie Slaughter, The New World Order (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004).

34 Archibugi, ‘Demos and Cosmopolis’, p. 35.

35 Held, ‘Law of States, Law of Peoples’ (2002), p. 32.

36 Jürgen Habermas, in C. Cronin (ed. and trans.), The Divided West (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2006a); Jürgen Habermas, in C. Cronin and M. Pensky (eds and trans.), Time of Transitions (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2006b).

37 Cristina Lafont, ‘Alternative Visions of a New Global Order: What Should Cosmopolitans Hope For?’, Ethics & Global Politics, 1:1 (2008), pp. 45–7.

38 John Simmons, ‘Justification and Legitimacy’, Ethics, 109:4 (1999), pp. 739–71.

39 Ibid., pp. 745–6.

40 Robert O Keohane, ‘The Contingent Legitimacy of Multilateralism’, Working Paper, No. 9, Warwick University: EU FP6 Network of Excellence on Global Governance, Regionalisation and Regulation: The Role of the EU (2005).

41 John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971); Rawls, John The Law of Peoples, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999).

42 Richard Higgott, ‘Global Public Goods and Global Governance: A Political Analysis of Economic Theory and Policy Practice’, A Report Prepared for UNIDO, (2005) available at {http://exchange.unido.org/upload/3361_Governance_Higgott.pdf}.

43 Cecilia Albin, ‘The Role of Fairness in Negotiation’, Negotiation Journal, 9:3 (1993), pp. 223–44.

44 Cecilia Albin, ‘Negotiating international Cooperation: Global Public Goods and Fairness’, Review of International Studies, 29:3 (2003), pp. 379–40.

45 Habermas, ‘The Inclusion of the Other’, p. 42.

46 Thomas Risse, ‘Global Governance and Communicative Action’, Government & Opposition, 39:2 (2004), pp. 292–3; Eva Erman, ‘Rethinking Accountability in the Context of Human Rights’, Res Publica: A Journal of Legal and Social Philosophy, 12:3 (2006), p. 261.

47 Risse, ‘Global Governance and Communicative Action’, p. 297.

48 Erman, ‘Rethinking Accountability’, p. 268.

49 Risse, ‘Global Governance and Communicative Action’, p. 303.

50 Stephen Krasner, Structural Conflict: The Third World Against Global Liberalism (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1985).

51 Ruth Grant and Robert O. Keohane, ‘Accountability and the Abuses of Power in World Politics’, American Political Science Review, 99:1 (2005), pp. 29–43.

52 Ann Florini, The Third Force: The Rise of Trans-national Civil Society (Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2003).

53 Allen Buchanan and Robert, O Keohane, ‘The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions’, Ethics & International Affairs, 20:4 (2006), pp. 425–6.

54 For a discussion of this transition see Amrita Narlikar, A Short History of the WTO (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).

55 Pascal Lamy to Richard Higgott, personal correspondence, 27 June 2006.

56 pace Aileen Kwa and Fatoumata Jawara, Behind the Scenes at the WTO: The Real World of Trade Negotiations (London: Zed Books, 2003).

57 Kapoor, ‘Deliberative Democracy’, p. 529; see also Markus Krajewski, ‘Democratic Legitimacy and Constitutional Perspectives of WTO Law’, Journal of World Trade, 35:1 (2001), p. 167–86; Richard H. Steinberg, ‘In the Shadow of Law or Power: Consensus Based Bargaining and Outcomes in the GATT/WTO’, International Organisation, 56:2 (2002), pp. 339–74.

58 This point is based on a detailed empirical analysis of the discussions of the Ministerial Meetings in the Doha Round from 2001 through to Geneva July 21–30, 2008. For insights into the nature of the negotiations processes in these meetings see the detailed ‘Daily Update’ analyses produced by the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD, Geneva) accessed at {http://ictsd.net/}.

59 Narlikar, ‘A Short History of the WTO’.

60 Warwick Commission, The Multilateral Trade Regime: Which Way Forward?, Warwick University, December 2007. Accessible at {http://go.warwick.ac.uk/go/warwickcommission}.

61 Commonwealth of Australia, Winning in World Markets: Meeting the Challenge of the New Global Economy. A Review of Export Policies and Programmes, Canberra, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (2008), {http://www.dfat.gov.au/publications/mortimer_report/mortimer_report2.pdf} recommendation 5.6.

62 The Financial Times (24 January 2007), p. 7.

63 That is the group within the WTO, not the G20 that has emerged from the Global Financial Crisis of 2008.

64 See the proposal and the safeguards for developing countries advanced in the Report of the Warwick Commission in to the Future of the Multilateral Trade Regime (2007), pp. 31–3.

65 Amrita Narlikar and Diana Tussie, ‘The G20 at the Cancun Ministerial Meeting: Developing Countries and their Evolving Coalitions’, The World Economy, 27:7 (2004), pp. 947–66.

66 This is not a story exclusive to the trade regime. Whatever it effectiveness in restoring stability to the global financial regime, the 15 November 2008 G20 meeting in Washington confirmed the place of the major developing countries in discussions over the governance of the global economy.

67 See Sheila Page, Developing Countries: Victims or Participants Their Changing Role in International Negotiations (London: Overseas Development Institute, 2003).

68 Albert O. Hirschman, Exit Voice and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organisations and States (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970).

69 Steven Brint, In the Age of experts: The Changing role of Professionals in Politics and Public Life (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994); and Charles Lindblom Inquiry and Change: New Haven (Yale University Press, 1990).

70 UN Millenium Project, Task Force on Trade (Washington DC, 2005), pp. 146–65.

71 Diane Stone, Banking on Knowledge: The Genesis of the Global Development Network (London: Routledge, 2001).

72 Richard Baldwin and Simon Evenett (eds), The Collapse of Global Trade: Murky, Protectionism and the Crisis: Recommendations for the G20, Geneva, VoxEU.org (2009).

73 Chang Ha-Joon, Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective (London: Anthem Press, 2002).