Advertisement

Conclusions

  • Rafael Biermann
  • Joachim A. Koops
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter reviews the overall state of research in the field of inter-organizational relations, emphasizing its richness and experimental character, as well as challenges such as the risk of fragmentation and theorization in silos. More specifically, it serves three major purposes. First, we discuss the balance of review and exploration in our Handbook, pointing in particular to some of the chapters, which explore terra incognita. Second, we assess the primary rationalist and constructivist approaches and variables presented in the Handbook, debate major findings on agency and on structure in inter-organizational relations and highlight those issue areas where inter-organizational research is substantial and where it is deserving. Finally, we recommend nine future research directions.

Keywords

European Union International Monetary Fund United Nations Global Governance Issue Area 
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.

Bibliography

  1. Abbott, K. W. (2012) ‘The Transnational Regime Complex for Climate Change’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 30:4, 571–90.Google Scholar
  2. Abbott, K. W. (2014) ‘Strengthening the Transnational Regime Complex for Climate Change’, Transnational Environmental Law, 3:1, 57–88.Google Scholar
  3. Adrianessens, P. (2008) ‘Rapprochement between the EU and the UN: History and Balance of Intersecting Political Cultures’, European Foreign Affairs Review 13, 53–72.Google Scholar
  4. Barnett, M. and Coleman, L. (2005) ‘Designing Police: Interpol and the Study of Change in International Organizations’, International Studies Quarterly, 49, 593–619.Google Scholar
  5. Barnett, M. and Finnemore, M. (1999) ‘The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations’, International Organization, 53:4, 699–732.Google Scholar
  6. Barnett, M. and Finnemore, M. (2004) Rules of the World: International Organizations in Global Politics, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Barrin, L. A. and Roper, S. D. (2004) ‘Economic Transition in Latin American and Post-Communist Countries: A Comparison of Multilateral Development Banks’, International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 17:4, 619–38.Google Scholar
  8. Bennett, J. (2013 [1995]) Meeting Needs. NGO Coordination in Practice, New York: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  9. Bensahel, N. (2006) ‘A Coalition of Coalitions: International Cooperation Against Terrorism’, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 29, 35–49.Google Scholar
  10. Betts, A. (2006), Conceptualising Interconnections in Global Governance: the Case of Refugee Protection, Oxford: University of Oxford, Refugee Studies Centre, RSC Working Paper N. 38.Google Scholar
  11. Betts, A. (2010) ‘The Refugee Regime Complex’, Refugee Survey Quarterly, 29:1, 12–37.Google Scholar
  12. Betts, A. (ed., 2011) Global Migration Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Biermann, R. (2008) ‘Towards a Theory of Inter-Organizational Networking’, Review of International Organizations, 3:2, 151–77.Google Scholar
  14. Biermann, R. (2009a) ‘NATO’s Institutional Decline in Post-Cold War Security’, in: Hallenberg, J., Sperling, J. and Wagnsson, C. (eds.) The EU and Security Governance: Networked Governance in a Multipolar World, London: Routledge, 40–60.Google Scholar
  15. Biermann, R. (2009b) ‘Interorganisationalism in Theory and Practice’, Studia Diplomatica (Special Issue: Military Crisis Management: The Challenge of Inter-organizationalism), 62:3, 13–19.Google Scholar
  16. Biermann, R. (2011) ‘Inter-Organizational Relations: An Emerging Research Program’, in Reinalda, B. (ed.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Non-State Actors, London: Ashgate, 173–84.Google Scholar
  17. Biermann, R. (2014) ‘NATO’s Troubled Relations with Partner Organizations. A Resource Dependence Explanation’, in: Mayer, S. (ed.) NATO’s Post-Cold Bureaucracy and the Changing Provision of Security, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 215–34.Google Scholar
  18. Biermann, R. (2015) ‘Designing Cooperation among International Organizations. Autonomy Concerns, the Dual Consensus Rule, and Cooperation Failure’, Journal of International Organization Studies, 6:2, 2015.Google Scholar
  19. Bourantonis, D. and Blavoukos, S. (eds., 2010) The EU’s Presence in International Organizations, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Brosig, M. (2013) ‘Introduction: The African Security Regime Complex—Exploring Converging Actors and Policies’, African Security, (Special Issue) 6, 171–90.Google Scholar
  21. Chabbott, C. (1998) ‘Constructing educational consensus: international development professionals and the world conference on education for all’, International Journal of Educational Development, 18:3, 207–18.Google Scholar
  22. Checkel, J. T. (1999) ‘Norms, Institutions, and National Identity in Contemporary Europe’, International Studies Quarterly, 43:1, 83–114.Google Scholar
  23. Cox, R. W. and Jacobson, H. K. (eds., 1973) The Anatomy of Influence. Decision Making in International Organization, New Haven und London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Cropper, S., Ebers, M., Huxham, C. and Ring, P. S. (eds., 2010) The Oxford Handbook of Inter-organizational Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Dijkzeul, D. and Beigbeder, Y. (2003) Rethinking International Organizations. Pathology and Promise, New York: Berghahn.Google Scholar
  26. Drezner, D. W. (2004) ‘Global Governance of the Internet: Bringing the State Back In’, Political Science Quarterly, 119:3, 477–98.Google Scholar
  27. Dufourcq, J. and Yost, D. S. (2006) NATO-EU Cooperation in Post-Conflict Reconstruction, Rome: NATO Defense College, Occasional Paper 15.Google Scholar
  28. Duke, S. (2008) ‘The Future of EU-NATO Relations: a Case of Mutual Irrelevance Through Competition?’, European Integration, 30:1, 27–43.Google Scholar
  29. Enders, W. and Su, X. (2007) ‘Rational Terrorists and Optimal Network Structure’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 51:1, 33–57.Google Scholar
  30. Enders, W. and Jindapon, P. (2009) ‘Network Externalities and the Structure of Terror Networks’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 54:2, 262–80.Google Scholar
  31. Feinberg, R. E. (1988) ‘The Changing Relationship Between the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund’, International Organization, 42:3, 545–60.Google Scholar
  32. Galbreath, D. and Gebhard, C. (eds., 2010) Cooperation or Conflict? Problematizing Organizational Overlap in Europe, London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  33. Gest, N. and Grigorescu, A. (2010) ‘Interactions among Intergovernmental Organizations in the Anti-Corruption Realm’, Review of International Organizations, 5:1, 53–72.Google Scholar
  34. Gheciu, A. (2011) ‘Divided Partners: The Challenges of NATO-NGO Cooperation in Peacebuilding Operations’, Global Governance, 17:1, 95–113.Google Scholar
  35. Gheciu, A., and Paris, R. (2011) ‘NATO and the Challenge of Sustainable Peacebuilding’, Global Governance, 17:1, 75–79.Google Scholar
  36. Gowan, R. (2009) ‘ESDP and the United Nations’, in: Grevi, G., Helly, D. and Keohane, D. (eds.) European Security and Defence Policy. The First 10 Years (19992009), Paris: EU Institute for Security Studies.Google Scholar
  37. Grigorescu, A. (2002) ‘European Institutions and Unsuccessful Norm Transmission: The Case of Transparency’, International Politics, 39:4, 467–89.Google Scholar
  38. Gutner, T. and Thompson, A. (2010) ‘The politics of IO performance: a framework’, Review of International Organizations, 5:3, 227–48.Google Scholar
  39. Hardy, C. (1994) ‘Underorganized Interorganizational Domains: The Case of Refugee Systems’, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 30:3, 278–96.Google Scholar
  40. Harsch, M. F. (2015) The Power of Dependence: NATO-UN Cooperation in Crisis Management, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Hellmann, G. (2003) ‘Are Dialogue and Synthesis Possible in International Relations?’, International Studies Review, 5, 123–53.Google Scholar
  42. Herren, M. (2009) Internationale Organisationen seit 1865, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  43. Herrhausen, A. (2007) ‘Coordination in United Nations peacebuilding: A theory-guided approach’, Discussion Paper / Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, No. SP IV 2007-301.Google Scholar
  44. Herrhausen, A. (2009) Organizing Peacebuilding: An Investigation of Interorganizational Coordination in International Post Conflict Reconstruction Efforts, Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  45. Hofmann, S. (2009) ‘Overlapping Institutions in the Realm of International Security: The Case of NATO and ESDP’, Perspectives on Politics, 7:1, 45–52.Google Scholar
  46. Hofmann, S. (2011) ‘Why Institutional Overlap Matters: CSDP in the European Security Architecture’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 49:1, 101–20.Google Scholar
  47. Hofmann, S. (2013) European Security in NATO’s Shadow. Party Ideologies and Institution Building, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Howorth, J. and Keeler, J. T.S. (eds., 2003) Defending Europe. The EU, NATO, and the Quest for European Autonomy, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  49. Hudson, D. (2015) ‘The IMF as a de facto institution of the EU: A multiple supervisor approach’, Review of International Political Economy, 22:3, 570–98.Google Scholar
  50. International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group (2007) ‘Enhancing Collaboration: Joint Management Action Plan’, 20 September (Washington DC: International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group), available at https://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/2007/eng/092007.pdf, date accessed 12 January 2015.
  51. International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group (2010) ‘Implementation of the Joint Management Action Plan on Bank-Fund Collaboration’, 3 March (Washington DC: World Bank Group), available at https://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2010/030310.pdf, date accessed 2 September 2015.
  52. Joachim, J., Schneiker, A. and Verbeek, B. (2015; first draft: 2009) ‘Not Always Moonlight and Roses: Cooperation, Competition, and Enmity among International Organizations’, Paper prepared for the 56th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, New Orleans, 18–21 Feb. 2015.Google Scholar
  53. Joachim, J. and Schneiker, A. (2013) Going it alone or with partners? The EU and UNSCR 1325, Paper prepared for the 8th Pan-European Conference on International Relations, Warsaw, 18–21 September 2013.Google Scholar
  54. Jönsson, C. (1996) ‘The Problem of Coordination Among UN Agencies: Experience from AIDS-related assistance programmes’, Development and Multilateral Institutions Programme, Working Paper No. 7.Google Scholar
  55. Jørgensen, K. E. (ed., 2010) The European Union and International Organisations, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Jørgensen, K. E. and Laatikainen, K. V. (eds., 2013) Routledge Handbook on the European Union and International Institutions, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  57. Keck, M. E. and Sikkink, K. (1998) Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  58. Keohane, R. O. and Victor, D. G. (2011) ‘The Regime Complex for Climate Change’, Perspectives on Politics, 9:1, 7–23.Google Scholar
  59. Kissack, R. (2010) Pursuing Effective Multilateralism: The European Union, International Organizations and the Politics of Decision Making, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  60. Kolb, M. (2013) The European Union and the Council of Europe, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  61. Koops, J. A. (ed., 2009) Military Crisis Management: The Case of Inter-organizationalism, Special issue of Studia Diplomatica, Vol LXII, Issue 3, Brussels: Egmont Institute.Google Scholar
  62. Koops, J. A. (2011) The European Union as an Integrative Power: Assessing the EU's ‘Effective Multilateralism’ Towards NATO and the United Nations, Brussels: VUB Press.Google Scholar
  63. Koops, J. A. (2012) ‘NATO’s Influence on the EU as an International Security Actor’, in: Costa, O. and Jorgensen, K. E. (eds.) The Influence of International Institutions on the EU: When Multilateralism Hits Brussels, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 155–85.Google Scholar
  64. Koops, J.A. and Tardy, T. (2015) ‘The United Nations’ Inter-organizational Relations in Peacekeeping’, in: Koops, J., MacQueen, N., Tardy, T. and Williams, P. D. (eds) Oxford Handbook of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Krause, J. and Ronzitti, N. (2012) The EU, the UN and Collective Security: Making Multilateralism Effective, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  66. Krebs, V. E. (2002) ‘Mapping Networks of Terrorist Cells’, Connections, 24:3, 43–52.Google Scholar
  67. Laatikainen, K. V. and Smith, K. E. (eds., 2006) Intersecting Multilateralisms: The European Union and the United Nations, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  68. Liese, A. (2009) ‘Die unterschiedlich starke Öffnung internationaler Organisationen gegenüber nichtstaatlichen Akteuren. Erklärungen der Institutionen- und Organisationstheorie’, in: Dingwerth, K., Kerwer, D. and Nölke, A. (eds.) Die Organisierte Welt. Internationale Beziehungen und Organisationsforschung, Baden-Baden: Nomos, 189–210.Google Scholar
  69. Lipson, M. (2007a) ‘A “Garbage Can Model” of UN Peacekeeping’, Global Governance, 13:1, 79–97.Google Scholar
  70. Lipson, M. (2007b) ‘Peacekeeping: Organized Hypocrisy?’, European Journal of International Relations, 13:1, 5–34.Google Scholar
  71. Loescher, G. (1993) Beyond Charity. International Cooperation and the Global Refugee Crisis, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Macaj G. (2014) Dysfunctional Endeavour: the Pursuit of EU Unity in the UN Human Rights Council, PhD Dissertation, Brussels: Vrije Universiteit Brussel.Google Scholar
  73. Malan, P., et al. (2007) ‘Report of the External Review Committee on Bank-Fund Collaboration’ (Washington DC: International Monetary Fund), available at https://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2007/022307.pdf, date accessed 20 July 2015.
  74. Meltzer, A. H. (2000) ‘Report of the International Financial Institutions Advisory Commission: Comments on the Critics’ (Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University), available at http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1029&context=tepper, date accessed 20 July 2015.
  75. Mérand, F., Hofmann, S. and Irondelle, B. (2011) ‘Governance and State Power: A Network Analysis of European Security’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 49:1, 121–47.Google Scholar
  76. Mueller, M., Schmidt, A. and Kuerrbis, B. (2013) ‘Internet Security and Networked Governance in International Relations’, International Studies Review, 15, 86–104.Google Scholar
  77. Murascin, W. (2004) ‘The global alliance for vaccines and immunization: Is it a new model for effective public-private cooperation in international public health?’, American Journal of Public Health, 94:11, 1922–25.Google Scholar
  78. Ness, G. D. and Brechin, S. R. (1988) ‘Bridging the gap: international organizations as organizations’, International Organization, 42:2, 245–73.Google Scholar
  79. Ness, G. D. and Brechin, S. R. (2013) ‘Looking Back at the Gap: International Organizations as Organizations Twenty-Five Years Later’, Journal of International Organizations Studies, 4, 14–39.Google Scholar
  80. Novosseloff, Alexandra (2004) EU-UN Partnership in Crisis Management: Developments and Prospects, IPI Policy Paper, 15 July, New York: International Peace Institute.Google Scholar
  81. Oberthür, S. and Gehring, T. (eds., 2006) Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  82. Oberthür, S. and Stokke (eds., 2011), Managing Institutional Complexity: Regime Interplay and Global Encvironmental Change, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  83. Oksamytna, K. (2013) ‘The Diffusion of Policy Norms to IOs: Are Other IOs a Factor?’ Paper prepared for the 1st European Workshop in International Studies, Tartu, June 5–8, 2013, available at http://unige.academia.edu/KseniyaOksamytna, date accessed 20 July 2015.
  84. Ojanen, H. (2006) ‘The EU and Nato: Two Competing Models for a Common Defence Policy’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 44:1, 57–76.Google Scholar
  85. Paris, R. (2009) ‘Understanding the “coordination problem” in postwar statebuilding’, in: Paris, R. and Sisk, T. (eds.) The Dilemmas of Statebuilding: Confronting the Contradictions of Postwar Peace Operations, Abingdon: Routledge, 53–78.Google Scholar
  86. Peters, I. (2004) ‘ESDP as a Transatlantic Issue: Problems of Mutual Ambiguity’, International Studies Review, 6, 381–401.Google Scholar
  87. Raustiala, K. and Victor, D. G. (2004) ‘The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources’, International Organization, 58:2, 277–309.Google Scholar
  88. Reichard, M. (2006) The EU-NATO Relationship: A Legal And Political Perspective, London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  89. Reinalda, B. (2009) Routledge History of International Organizations. From 1815 to the Present Day, London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  90. Riddell, R. C. (2007) Does Foreign Aid Really Work? Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Riddell, R. C. (2009) ‘Does Foreign Aid Work?’ In: Kremer, M., Lieshout, P. van and Went, R. (eds.) Doing Good for Doing Better. Development Policies in a Globalized World, The Hague, Amsterdam University Press, 47–79.Google Scholar
  92. Romaniuk, P. (2010) Multilateral Counter-Terrorism. The global politics of cooperation and contestation, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  93. Sageman, M. (2004) Understanding Terror Networks, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  94. Schäferhoff, M. (2009) ‘Kooperation oder Konkurrenz? Zur Kooperationsbereitschaft internationaler Verwaltungsstäbe in transnationalen öffentlich-privaten Partnerschaften’, in: Dingwerth, K., Kerwer D. and Nölke A. (eds.) Die Organisierte Welt. Internationale Beziehungen und Organisationsforschung, Baden-Baden: Nomos, 211–31.Google Scholar
  95. Scheuermann, M. (2012) VN-EU-Beziehungen in der militärischen Friedenssicherung, Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  96. Schumacher, B. (2012) The Influence of the Council of Europe on the European Union: Resource Exchange and Domain Restriction as Venues for Inter-Institutional Influence’, in: Costa, O. and Jorgensen, K.E. (eds) The Influence of International Institutions on the EU: When Multilateralism Hits Brussels, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 186–214.Google Scholar
  97. Scott, R. W. (1998) Organizations. Rational, Natural, and Open Systems, 5th ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  98. Seyboldt, T. (2009) ‘Harmonizing the Humanitarian Aid Network: Adaptive Change in a Complex System’, International Studies Quarterly, 53:4, 1027–50.Google Scholar
  99. Smithers, P. (1979) ‘Towards Greater Coherence Among Inter-governmental Organizations Through Governmental Control’, in: Andemicael, B. (ed.) Regionalism and the United Nations, New York: Oceana Publications, 13–93.Google Scholar
  100. Stephenson, M. Jr. and Schnitzer, M. H. (2006) ‘Interorganizational Trust, Boundary Spanning, and Humanitarian Relief Coordination’, Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 17:2, 211–33.Google Scholar
  101. Stohl, M. (2008) ‘Networks, terrorists, and criminals: the implications for community policing’, Crime. Law, and Social Change, 50, 59–72.Google Scholar
  102. Tardy, T. (2005) The United Nations and the European Union: Partners in Effective Multilateralism, Paris: EU Institute for Security Studies, Chaillot Paper 78.Google Scholar
  103. Tardy, T. (2009) ‘UN-EU Relations in Military Crisis Management: Instiutionalisation and Key Constraints’, Studia Diplomatica 3, 43–52.Google Scholar
  104. Tardy, T. (2011) Cooperating to Build Peace. The UN-EU Inter-Institutional Puzzle, Geneva Papers—Research Series 2, Geneva: Geneva Centre for Security Policy.Google Scholar
  105. Varwick, J. (ed., 2005) Die Beziehungen zwischen NATO und EU. Partnerschaft, Konkurrenz, Rivalität, Opladen: Barbara Budrich.Google Scholar
  106. Varwick, J. and Koops, J. (2009) ‘The European Union’s Relations with NATO: Shrewd Interorganizationalism in the Making?’, in: Jorgensen, K. E. (ed.) The European Union and International Organisations, London: Routledge, 101–30.Google Scholar
  107. Vetterlein, A. and Moschella, M. (2014) ‘International organizations and organizational fields: explaining policy change in the IMF’, European Political Science Review, 6:1, 143–65.Google Scholar
  108. Wouters, J., Hoffmeister, F. and Ruys, T. (eds., 2006) The United Nations and the European Union: An Ever Stronger Partnership, The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press.Google Scholar
  109. Wouters, J., Bruyninckx, H., Basu, S. and Schunz, S. (eds., 2012) The European Union and Multilateral Governance: Assessing EU Participation in United Nations Human Rights and Environmental Fora, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  110. Yost, D. (2007) NATO and International Organizations, Rome: NATO Defense College.Google Scholar
  111. Young, O. R. (ed., 2002) The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change: Fit, Interplay, and Scale, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rafael Biermann
    • 1
  • Joachim A. Koops
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Political ScienceFriedrich Schiller UniversityJenaGermany

Personalised recommendations