Summary
Summary Global & European Governance Literature Notes
- Course
- Institution
Literature and lecture notes on for 3.4 C Global and European Governance (Erasmus University)
[Show more]
1 review
By: floormolenaar21 • 1 year ago
Seller
Follow
jennifernguyen
Reviews received
Content preview
LECTURE 1: Intro and StatesStates
● Started in Westphalia: birth of international system (1648)
● End of thirty years’ wear and eighty years’ war
○ Consequence → exclusive sovereignty
● Exclusive sovereignty → not to meddle in each other’s rights
○ Internal sovereignty (date back to roman times): state is free to decide
rules that reside within its own borders → naturally means that
other states cannot apply law in other countries
■ States make laws, provide frameworks not church or private
companies/indivs
○ External sovereignty: no outside interference in the borders within the state,
other states cannot interfere on behalf of their citizens
○ Rules become geographically limited (territories of the state)
○ Outside intervention of the state is only possible if rulers permit it
○ ⇔ state become increasingly more present in people’s lives (ex:
food safety rules → what food you can eat, electricity/fuel usage)
● Why did states survive?
○ Advantages of state (vs empires & leagues)
■ Empires lack written codes, customary proceedings, legal
climate for trade, high transaction costs → lower uncertainty,
reliability & predictability, so higher transaction costs
■ Leagues (units of smaller cities) lack territorial contiguity
(individual units are not connected to each other), lack fixed
borders, clear rules, internal hierarchy → difficulty to defend,
some cities more equal to others to conduct business and
function of cities
● States in international politics
○ Preferences of actors within state become state preferences
○ No higher authority than the state when there is internal sovereignty
● Anarchy
○ Main and most basic assumption of the international governance
○ Difference between international and domestic society
■ Domestic society
● Clear hierarchy of rules
● Consequences to rule violations
○ Not about lack of order but about lack of higher authority
○ Leads to “911” problem → no one to call when it is about
international politics
Game theory
● Each game needs
○ Players - need at least 2 (people, companies, states)
■ Rational
● Not necessarily cost effective
● Have preferences and pursue them
, ■ Informed
● Aware of their options and actors’
○ Strategies (a choice thereof)
○ Preferences (exist and are transitive = if prefer A over B or C over D, means
that you also prefer A over D)
○ Solution (final point)
● Prisoner’s dilemma: cooperation w/ other criminal or defect to police →
cooperation game
○ Cooperation risks cheating
○ Benefits from cheating are higher than benefits from sticking
● Battle of the sexes: boxing vs opera → coordination problem
○ Induce cooperation: threat, bribe, package deal, pre-emptive action
○ Difficult to find common course
○ But no difficulty to stick to it
Frieden, J. A., Lake, D. A., & Schultz, K. A. (2012). World Politics: Interests,
Interactions, Institutions. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. [Ch 2; sections
Interests and Interactions only]
Interests
● = preferences of actors over the possible outcomes that might result from their
political choices
○ Determine how actors rank the desirability of different outcomes, from most to
least preferred
● Group interests at the individual and collective level, in 3 categories
○ Power/security
■ All political actors require a degree of personal or collective security as
a prerequisite to all other goals
■ Or to desire power and ability to dominate others either as part of
human nature or essential to survival in a competitive international
environment
○ Economic/material welfare
■ Political actors presumed to desire higher standard of living defined in
terms of greater income, more consumable goods and services, or
more leisure time (less work)
○ Ideological goals
■ Actors may also desire moral, religious or other ideological goals,
including democracy, human equality and dignity
■ Ideas often play key role in shaping what actors want or believe to be
good and desirable
● Actors
○ Types of actors: states, groups within countries, international organizations,
individuals
○ State = central authority that has the ability to make and enforce laws, rules
and decisions within its territory
■ Sovereignty: expectation that states have legal and political
supremacy within their boundaries → have control over their
own policies and political processes
, ■ National interests → assume that states are motivated by
interest in security (from external and internal threats) and
power (accumulate to ensure security)
Interactions
● = ways in which choices of two or more actors combine to produce political outcomes
○ When outcomes are the product of an interaction, actors have to anticipate
the likely choices of others and take those choices into account when making
decisions
○ Strategic interactions: each actor’s strategy/plan of action depends on
anticipated strategy of others
● Assumptions
○ Actors are purposive, they behave w/ the intention of producing a
desired result → actors assumed to choose among available options
w/ regard for their consequences and w/ the aim of bringing abt
outcomes they prefer
○ Strategic interaction - actors adopt strategies to obtain desired
outcomes given what they believe to be interests and likely actions
of others → develop strategies that they believe are a best response
to anticipated strategies of others
● Cooperation = when two or more actors adopt policies that make at least one actor
better off than it would otherwise be - when actors have shared interest in achieving
an outcome & must work tgt
○ Past policy combinations produced an outcome aka the status quo (q)
, ○ Any policy combination that leads to an outcome in qba would be better for
both actors that if they were under the status quo
○ Pareto frontier: downward-sloping line which shows different ways maximum
feasible income can be divided between the two actors
○ Mutual policy adjustments that move actors toward or onto the Pareto frontier,
increasing the welfare of some or all partners without diminishing welfare of
any one actor - mutual gain
● Bargaining = interaction in which actors must choose outcomes that make one better
off at the expense of another
○ When bargaining, actors move along the frontier
○ On the frontier, any improvement in A’s welfare comes strictly at the expense
of B’s welfare
○ Zero-sum game → gains for one side perfectly match the losses of
the other
○ Bargaining is purely redistributive rather than creating additional
value (ie cooperation) → only allocates a fixed sum of value
between different actors
Spruyt, H. (2002). The origins, development, and possible decline of the modern state.
Annual Review of Political Science, 5(1), 127-149.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller jennifernguyen. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $13.90. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
48756 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 15 years now