Author:
GRANT RUTH W.,KEOHANE ROBERT O.
Abstract
Debates about globalization have centered on calls to improve accountability to limit abuses of power in world politics. How should we think about global accountability in the absence of global democracy? Who should hold whom to account and according to what standards? Thinking clearly about these questions requires recognizing a distinction, evident in theories of accountability at the nation-state level, between “participation” and “delegation” models of accountability. The distinction helps to explain why accountability is so problematic at the global level and to clarify alternative possibilities for pragmatic improvements in accountability mechanisms globally. We identify seven types of accountability mechanisms and consider their applicability to states, NGOs, multilateral organizations, multinational corporations, and transgovernmental networks. By disaggregating the problem in this way, we hope to identify opportunities for improving protections against abuses of power at the global level.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science
Reference59 articles.
1. Krouse Richard W .1982.“Two Concepts of Democratic Representation: James and John Stuart Mill.”Journal of Politics 44 (2) May:509–37.
2. Sen Amartya .1999.“Democracy as a Universal Value.”Journal of Democracy 10 (3):3–17.
3. Held David .1995.Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance.Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.
4. Locke John .(1690) 1980.Second Treatise of Government,ed. C. B. Macpherson .Indianapolis, IN:Hackett.
5. Hamilton Alexander , James Madison , and John Jay .(1787) 1982.The Federalist Papers,ed. Garry Wills .New York:Bantam.
Cited by
983 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