ULUSLARARASI ÖRGÜTLENME VE KÜRESEL YÖNETİŞİM - Deneme Sınavı - 6

Communicative action approach is a knowledge-based (cognitive) theories. The others are interest based (institutional) theories.

There are three types of international regimes: spontaneous, imposed, and negotiated.

Spontaneous regimes are unplanned; they emerge out of common behaviors of actors.

Imposed regimes are purposely constructed by a dominant actor.

Negotiated regimes are those regimes “characterized by conscious efforts to agree on their major provisions, explicit consent on the part of individual participants, and formal expression of the results… It is important to differentiate among several types of negotiated orders that occur in the international system. Such orders will take the form either of ‘constitutional’ contracts or of legislative bargains”

Haggard and Simmons outline four approaches that explain regime formation and maintenance: structural, game-theoretic, functional, and cognitive

The following are about climate change regime:

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC] (1992-1997) (1997-1998)

UNFCCC Financial Mechanism (1992-1997) (1997-1998)

 Kyoto-Protocol

There are five models of internet governance:

• The spontaneous cyberspace model: The Internet is beyond the reach of government control, and it is a self-governing realm of individual liberty.

• The transnational institutions and organization model: It inherently transcends national borders. As a result, most suitable institutions are transnational and quasiprivate cooperatives or international organizations with treaty arrangements.

• The internet architecture and code model: Many regulatory decisions are made by communication protocols and other software about how the Internet operates.

• The national government and law model: Regulatory decisions about the Internet are made through legal regulations by national governments.

• The market regulation and economics model: Market forces are driving forces in shaping the nature of the Internet.

For liberal approach; in a social system where power centralizes, we also observe poor governance. Good governance, however, requires democracy and political pluralism.

II) Neorealists believe that international cooperation depends on the will and power of nation states.

IV) Neorealists emphasize the importance of relative gains (zero-sum game) in international politics.

Expressions with numbered as I, III and IV are expressions are emphasized by neoliberals.

Neoliberals attach greater importance to sustainable development, economic welfare, and non-security issue areas such as international environmental problems. The other four expresssions are belong to neorealists.

Principles are beliefs of causation, fact, and rectitude.

International regimes are mostly seen in issue areas related to the environment, trade, human rights, arms control, and international security. International security regimes differ from other types of international regimes for four reasons:

The main trends of the process of increasing economic integration are as follows: the internationalization of production, trade and financial activities, the increase of foreign trade and economic openness, the reduced role of the state, and the growing role of multinational corporations.

Unlike realists and neorealists who emphasize the concepts of “self-help” and “relative capability” in international politics, liberals focus on common interests where states can cooperate with one another and collaborate toward setting a framework for an institutionalized cooperation.

While neorealists claim that foreign policy is constrained by anarchy, neoliberals argue that international regimes, globalization, and international interdependence are important tools for managing the relations between international actors.

A zero-sum game is a situation in which one actor’s gain means another actor’s loss.

Krasner, there are four defining components of international regimes: • Principles are beliefs of causation, fact, and rectitude. • Norms are standards of behavior, and they are defined in terms of rights and obligations. • Rules are specific prescriptions or proscriptions for action. • Decision-making procedures are prevailing practices for making and implementing collective choice (Krasner, 1983: 2).

Power-based (Structural) theories;

1. Hegemonic stability theory (Keohane, 1984)

2. Power-oriented research (Krasner, 1983)

3. Modern realist perspective (Grieco, 1988)

Interest-based (Institutional) theories;

1. Contractualist (Functional) theory (Keohane, 1984)

2. Situation-structural approach (Stein, 1990, Snidal, 1985,Oye, 1986)

3. Problem-structural approach (E‡nger et al., 1993, Rittberger, 1993)

4. Institutional bargaining (Young, 1989)

There are five models of internet governance:

• The spontaneous cyberspace model: The Internet is beyond the reach of government control, and it is a self-governing realm of individual liberty.

• The transnational institutions and organization model: It inherently transcends national borders. As a result, most suitable institutions are transnational and quasiprivate cooperatives or international organizations with treaty arrangements.

• The internet architecture and code model: Many regulatory decisions are made by communication protocols and other software about how the Internet operates.

• The national government and law model: Regulatory decisions about the Internet are made through legal regulations by national governments.

• The market regulation and economics model: Market forces are driving forces in shaping the nature of the Internet (Solum, 2009: 56-57).