Global governance in the age of epistemic authority

IF 2.2 1区社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

International Theory Pub Date : 2020-12-28 DOI:10.1017/S1752971920000433

Vincent Pouliot

引用次数: 9

Abstract

Abstract Today's global governance is qualitatively different from the past, according to Michael Zürn's penetrating analysis. With the rise of epistemic authority, reflexivity, service, and request have come to surpass command and control as key modes of global governance, leading to new forms of legitimation and contestation. I engage with this rich and thought-provoking argument on three counts. First, it remains doubtful that states defer to international organizations because the latter ‘know better’. There exist many gaps in epistemic authority and politics often trump rationality in global governance. Second, it is not clear how global hierarchy, which Zürn equates with ‘pockets of authority’, could emerge out of demands and requests, precisely because epistemic authority is so fluid and prone to contestation. Third, as historically young and increasingly based on service authority as it may be, contemporary global governance still rests on a body of inherited practices whose legitimation principles seem closer to tradition than to reflexive justification.

查看原文本刊更多论文

知识权威时代的全球治理

迈克尔·泽恩(Michael z rn)的精辟分析表明，今天的全球治理与过去有质的不同。随着认知权威的兴起，反身性、服务和请求已经超越命令和控制，成为全球治理的关键模式，导致了新的合法化和争论形式。我对这个丰富而发人深省的论点有三点看法。首先，各国之所以听从国际组织，是因为后者“更了解”，这一点仍然值得怀疑。在全球治理中，认识权威存在诸多空白，政治往往胜过理性。其次，目前尚不清楚全球等级制度是如何从需求和请求中产生的，z将其等同于“权力口袋”，正是因为认知权威是如此的不稳定，容易引起争论。第三，当代全球治理虽然在历史上还很年轻，而且越来越以服务权威为基础，但它仍然依赖于一系列继承下来的实践，这些实践的合法性原则似乎更接近传统，而不是反身性的正当性。

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

International Theory Multiple-

CiteScore

6.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Editorial board International Theory (IT) is a peer reviewed journal which promotes theoretical scholarship about the positive, legal, and normative aspects of world politics respectively. IT is open to theory of absolutely all varieties and from all disciplines, provided it addresses problems of politics, broadly defined and pertains to the international. IT welcomes scholarship that uses evidence from the real world to advance theoretical arguments. However, IT is intended as a forum where scholars can develop theoretical arguments in depth without an expectation of extensive empirical analysis. IT’s over-arching goal is to promote communication and engagement across theoretical and disciplinary traditions. IT puts a premium on contributors’ ability to reach as broad an audience as possible, both in the questions they engage and in their accessibility to other approaches. This might be done by addressing problems that can only be understood by combining multiple disciplinary discourses, like institutional design, or practical ethics; or by addressing phenomena that have broad ramifications, like civilizing processes in world politics, or the evolution of environmental norms. IT is also open to work that remains within one scholarly tradition, although in that case authors must make clear the horizon of their arguments in relation to other theoretical approaches.