peter willett
Peter Willetts: “Transnational actors and international organizations in global politics” (2008)
1. Introduction
-> international relations should no longer be regarded as ‘states’ interacting with each other:
= from realist to pluralist approach
= international relations and global politics as the interaction of:
- states or governments
- transnational companies (Nestlé, Shell, Ford, …)
- national NGOs
- IGOs (UN, NATO, EU, …)
- INGOs (Amnesty International, WWF, …)
2. Problems with the state-centric approach
-> 4 main problems:
1) ambiguity between different meanings of ‘state’
= legal person?
= political community?
= apparatus of government?
=> this article: government point of view (disentangle state and its citizens)
2) lack of similarity between countries
= legally equal but politically very different
e.g.: difference in size, population, economy, governmental system, …
= some transnational actors are bigger than countries in terms of members, GDP, …
3) state systems and international systems
= false assumption that states are located in anarchic international system
4) difference between state and nation
= nations cross state boundaries as do transnational actors
= country-based political systems are thus not necessarily more coherent than global
3. Transnational companies as political actors
-> transnational companies as companies with subsidiaries outside the home country
= increasingly more TNCs from developing countries
= important consequences:
- financial flows and loss of sovereignty
e.g.: currency no longer national in EU, national policies don’t affect intra firm trade
- triangulation and loss of sovereignty
e.g.: indirect trade can’t be prevented
- regulatory arbitrage and loss of sovereignty
1
e.g.: companies can threaten to close affiliates in a certain country and move to another one when conditions are not good anymore (Ryanair)
- extraterritoriality and sovereignty
e.g.: TNCs with bases in
1. Introduction
-> international relations should no longer be regarded as ‘states’ interacting with each other:
= from realist to pluralist approach
= international relations and global politics as the interaction of:
- states or governments
- transnational companies (Nestlé, Shell, Ford, …)
- national NGOs
- IGOs (UN, NATO, EU, …)
- INGOs (Amnesty International, WWF, …)
2. Problems with the state-centric approach
-> 4 main problems:
1) ambiguity between different meanings of ‘state’
= legal person?
= political community?
= apparatus of government?
=> this article: government point of view (disentangle state and its citizens)
2) lack of similarity between countries
= legally equal but politically very different
e.g.: difference in size, population, economy, governmental system, …
= some transnational actors are bigger than countries in terms of members, GDP, …
3) state systems and international systems
= false assumption that states are located in anarchic international system
4) difference between state and nation
= nations cross state boundaries as do transnational actors
= country-based political systems are thus not necessarily more coherent than global
3. Transnational companies as political actors
-> transnational companies as companies with subsidiaries outside the home country
= increasingly more TNCs from developing countries
= important consequences:
- financial flows and loss of sovereignty
e.g.: currency no longer national in EU, national policies don’t affect intra firm trade
- triangulation and loss of sovereignty
e.g.: indirect trade can’t be prevented
- regulatory arbitrage and loss of sovereignty
1
e.g.: companies can threaten to close affiliates in a certain country and move to another one when conditions are not good anymore (Ryanair)
- extraterritoriality and sovereignty
e.g.: TNCs with bases in