Papers by Jens Steffek
Acta Politica, vol. 40, issue 3, pp. 368-383 , 2005
In the focus of this paper is the nexus between Italian fascism, corporativism and Italy’s projec... more In the focus of this paper is the nexus between Italian fascism, corporativism and Italy’s project of colonial expansion. During the fascist period, some Italian intellectuals and diplomats developed a distinct style of international theorizing, in which they suggested exporting corporativism, the socio-economic ideology of the Italian fascist state, to other parts of the world. One of the leading authors, Giuseppe de Michelis, suggested corporativism as a blueprint for international organizations of global reach, designed to coordinate economic relations and allocate resources. As a starting point for this project de Michelis envisaged creating ‘Eurafrica’, an intercontinental space that would have included the whole of Europe and its colonial territories in Africa. While lofty ideas about global governance along corporativist lines had few followers in fascist Italy, the connection between corporativism and colonialism found more resonance. Colonial expansion to Africa was generally seen as a necessity of the Italian nation, and a foreign policy priority. At the same time, Italian fascists were eager to distinguish their ‘new’ colonialism from the ‘old’ colonialism of established colonial powers. In this context, the ideology of corporativism was instrumental because it enabled fascists to claim that Italian expansionism differed from exploitative practices of the past.
In this paper I introduce and discuss output legitimacy as a category of normative analysis of in... more In this paper I introduce and discuss output legitimacy as a category of normative analysis of international organizations (IOs). I refute the widespread view that output legitimacy is just a synonym for organizational effectiveness or efficiency, and unrelated to democracy. I argue instead that output legitimacy has an important democratic dimension. The touchstone of ‘democratic output legitimacy’ is the extent to which systems of governance produce results that cater to the public interest. By analogy, the democratic output legitimacy of IOs can be understood in terms of their ability to safeguard a public interest that is transnationally defined. This ability hinges upon i) their capacity to keep powerful (state and non-state) actors in check; and ii) the epistemic quality of their decision-making procedures. Attaining these qualities may require shielding IOs to some extent from the input dimension of the international political process. In the last section of the paper I take issue with the hazards associated with non-majoritarian institutions, in particular the problem of technocratic paternalism. While mechanisms of input legitimation work on the basis of articulated citizen interests, output-oriented mechanisms function with reference to assumed citizen interests. Technocratic paternalism is imminent when policy-making based on assumed citizen interests escapes systematic confrontation with articulated citizen interests. The paper hence pinpoints a challenge to global governance arrangements: how to enable an encompassing debate over the global public interest while keeping pressure of powerful factions in check.
Published Papers by Jens Steffek
In the literature on global and European governance, ‘public accountability’ is increasingly conc... more In the literature on global and European governance, ‘public accountability’ is increasingly conceptualized as accountability to national executives, to peers, to markets, to ombudsmen, or to courts. While the empirical analysis of multiple accountability relations within governance networks has its merits, the creeping re-conceptualization of ‘public accountability’ as an umbrella term tends to obfuscate one crucial dimension of it: the critical scrutiny of citizens and the collective evaluation of governance through public debate. In this essay I critically discuss the advance of managerial and administrative notions of accountability into debates on international governance and advocate a return to a narrower conception of public accountability as accountability to the wider public. I then proceed to investigate the prospects for such public accountability beyond the state, which depends upon the emergence of a transnational public sphere, consisting of media and organized civil society. The function of such a transnational public sphere is to put pressure on governance institutions through ‘scandalization’, and to generate and promote new political concerns and demands that can be taken up by the institutions of governance.
Leviathan, 2008
This contribution investigates the empirical foundation of the claim that civil society participa... more This contribution investigates the empirical foundation of the claim that civil society participation mitigates the democratic deficit of international governance. In a first step, two potentially democratizing functions of organized civil society are identified: direct channelling of citizens’ interest into international negotiations and a contribution to the emergence of a transnational public sphere. While the creation of public visibility is rather unproblematic direct input into negotiation processes is often hampered by the conditions of executive multilateralism. Moreover, we need to acknowledge trade-offs between constructive collaboration with international organizations and public opposition against their policies.
Acta Politica, 2005
In the literature on international governance it is often claimed that deliberation can enhance t... more In the literature on international governance it is often claimed that deliberation can enhance the rationality and legitimacy of political rule-making beyond the nation state. It is unclear, however, under what conditions such deliberative processes contribute to the emergence of transnational democracy, understood as self-government on a global scale. In this paper we address this question and propose a set of criteria which can be used to assess the democratic quality of decision-making through empirical research. Our inquiry thus is linked to the more general debate on how to measure the quality of an existing deliberative practice. The criteria we suggest to measure democratic quality focus on access to deliberative settings and relevant information, transparency of the policy process, justification of agreements and decisions, responsiveness of the political agenda, and inclusion of all relevant concerns. This catalogue was developed with a view to the emergent role of non-state actors in inter-and supranational policy-making. Although the deliberative settings at this level of policy-making are quite particular we believe that our criteria can be a useful guide for studying other types of decision-making as well.
Journal of International Relations and Development, 2005
Global Society, 2009
Civil society participation in international and European governance is often promoted as a remed... more Civil society participation in international and European governance is often promoted as a remedy to its much-lamented democratic deficit. We argue in this paper that this claim needs refinement because civil society participation may serve two quite different purposes: It may either enhance the democratic accountability of intergovernmental organisations and regimes, or the epistemic quality of rules and decisions made within them. Comparing the EU (European Union) and World Trade Organisation (WTO) in the field of biotechnology regulation we find that many participatory procedures officially are geared towards the epistemic quality of regulatory decisions. In practice, however, these procedures provide little space for epistemic deliberation. Nevertheless, they often lead to enhanced transparency and hence improve the accountability of governance. We also find evidence confirming findings from the literature that the different roles assigned to civil society organisations as 'watchdogs' and 'deliberators' are at times hard to reconcile. Our conclusion is that we need to acknowledge potential trade-offs between the two democratising functions of civil society participation and should be careful not to exaggerate our demands on civil society organisations.
European Journal of International Relations, 2003
... difference between their subjects; at the very least, all exemptions and exceptions from gene... more ... difference between their subjects; at the very least, all exemptions and exceptions from general rules require ... Maximum neutrality is achieved by cutting the last ligaments between the civil servant and his ... In the discussion of Carl Schmitt earlier we have seen the function of the ...
Government and Opposition, 2004
We argue that the democratization of global governance will ultimately depend upon the creation o... more We argue that the democratization of global governance will ultimately depend upon the creation of an appropriate public sphere that connects decision-making processes with transnational constituency. The emergence of such a public sphere would require more transparency in international organizations as well as institutional settings in which policy-makers respond to stakeholders’ concerns. Organized civil society plays a key role by exposing global rule-making to public scrutiny and bringing citizens’ concerns onto the agenda. We illustrate the prospects and difficulties of building a transnational public sphere with the example of the WTO.
Forest Policy and Economics, 2009
The aim of this largely conceptual paper is to spell out the dynamics of discursive legitimation ... more The aim of this largely conceptual paper is to spell out the dynamics of discursive legitimation in environmental governance. It briefly discusses the concept of legitimacy and establishes the theoretical connection between legitimation processes and justificatory discourse. Three dimensions of discursive legitimation are outlined, pertaining to goals of governance, procedures of governance, and outcomes of governance, respectively. The paper also takes issue with the different categories of actors involved in discursive legitimation of governance. In particular, it explores the relationship between experts and lay people and the connection of communication processes within political institutions to the wider public sphere.
European Journal of International Relations, 2004
Journal of Civil Society, 2010
Transnational civil society organizations (CSOs) are often said to lack accountability. Taking is... more Transnational civil society organizations (CSOs) are often said to lack accountability. Taking issue with this claim, we report the results of a study on the accountability regimes of 60 transnational CSOs engaging in political advocacy. We scrutinize their transparency, opportunities for internal participation, evaluations and self-regulation, complaint procedures, and their independence from the state and intergovernmental organizations. We find that most transnational CSOs are reasonably transparent and offer participatory opportunities at least for members. They are organizationally independent from states and intergovernmental organizations, but dependencies on public funding are striking in some cases. Independent evaluations of their activities are scarce and codes of conduct, often suggested as an avenue towards better self-regulation of CSOs, do not seem to play a major role in practice. We conclude that the debate over transnational CSO accountability should focus on the most critical issues. In the case of general interest organizations, this seems to be the danger of co-optation through public financing. Special interest organizations, by contrast, are highly independent but have deficits in external transparency, especially regarding their budget.
econstor www.econstor.eu Der Open-Access-Publikationsserver der ZBW -Leibniz-Informationszentrum ... more econstor www.econstor.eu Der Open-Access-Publikationsserver der ZBW -Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft The Open Access Publication Server of the ZBW -Leibniz Information Centre for Economics Nutzungsbedingungen: Die ZBW räumt Ihnen als Nutzerin/Nutzer das unentgeltliche, räumlich unbeschränkte und zeitlich auf die Dauer des Schutzrechts beschränkte einfache Recht ein, das ausgewählte Werk im Rahmen der unter → http://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungen nachzulesenden vollständigen Nutzungsbedingungen zu vervielfältigen, mit denen die Nutzerin/der Nutzer sich durch die erste Nutzung einverstanden erklärt.
In this paper we seek to assess whether the existing practice of civil society participation in t... more In this paper we seek to assess whether the existing practice of civil society participation in the World Trade Organization (WTO) is mitigating its democratic deficit. The first section briefly presents our conception of 'democracy' and how we operationalized it for empirical research. We then use a parsimonious list of four criteria to evaluate a) the institutional framework for cooperation between governmental and non-governmental actors as it developed since the foundation of the WTO in 1994, and b) the de facto practice of cooperation between organized civil society and the WTO. Our empirical analysis is structured along the lines of various types of consultation and outreach activities that the WTO has organized in recent years to respond to the calls for more public participation in world trade governance. As for political content we focus on the trade-related aspects of the regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) because it is a highly contested issue that mobilized all types of civil society organizations, from business lobby groups to advocacy NGOs. The conclusions that we draw from the general overview and the case study are ambivalent. On the one hand, the number of consultative mechanisms in the WTO has increased remarkably over time, as has the transparency of the formal policy-making process. On the other hand, we observe that these new mechanisms remain detached from the intergovernmental negotiation processes. Therefore, civil society actors have only a very limited chance to impact the formulation of policy proposals, and in fact, many of them do not even aspire to do so. They rather see their role in making the general public more aware of (and more sensitive to) the manifold consequences that WTO policies have on peoples' lives all over the world.
Civil society participation in international and European governance is often promoted as a remed... more Civil society participation in international and European governance is often promoted as a remedy to its much-lamented democratic deficit. We argue in this paper that this claim needs refinement because civil society participation may serve two quite different purposes: It may either enhance the democratic accountability of intergovernmental organisations and regimes, or the epistemic quality of rules and decisions made within them. Comparing the EU (European Union) and World Trade Organisation (WTO) in the field of biotechnology regulation we find that many participatory procedures officially are geared towards the epistemic quality of regulatory decisions. In practice, however, these procedures provide little space for epistemic deliberation. Nevertheless, they often lead to enhanced transparency and hence improve the accountability of governance. We also find evidence confirming findings from the literature that the different roles assigned to civil society organisations as 'watchdogs' and 'deliberators' are at times hard to reconcile. Our conclusion is that we need to acknowledge potential trade-offs between the two democratising functions of civil society participation and should be careful not to exaggerate our demands on civil society organisations.
Uploads
Papers by Jens Steffek
Published Papers by Jens Steffek