Abstract
Abstract
This chapter showcases the dichotomy between the ambit of the expansive analysis of rationalist international relations (IR), focused on the design of institutions as opposed to the minimalist examination of the role of the actual designers. Although rationalist IR throughout its scholarly contribution places considerable emphasis on the choice of institutional type, it leaves out any detailed profile of the actual process of individual or collective agency. A basic assumption throughout the literature remains that the dynamic of institutional choice is driven by a logic of intentionality. It neglects the question of who are the actual designers of those institutional options—and what is their process of calculation. This chapter exposes the flaws attached to this missing component.
Publisher
Oxford University PressOxford
Reference689 articles.
1. Why States Act through Formal International Organizations;The Journal of Conflict Resolution,1998
2. Organizational Ecology and Institutional Change in Global Governance;International Organization,2016
3. Abbott, Kenneth W., Philipp Genschel, Duncan Snidal, and Bernhard Zangl. 2010. ‘Competence–Control Theory: The Challenge of Governing through Intermediaries’. In The Governor’s Dilemma: Indirect Governance beyond Principals and Agents, edited by Kenneth W. Abbott, Bernhard Zangl, Duncan Snidal, and Philipp Genschel: pp. 3–38. Oxford: Oxford University Press.