![]() These different understandings have their origin in certain real-world and disciplinary dynamics and constitute global governance in present discourse as a “condensation symbol” of different meanings. More specifically, the article argues that the current state of confusion exists not because of a lack of debate but rather because of different understandings of global governance that were attached to the concept during its emergence and which are still advanced and reproduced within debates today. This state of confusion affects debates within the Political Science subfield of IR as well as dialogue between different disciplines beyond IR. In fact, how to even speak and think global governance-whether as a description of world politics, as a theoretical perspective to explain it, or as a normative notion to be realized through global policy-remains debated. More than 20 years after global governance was introduced to the discipline of International Relations (IR), confusion about its conceptual status remains.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |