The Review of International Organizations

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 193–220 | Cite as

Organization without delegation: Informal intergovernmental organizations (IIGOs) and the spectrum of intergovernmental arrangements

Article

Abstract

The renaissance in the theoretical analysis of intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) has focused on formal IGOs (FIGOs), but many IGOs are subject to no formal treaty and/or have no permanent secretariat. Important examples of informal IGOs (IIGOs) include the G-groups that are the locus of much high-level interaction among states. We develop the spectrum of intergovernmental arrangements to show the wide variation in the formalization of international institutions and theorize when states will choose informal arrangements such as an IIGO over (or in combination with) a FIGO. A paired case comparison illustrates our claims that states use IIGOs when they need flexibility, to protect their sovereignty, to maintain close control of information, to lower short term transaction costs for speed, to minimize bureaucracy and to manage uncertainty during times of crisis. Finally, we examine how institutional choice is influenced by power.

Keywords

International organizations Intergovernmental organizations Informal governance International cooperation Institutional design Soft law Power Flexibility Delegation Legalization G groups 

JEL Codes

F53 F55 K33 

References

  1. Abbott, K., & Snidal, D. (2000). Hard and soft Law in international governance. International Organization, 54(3), 421–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbott, K., Keohane, R., Moravcsik, A., Slaughter, A.-M., & Snidal, D. (2000). The concept of legalization. International Organization, 54(3), 401–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abbott, K., & Snidal, D. (1998). Why states Act through formal international organizations. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42(1), 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alexandroff, A. S. (2010). Challenges in global governance: Opportunities for G-x leadership. The Stanley Foundation: Policy Analysis Brief.Google Scholar
  5. Alter, K. J., & Meunier, S. (2006). Nested and overlapping regimes in the transatlantic banana trade dispute. Journal of European Public Policy, 13(3), 362–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aust, A. (1986). The theory and practice of informal international instruments. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 35, 787–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baker, A. (2000). The G-7 as a global “ginger group”: plurilateralism and four-dimensional diplomacy. Global Governance, 6(2), 165–189.Google Scholar
  8. Barnett, M., & Finnemore, M. (1999). The politics, power, and pathologies of international organizations. International Organization, 53, 699–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boehmer, C., Gartzke, E., & Nordstrom, T. (2004). Do intergovernmental organizations promote peace? World Politics, 57(1), 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collier, D., LaPorte, J., & Seawright, J. (2012). Putting typologies to work: concept formation, measurement, and analytic rigor. Political Research Quarterly, 65(1), 217–232.Google Scholar
  11. Gill, S. (1999). Structural changes in multilateralism: The G7 nexus and the global crisis. In M. Schechter (Ed.), Innovation in multilateralism. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
  12. Grieco, J. M. (1988). Anarchy and the limits of cooperation: a realist critique of the newest liberal institutionalism. International organization, 42(03), 485–507.Google Scholar
  13. Gruber, L. (2000). Ruling the world: Power politics and the rise of supranational institutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Goldsmith, J., & Posner, E. A. (2005). The limits of international Law. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Haftel, Y. (2012). Regional economic institutions and conflict mitigation: Design, implementation, and the promise of peace. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  16. Haftel, Y., & Thompson, A. (2006). The independence of international organizations: Concept and applications. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50, 253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haas, R. (2010). The Case for Messy Multilateralism. Financial Times, January 5 2010.Google Scholar
  18. Hawkins, D., Lake, D., Nielson, D., & Tierney, M. (2006). Delegation and agency in international organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Helmke, G., & Levitsky, S. (2004). Informal institutions and comparative politics: A research agenda. Perspectives on Politics, 2(4), 725–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hudec, Robert E. 1998. The Role of the GATT Secretariat in the Evolution of the WTO Dispute Settlement Procedure. in Jagdish Bhagwati and Mathias Hirsch, eds. The Uruguay Round and Beyond: Essays in Honour of Arthur Dunkel, Springer-Verlag, 101–120.Google Scholar
  21. Ikenberry, G. J. (2000). After victory: institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Jupille, J., Mattli, W., & Snidal, D. (2013). Institutional choice in global commerce. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kelley, J. (2009). The more the merrier: The effects of having multiple international election monitoring organizations. Perspectives on Politics, 7(1), 59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Keohane, R. O., & Victor, D. G. (2011). The regime complex for climate change. Perspectives on Politics, 9, 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1974). Transgovernmental relations and international organizations. World Politics, 27(1), 39–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kirton, J. J. (1999). Explaining G8 effectiveness. In M. Hodges, J. J. Kirton, & J. P. Daniels (Eds.), The G8’s role in the New millennium (pp. 45–68). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  27. Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., & Snidal, D. (2001). The rational design of international institutions. International Organization, 56, 761–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Krasner, S. (1982). Structural causes and regime consequences: Regimes as intervening variables. International Organization, 36(2), 185–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Krasner, S. D. (1991). Global communications and national power. World politics, 43(3), 336–366.Google Scholar
  30. Lellouch, P. (1979). International Nuclear Politics. Foreign Affairs, 58(2), 336–350.Google Scholar
  31. Lipson, C. (1991). Why Are some international agreements informal? International Organization, 45, 495–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pevehouse, J., Nordstrom, T., & Warnke, K. (2004). The correlates of War 2: International governmental organizations data version 2.0. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 21(2), 101–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Prantl, J. (2005). The UN security council and informal groups of states: Complementing or competing for governance? International Organization, 59(3), 559–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Raustiala, K., & Victor, D. G. (2004). The regime complex for plant genetic resources. International Organization, 58, 277–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rochester, J. M. (1986). The rise and fall of international organization as a field of study. International Organization, 40(4).Google Scholar
  36. Shanks, C., Jacobson, H., & Kaplan, J. (1996). Inertia and change in the constellation of international governmental organizations, 1981–1992. International Organization, 50, 593–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Slaughter, A.-M. (2004). A New world order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Snidal, D. (1979). Public goods, property rights, and political organizations. International Studies Quarterly, 23(4):532–566.Google Scholar
  39. Stone, R. W. (2011). Controlling institutions: International organizations and the global economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stone, R. W. 2013. Informal governance in international organizations: Introduction to the Special Issue. Review of International Organizations.Google Scholar
  41. Volgy, T. J., Fausett, E., Grant, K. A., & Rodgers, S. (2008). Identifying formal intergovernmental organizations. Journal of Peace Research, 45(6), 849–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wood, B. (1988). Critical choices. In J. Holmes & J. Kirton (Eds.), Canada and the New internationalism (pp. 134–137). Toronto: Canadian Institute of International Affairs.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ChicagoChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Nuffield College, University of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations