The Loss of Institutionality in International Organizations, and their Decline in the Contemporary International Society

José Manuel Sobrino Heredia
{"title":"The Loss of Institutionality in International Organizations, and their Decline in the Contemporary International Society","authors":"José Manuel Sobrino Heredia","doi":"10.25267/paix_secur_int.2021.i9.1001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Never before have international organisations (IOs) been as numerous or as questioned as they are today. One reason for this, I believe, is the shift away from institutionalisation, which renders them inoperative and, thus, irrelevant. This decline in the institutional component of IOs has caused – and continues to cause – many of them to become empty shells with acronyms. Their bodies are purely testimonial and are supplanted in decision-making by their member states, which prefer informal agreement mechanisms that can be pursued outside or in parallel to the institutional procedures provided for in the IO’s constitutive treaty. This preference of states to act in parallel to – or instead of – IOs’ bodies when dealing with issues falling under their jurisdiction erodes their institutional component. As a result, the organisations cease to be – as set out in their constitutive treaties – true centres of decision-making and action based on a specific, independent, and permanent institutional structure consisting of bodies responsible for managing collective interests and capable of expressing a will that is legally different from that of their member states. They thus become mere institutional skeletons.","PeriodicalId":333001,"journal":{"name":"Paix et Securite Internationales","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Paix et Securite Internationales","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25267/paix_secur_int.2021.i9.1001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Never before have international organisations (IOs) been as numerous or as questioned as they are today. One reason for this, I believe, is the shift away from institutionalisation, which renders them inoperative and, thus, irrelevant. This decline in the institutional component of IOs has caused – and continues to cause – many of them to become empty shells with acronyms. Their bodies are purely testimonial and are supplanted in decision-making by their member states, which prefer informal agreement mechanisms that can be pursued outside or in parallel to the institutional procedures provided for in the IO’s constitutive treaty. This preference of states to act in parallel to – or instead of – IOs’ bodies when dealing with issues falling under their jurisdiction erodes their institutional component. As a result, the organisations cease to be – as set out in their constitutive treaties – true centres of decision-making and action based on a specific, independent, and permanent institutional structure consisting of bodies responsible for managing collective interests and capable of expressing a will that is legally different from that of their member states. They thus become mere institutional skeletons.
国际组织的制度性缺失及其在当代国际社会中的衰落
国际组织(IOs)从未像今天这样数量众多或受到如此多的质疑。我认为,造成这种情况的一个原因是,从制度化的转变,使它们失去了作用,因此变得无关紧要。IOs中机构成分的下降已经导致——并将继续导致——许多IOs变成了带有首字母缩写的空壳。它们的机构纯粹是证明性的,在决策方面被成员国所取代,成员国更喜欢非正式的协议机制,这种机制可以在国际组织的构成条约中规定的机构程序之外或并行进行。在处理属于其管辖范围内的问题时,各国倾向于与国际组织的机构并行或代替其机构采取行动,这削弱了国际组织的机构成分。其结果是,这些组织不再是——正如其组成条约所规定的那样——真正的决策和行动中心,其基础是一个具体、独立和永久的机构结构,由负责管理集体利益的机构组成,并有能力表达在法律上不同于其成员国的意愿。这样,他们就成了纯粹的制度骨架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信