Abstract
AbstractMost issue areas in world politics today are governed neither by individual institutions nor by regime complexes composed of formal interstate institutions. Rather, they are governed by “hybrid institutional complexes” (HICs) comprising heterogeneous interstate, infra-state, public–private and private transnational institutions, formal and informal. We develop the concept of the HIC as a novel descriptive and analytical lens for the study of contemporary global governance. The core structural difference between HICs and regime complexes is the greater diversity of institutional forms within HICs. Because of that diversity, HICs operate differently than regime complexes in two significant ways: (1) HICs exhibit relatively greater functional differentiation among their component institutions, and hence suffer from relatively fewer overlapping claims to authority; and (2) HICs exhibit greater informal hierarchy among their component institutions, and hence benefit from greater ordering. Both are systemic features. HICs have characteristic governance benefits: they offer good “substantive fit” for multi-faceted governance problems and good “political fit” for the preferences of diverse constituents; constrain conflictive cross-institutional strategies; and are conducive to mechanisms of coordination, which enhance substantive coherence. Yet HICs also pose characteristic governance risks: individual institutions may take on aspects of problems for which they are ill-suited; multiple institutions may create confusion; HICs can amplify conflict and contestation rather than constraining them; and the “soft” institutions within HICs can reduce the focality of incumbent treaties and intergovernmental organizations and forestall the establishment of new ones. We outline a continuing research agenda for exploring the structures, operations and governance implications of HICs.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Economics and Econometrics,Political Science and International Relations
Reference97 articles.
1. 2018. Orchestration: Strategic Ordering in Polycentric Climate Governance. In Andrew Jordan, Dave Huitema, Harro van Asselt, Jonas Schoenefeld and Johanna Forster, eds., Governing Climate Change: Polycentricity in Action? Cambridge University Press.
2. Abbott, K. W. (2012). The Transnational Regime Complex for Climate Change. Government and Policy: Environment and Planning C, 30(4), 571–590.
3. Abbott, K. W., & Benjamin, F. (2020). Choosing Low-Cost Institutions in Global Governance. International Theory, published online, 11 June.
4. Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2009). Strengthening International Regulation through Transnational New Governance: Overcoming the Orchestration Deficit. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 42, 501–578.
5. Abbott, K. W., Green, J. F., & Keohane, R. O. (2016). Organizational Ecology and Institutional Change in Global Governance. International Organization, 70(2), 247–277.
Cited by
38 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献