The limits of design for cosmopolitan democracy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Most scholars and practitioners agree that world politics suffers from a democratic deficit. In response, proposals for cosmopolitan democracy are not in short supply. Indeed the meaning of the term cosmopolitan democracy is now incredibly broad, encompassing a wide variety of institutional and normative prescriptions intended to foster more democratically legitimate standards at the transnational level. However, there is a distinct irony to these proposals. The increased interdependence and cooperation of actors at the transnational level - spurred on by globalization - make cosmopolitan democracy a necessary vision. Simultaneously, globalization amplifies power imbalances and thus skews the interests of different agents. Hence, globalization makes cosmopolitan democracy a necessary but distant prospect. This article seeks to address the empirical institutional constraints against building cosmopolitan democracy using historical institutionalism to stress the limitations of design. A normative argument is also built focusing on the relative merits of democratic experimentalism as a way to advance the cosmopolitan project whilst undercutting the complications noted in the analytical section of the article. © 2012 by Public Reason.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)28-47
Number of pages20
JournalPublic Reason
Volume4
Issue number1-2
Publication statusPublished - 2012

    Fingerprint

Bibliographical note

Cited By :1

Export Date: 19 September 2018

Correspondence Address: Kuyper, J. W.; Australian National UniversitAustralia; email: jonathan.kuyper1@gmail.com

References: Abers, R., (2000) Inventing Local Democracy: Grassroots Politics in Brazil, , Boulder, CO.: Lynne Rienner Publishers; Alexander, G., Institutions, Path Dependence, and Democratic Consolidation (2001) Journal of Theoretical Politics, 13 (3), pp. 249-270; Archibugi, D., Held, D., (1995) Cosmopolitan Democracy: An Agenda for a New World Order, , Cambridge: Polity Press; Archibugi, D., Held, D., Cosmopolitan Democracy: Paths and Agents (2011) Ethics and International Affairs, 25 (4), pp. 433-461; Archibugi, D., Held, D., Köhler, M., (1998) Re-imagining Political Community: Studies in Cosmopolitan Democracy, , Stanford: Stanford University Press; Archibugi, D., Koenig-Archibugi, M., Marchetti, R., (2011) Global Democracy: Normative and Empirical Perspectives, , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Barnett, B., Finnemore, M., The Politics, Power and Pathologies of International Organizations (1999) International Organization, 53 (4), pp. 699-732; Beetham, D., Towards a Universal Framework for Democracy Assessment (2004) Democratization, 11 (2), pp. 1-17; Brock, G., (2008) Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Account, , Oxford: Oxford University Press; Brown, G., Bringing the State Back into Cosmopolitanism: The Idea of Responsible Cosmopolitan States (2011) Political Studies Review, 9 (1), pp. 53-66; Cabrera, L., (2004) Political Theory of Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Case for the World State, , New York: Routledge; Campbell, J.L., (2004) Institutional Change and Globalization, , Princeton: Princeton University Press; Caney, S., (2005) Justice Beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory, , Oxford: Oxford University Press; Dorf, M., Sabel, C., A Constitution of Democratic Experimentalism (1998) Columbia Law Review, 98 (2), pp. 267-473; Dryzek, J.S., Transnational Democracy (1999) Journal of Political Philosophy, 7 (1), pp. 30-51; Dryzek, J.S., Bächtiger, A., Milewicz, K., Toward a Deliberative Global Citizens' Assembly (2011) Global Policy, 2 (1), pp. 33-42; Erman, A., In Search of Democratic Agency in Deliberative Governance European Journal of International Relations, , Forthcoming; Falk, R., Strauss, A., Toward Global Parliament (2001) Foreign Affairs, 80 (1), pp. 212-220; Fearon, J., Bargaining, Enforcement, and International Cooperation (1998) International Organization, 52 (2), pp. 269-305; Finnemore, M., Sikkink, K., International Norm Dynamics and Political Change (1998) International Organization, 52 (4), pp. 887-917; Fioretos, O., Historical Institutionalism in International Relations (2011) International Organization, 65 (2), pp. 367-399; Fung, A., Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and their Consequences (2003) The Journal of Political Philosophy, 11 (3), pp. 338-367; Fung, A., Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance (2006) Working and Published Papers, , http://www.archonfung.net/papers/fungvarietiesofpart.pdf, (accessed May 26, 2012); Goldstone, J., Representation Models and Democratic Transitions in Fragile and Post-Conflict States (2010) World Development Report 2011, , http://wdr2011.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/Representational%20Models%2018%20Sept%20(Goldstone).pdf, (accessed November 14, 2012); Goodin, R., Global Democracy: In the Beginning (2010) International Theory, 2 (2), pp. 175-209; Hawkins, D., Lake, D., Nielson, D., Tierney, M., Delegation under anarchy: States, international organizations, and principal-agent theory (2006) Delegation and Agency in International Organizations, pp. 3-38. , In edited by D. Hawkins, D. Lake, D. Nielson, and M. Tierney, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Held, D., (1995) Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance, , Cambridge: Polity Press; Ikenberry, G.J., (2001) After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars, , Princeton: Princeton University Press; Keohane, R.O., (1984) After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; Kennedy, D., The Mystery of Global Governance (2008) Kormendy Lecture, , http://www.watsoninstitute.org/blss/media/docs/kennedy.pdf, (accessed October 16, 2012); Koenig-Archibugi, M., Is Global Democracy Possible? (2010) European Journal of International Relations, 17 (3), pp. 519-542; Koremenos, B., Contracting around International Uncertainty (2005) International Organization, 99 (4), pp. 549-565; Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., Snidal, D., The Rational Design of International Institutions (2001) International Organization, 55 (4), pp. 761-799; List, C., Koenig-Archibugi, M., Can There Be a Global Demos? An Agency-Based Approach (2010) Philosophy and Public Affairs, 38 (1), pp. 76-110; Mahoney, J., Path-Dependence in Historical Sociology (2000) Theory and Society, 29 (4), pp. 507-548; Mahoney, J., Thelen, K., A Gradual Theory of Institutional Change (2010) Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency and Power, pp. 1-37. , In edited by J. Mahoney and K. Thelen, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Marchetti, R., (2008) Global Democracy: For and Against: Ethical Theory, Institutional Design, and Social Struggles, , London-New York: Routledge; Miller, D., Democracy's Domain (2009) Philosophy and Public Affairs, 37 (3), pp. 201-228; Moravcsik, A., Is there a 'Democratic Deficit in World Politics? A Framework for Analysis (2004) Government and Opposition, 39 (2), pp. 336-363; Morgenthau, H., (1948) Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, , New York: Alfred A. Knopf; Nye, J., Globalization's Democratic Deficit: How to Make International Organizations More Accountable (2001) Foreign Affairs, 80 (4), pp. 2-7; Pierson, P., The Limits of Design: Explaining Institutional Origins and Change (2000) Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13 (4), pp. 475-499; Pierson, P., (2004) Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis, , Princeton: Princeton University Press; Przeworski, A., Institutions Matter? (2004) Government and Opposition, 39 (4), pp. 527-540; Risse, T., Let's Argue!: Communicative Action in World Politics (2000) International Organization, 54 (1), pp. 1-39; Rosendorff, B.P., Milner, H., The Optimal Design of International Trade Institutions: Uncertainty and Escape (2001) International Organization, 55 (4), pp. 829-857; Scholte, J.A., Civil Society and Democratically Accountable Global Governance (2004) Government and Opposition, 39 (2), pp. 211-233; Shah, A., Participatory Budgeting (2007) Public Governance and Accountability Sector, , http://siteresources.worldbank.org/PSGLP/Resources/ParticipatoryBudgeting.pdf, (accessed October 16, 2012); Strambach, S., Path dependency and path plasticity: The co-evolution of institutions and innovation-the German customized business software industry (2008) Working Papers on Innovation and Space, , ftp://137.248.191.199/RePEc/pum/wpaper/WP2.pdf, (accessed October 28, 2012); Tsebelis, G., Veto Players and Institutional Analysis (2000) Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13 (4), pp. 441-474; UK Participatory Budgeting Project., , http://www.participatorybudgeting.org.uk/about, (accessed October 28, 2012); Waltz, K., (1979) Theory of International Politics, , Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing; Wendt, A., Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics (1992) International Organization, 46 (2), pp. 391-425

Keywords

  • Cosmopolitanism
  • Democratic experimentalism
  • Global democracy
  • Global governance
  • Historical institutionalism

Cite this