Introduction Richard A.Higgott, Geoffrey R.D.Underhill and Andreas Bieler

Traditionally, in International Relations (IR), power and authority were considered to rest with states. This has recently come under scrutiny empirically and theoretically due to the changes associated with ‘globalisation’. Globalisation is a complex concept. Two extreme versions oppose each other....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inNon-State Actors and Authority in the Global System pp. 19 - 30
Format Book Chapter
LanguageEnglish
Published Routledge 2000
Subjects
GONGOs
FDI
Confers
Local Grass Roots Organisations
Global Structural Change
Civil Society
International NGOs
Historic Bloc
State Policy Processes
Brazilian Government
Follow
Liberal Investment Regime
MAI Negotiation
Regional Production Structures
Grand Security Strategies
WSC
Capitalist Liberal Democracy
Jan Aart Scholte
Non-state Actors
Neo-liberal Discourse
Triangular Diplomacy
IR Theory
Civil Society Empowerment
IPC
Amazonian Deforestation
Online AccessGet full text
DOI10.4324/9780203165041-7

Cover

More Information
Summary:Traditionally, in International Relations (IR), power and authority were considered to rest with states. This has recently come under scrutiny empirically and theoretically due to the changes associated with ‘globalisation’. Globalisation is a complex concept. Two extreme versions oppose each other. Globalists, especially prior to the economic meltdown of 1997-8, regard globalisation as moving inevitably to a borderless world and economic ‘level playing field’, on which truly global companies are the primary actors. There is little or no role left to states beyond the provision of infrastructure and public goods required by business (Ohmae 1990 and 1995). In more nuanced fashion, Strange talks about an increasing hollowness of state authority or a ‘retreat of the state’ (Strange 1996). Conversely, internationalists consider states to be still the main actors in international economics and politics. Hirst and Thompson argue that the economy is predominantly international, not global, and that therefore states, although in a slightly different way, still play a central role in its governance (Hirst and Thompson 1996:178-89). The changes are called internationalisation, not globalisation, and are defined as a drastic increase in cross-border flows of goods, services and capital (Keohane and Milner 1996).
DOI:10.4324/9780203165041-7