Advertisement

The Rise of Executive Sovereignty in the Era of Globalization

  • Andreas Vasilache
Chapter
Part of the United Nations University Series on Regionalism book series (UNSR, volume 5)

Abstract

It seems to be self-evident that globalization restricts the ability of the state to autonomous policy making and enforcement. However, the interrelation between the structural patterns of transborder politics and the systematic framework of stateness demonstrates that transborder politics not so much implies a weakening of the state in toto, but rather a strengthening of national governments – and of administrative logics in general. It will be shown not only that, but in more detail why and how executive politics is promoted by the boundary-dissolving forces of globalization. In order to do so, this chapter takes a conceptual look at the separation of powers under globalized conditions, including a theoretical discussion of different indicative examples. Understanding and acknowledging the expansion of administrative logics, however, suggests that losses of democratic legitimacy in the era of globalization can still be tackled also within the existing political and institutional framework of the state.

Keywords

Foreign Policy European Monetary Union Transit Area Policy Field Social Contract Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adam, A. (2002). Despotic der Vernunft? Hobbes, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel (2nd ed.), Freiburg: Alber.Google Scholar
  2. Alonso, S., Keane, J., & Merkel, W. (Eds.). (2011). The future of representative democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Arenhövel, M. (2003). Globales Regieren. Neubeschreibungen der Demokratie in der Weltgesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main/New York: Campus.Google Scholar
  4. Beck, U. (1997). Was ist Globalisierung? Irrtümer des Globalismus – Antworten auf Globalisierung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  5. Beck, U. (2002). Macht und Gegenmacht im globalen Zeitalter. Neue weltpolitische Ökonomie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  6. Beisheim, M., et al. (1999). Im Zeitalter der Globalisierung. Thesen und Daten zur gesellschaftlichen und politischen Denationalisierung. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  7. Benz, A. (2004). Einleitung: Governance – Modebegriff oder nützliches sozialwissenschaftliches Konzept? In A. Benz (Ed.), Governance – Regieren in komplexen Regelsystemen. Eine Einführung (pp. 11–28). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  8. Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2005). Public-private partnerships. Effective and legitimate tools of transnational governance? In E. Grande & L. W. Pauly (Eds.), Complex sovereignty. Reconstituing political authority in the twenty-first century (pp. 195–216). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  9. Brühl, T., Debiel, T., & Hamm, B. (Eds.). (2001). Die Privatisierung der Weltpolitik. Entstaatlichung und Kommerzialisierung im Globalisierungsprozess. Bonn: Dietz.Google Scholar
  10. Brunkhorst, H. (2008). Demokratische Solidarität in der Weltgesellschaft. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte (APuZ), 21, 3–8.Google Scholar
  11. Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security. A new framework for analysis. Boulder/London: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  12. Cremers, E. (1986). Grenze und Horizont. Protosoziologische Reflexionen zu einer Phänomenologie und Soziologie sozialer Grenzen. Inauguraldissertation, Fernuniversität Hagen, Hagen.Google Scholar
  13. Czempiel, E.-O. (1992). Governance and democratization. In J. N. Rosenau & E.-O. Czempiel (Eds.), Governance without government: Order and change in world politics (pp. 250–271). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Czempiel, E.-O. (1999). Kluge Macht. Außenpolitik für das 21. Jahrhundert. München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  15. Delcourt, B., Paye, O., & Vercauteren, P. (Eds.). (2007). La gouvernance européenne. Un nouvel art de gouverner? Louvain-la-Neuve: Éditions Academia Bruylant.Google Scholar
  16. Europäische Gemeinschaft. (2002, December 30). Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2320/2002 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 16. Dezember 2002 zur Festlegung gemeinsamer Vorschriften für die Sicherheit in der Zivilluftfahrt (Text von Bedeutung für den EWR). Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften, pp. L 355/1–L 355/21.Google Scholar
  17. European Commission. (2005). Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on common rules in the field of civil aviation security (Text with EEA relevance). Brussels.Google Scholar
  18. Foucault, M. (1992). Was ist Kritik? Berlin: Merve.Google Scholar
  19. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ). (2007, May 10). Regierung will Fettleibigkeit eindämmen. Aktionsplan gegen Übergewicht und “falsche” Ernährung/Kritik an Ländervergleich, pp. 1f.Google Scholar
  20. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. (2008, March 12). Mehr Austausch mit Washington, p. 5.Google Scholar
  21. Grande, E., & Pauly, L. (2005). Complex sovereignty and the emergence of transnational authority. In E. Grande & L. W. Pauly (Eds.), Complex sovereignty. Reconstituing political authority in the twenty-first century (pp. 285–299). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  22. Guéhenno, J.-M. (1993). The end of the nation-state. Minneapolis/London: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  23. Habermas, J. (1998). Die postnationale Konstellation. Politische Essays. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  24. Habermas, J. (2008). Ach, Europa. Kleine politische Schriften XI. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  25. Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2001). Empire. Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Heins, V., & Warburg, J. (2004). Kampf der Zivilisten. Militär und Gesellschaft im Wandel. Bielefeld: Transcript.Google Scholar
  27. Held, D. (2004). Global covenant. The social democratic alternative to the Washington consensus. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  28. Hobbes, T. (1985). Leviathan. Ed. with an introd. by C.B. Macpherson. London: Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
  29. Jäger, T., & Kümmel, G. (Eds.). (2007). Private military and security companies. Chances, problems, pitfalls and prospects. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  30. Keating, M. (2001). Plurinational democracy. Stateless nations in a post-sovereignty era. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Keohane, R. O. (2002). Power and governance in a partially globalized world. London/New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Keohane, R. O. (2006). The contingent legitimacy of multilateralism. In: GARNET Working Paper 09(06).Google Scholar
  33. König, K. (2008). Governance- und Managementkonzepte des Regierens. In E. Holtmann & W. J. Patzelt (Eds.), Führen Regierungen tatsächlich? Zur Praxis gouvernementalen Handelns (pp. 21–34). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Leisering, B. (2008). Menschenrechtsschutz in politisch bestimmten Räumen. Zur Effektivität juristischer Kontrollmechanismen (Working Paper 03/2008). Institute for World Society Studies, Bielefeld University.Google Scholar
  35. Lieber, R. J. (1991). No common power. Understanding international relations. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  36. Locke, J. (1966). Two treatises of government. A critical ed. with an introd. and apparatus criticus by Peter Laslett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Luhmann, N. (1987). Soziale Systeme. Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  38. Mayntz, R. (2004). Kapitel 3: Governance im modernen Staat. In A. Benz (Ed.), Governance – Regieren in komplexen Regelsystemen. Eine Einführung (pp. 65–76). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  39. Mill, J. S. (1998). On liberty and other essays. Ed. with an introduction and notes by John Gray. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Morgenthau, H. J. (1993). Politics among nations. The struggle for power and peace. Boston et al.: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  41. Mouffe, C. (2005). On the political. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Müller, K. (2002). Globalisierung. Frankfurt am Main/New York: Campus.Google Scholar
  43. Müller, H. (2009). Staatlichkeit ohne Staat – Ein Irrtum aus der europäischen Provinz? Limitierende Bedingungen von Global Governance in einer fragmentierten Welt. In N. Deitelhoff & J. Steffele (Eds.), Was bleibt vom Staat? Demokratie, Recht und Verfassung im globalen Zeitalter (pp. 221–258). Frankfurt am Main/New York: Campus.Google Scholar
  44. Muthien, B., & Taylor, I. (2002). The return of the dogs of war? The privatization of security in Africa. In R. B. Hall & T. J. Biersteker (Eds.), The emergence of private authority in global governance (pp. 183–199). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Park, S.-H., & Kim, H. (2008). The process of European monetary integration and its implications for East Asia. In R. Seidelmann & A. Vasilache (Eds.), European Union and Asia. A dialogue on regionalism and interregional cooperation (pp. 221–238). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  46. Peters, B. G. (2005). Governance. A garbage can perspective. In E. Grande & L. W. Pauly (Eds.), Complex sovereignty. Reconstituing political authority in the twenty-first century (pp. 68–92). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  47. Porter, T. (2005). The private production of public goods. Private and public norms in global governance. In E. Grande & L. W. Pauly (Eds.), Complex sovereignty reconstructing political authority in the twenty-first century (pp. 217–237). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  48. Robert, P. (2005). Bürger, Kriminalität und Staat. With a foreword by Fritz Sack. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  49. Rosenau, J. N. (1992). Governance, order, and change in world politics. In J. N. Rosenau & E.-O. Czempiel (Eds.), Governance without government. Order and change in world politics (pp. 1–29). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rosenau, J. N. (1997). Along the domestic-foreign frontier. Exploring governance in a turbulent world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rousseau, J.-J. (1964). Œuvres complètes. In B. Gagnebin & M. Raymond (Eds.), Bibliothèque de la Pléiade. Vol. III. Du contrat social. Écrits politiques. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  52. Sack, D. (2000). Step across the border, stop at Frankfurt’s frontier! Vorgänge, 2(200), 14–22.Google Scholar
  53. Schuck, C. (2008). Die Entgrenzung des Islamismus. Indonesische Erfahrungen im globalen Kontext. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  54. Seils, C. (2007, April 20). Was treibt Schäuble? In: ZEIT online, http://www.zeit.de/online/2007/17/was-treibt-schaeuble?page=all. Accessed 24 January 2009.
  55. Silverstein, K. (2000). Private warriors. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  56. Singer, P. W. (2003). Corporate warriors. The rise of the privatized military industry. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Singer, P. W. (2004). The private military industry and Iraq. What have we learned and where to next? DCAF Policy Paper, Geneva.Google Scholar
  58. Süddeutsche Zeitung. (2007, May 10). Aktionsplan gegen Fettleibigkeit, p. 1.Google Scholar
  59. Telò, M. (2007a). Europe. A civilian power? European Union, global governance, world order. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  60. Telò, M. (Ed.). (2007b). European Union and new regionalism. Regional actors and global governance in a post-hegemonic era (2nd ed.). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  61. Van Langenhove, L. (2011). Building regions. The regionalization of the world order. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  62. Vasilache, A. (2008a). What is supranational integration? Social contract theory and beyond. In R. Seidelmann & A. Vasilache (Eds.), European Union and Asia. A dialogue on regionalism and interregional cooperation (pp. 13–30). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  63. Vasilache, A. (2008b). Die Partikularisierung des Staates. Ein Problemaufriss. Sozialer Sinn. Zeitschrift für hermeneutische Sozialforschung, 9(1), 121–140.Google Scholar
  64. Vasilache, A. (2009). The normative and analytical limits of governance. A conceptual intervention and a poststructuralist suggestion. In J. L. de Sales Marques, R. Seidelmann, & A. Vasilache (Eds.), Asia and Europe. Dynamics of inter- and intra-regional dialogues (pp. 59–77). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  65. Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Boston et al.: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  66. Wolf, K.-D. (1999). The new raison d’État as a problem for democracy in world society. European Journal of International Relations, 5(3), 333–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wulf, H. (2005). Internationalisierung und Privatisierung von Krieg und Frieden. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  68. Zürn, M., & Walter-Drop, G. (2011). Democracy and representation beyond the nation state. In S. Alonso, J. Keane, & W. Merkel (Eds.), The future of representative democracy (pp. 258–281). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for German and European Studies, Faculty of SociologyUniversity of BielefeldBielefeldGermany

Personalised recommendations