| ID | 131013 |
| Title Proper | Response |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Mazower, Mark |
| Publication | 2014. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Weiss and Wilkinson ask us to figure out how to give greater precision to the concept of "global governance" in order better to understand how the world is run and perhaps also to have greater hope of changing it in the way we would like. This approach assumes that the concept is worth sticking with. I find myself unsure of this.
On the one hand, as they point out, international affairs did acquire a greater degree of functional complexity toward the end of the twentieth century as a variety of nonstate actors took on global roles and states themselves became umbrella rubrics for ever proliferating agencies and ministries with international competences. There is no question that Realism in particular was poorly equipped to understand this 'new world order'. |
| `In' analytical Note | International Studies Quarterly Vol.58, No.1; March 2014: p.219-220 |
| Journal Source | International Studies Quarterly Vol.58, No.1; March 2014: p.219-220 |
| Key Words | World Order ; International Competences ; International Affairs ; Functional Complexity ; Global Role ; Wilkinson and Weiss - W&W ; Human Communities ; Perhaps Legitimately ; System ; Epochs ; International Organization - IO ; International Cooperation - IC ; International Relations - IR ; International Alliance - IA ; Global Governance ; Global Politics ; Politics ; Emerging Power ; Realism ; Proliferating Agencies |