Conclusion

Loading...

From the course by University of Geneva

International Organizations Management

33 ratings

University of Geneva

International Organizations Management

33 ratings

This course provides an introduction to International Organizations and the United Nations, and explores how business and management tools can be applied in these settings to achieve better, more effective results. With a focus on cross-sector partnerships in a changing world, the course offers you insights into the inner workings of international organizations and the challenges they face today. It will introduce you to effective, state-of-the art management tools and principles to help you lead change in this world – taught by senior staff of international organizations themselves. This is an introductory course offered by the International Organizations MBA (IO-MBA) of the University of Geneva, an executive program for change-makers in international organizations, NGOs and social ventures.

From the lesson

The Shifting Context for International Organizations

In our second module, we will turn to the practice of international relations to understand how states engage with each other and other actors on the global stage. Today, international relations are about much more than the traditional study of states, security and power. From growing anti-trade sentiments, to the impact of climate change, to cyber-security in a hyper-connected world, most of the security threats of the 21st century will require greater cooperation across borders and collective action from governments, private sector and civil society. These shifts raise important questions for the future functioning of international organizations.

Conclusion 7:30

Meet the Instructors

Gilbert Probst
Professor, Organization and Management
Faculty of Economic and Social Sciences
Sebastian Buckup
Visiting professor
International Organizations MBA
Bruce Jenks
Visiting professor
International Organizations MBA
Stephan Mergenthaler
Visiting professor
International Organizations MBA
Cassandra Quintanilla
Teaching and research assistant
International Organizations MBA
Lea Stadtler
Research Fellow
Faculty of Economic and Social Sciences
Claudia Gonzalez Romo
Visiting professor
International Organizations MBA
Julian Fleet
Visiting professor
International Organizations MBA
Tina Ambos
Academic Director of the International Organizations MBA
Faculty of Economic and Social Sciences

[MUSIC]

Our short excursions into the worlds of trade, climate change, and

Internet governance illustrated how issues which transcend traditional

borders of nation states and arguably traditional mandates of international

organizations make global cooperation more important yet also more difficult.

In international trade, the emergence of global supply chains and

the fragmentation of production processes creates new network problems

that WTO has big difficulties to address them.

Investment rules, competition policies or customs procedures are domestic in nature

but, of course, have major implications for global supply chains.

So how should the WTO deal with this?

On top, emerging markets have evolved from passive observers on the periphery

to active participants at the front and center of the WTO and

other trade bodies, making them more legitimate, yet also less effective.

Stacey Child discussed two potential solutions to reducing the growing

complexity in international trade, made our regional agreements and

issue-specific unilateral agreements.

It remains of course to be seen if any of those with advanced or

fragmented international trade going forward.

With more than 200 multilateral agreements,

global environmental governance is highly institutionalized.

Still, in terms of outcomes, success stories are unfortunately rare.

In climate change, the second global issue we explored, two decades of international

negotiations resulted exactly in one treaty, the 1995 Kyoto Protocol.

And this one on top never got ratified by the United States or

any major developing country.

According to Jill Casan, international institutions have not been able

to help states overcome collective action dilemmas.

Partly, this goes back to conflicting priorities of developing countries

who evolved into the world's largest emitters of the past two decades and

partly, to powerful transnational networks actors and

interests which constrained the ability of states to arrive at agreements.

Voluntary subnational initiatives, as well as transnational multi-stakeholder

partnerships, rose to fill the gap in recent years.

But as Jill pointed out, by themselves, they will not be enough

to confront one of the biggest challenges humanity is facing today.

The management of the Internet has only recently entered

the stage of international politics.

In many ways, it is the perfect network problem where everyone gains

from openness and connectedness, but there are common challenges,

such as cyber crime, but also common rules and frameworks need to be reassured.

Explained the emergence of new structures for Internet governance

amplified the tension between hierarchies and networks in a powerful way.

All three examples showed how the 20th century hierarchical model of

international organization is struggling to deal with today's challenges.

Our guest speakers illustrated that innovative approaches to these problems

are often about networked leadership, about being at the center,

not about being at the top.

States and foreign institutions continue to play an important role in this,

but they increasingly need to orchestrate networks

to successfully manage today's global problems.

>> The three examples we decided to share with you not only exhibit similar

dynamics, the struggle between hierarchies and networks.

They also respond to a common concern, an international order which allows societies

to reap the benefits from globalization while limiting its risks.

This concern has not always been at the forefront of international politics.

Historically, states experience interdependence primarily as threats

to their sovereignty.

International relations was mainly about the projection of military power

over territories as expressed in the term geopolitics.

The collapse of the Soviet Union shifted the focus from state security

to the provision of institutions that facilitate globalization.

This is not to say that large powers did not clash anymore.

Differences arose over the conflicts in the Balkans, NATO enlargement,

the missile shield, intellectual property,

artificially lower exchange rates, trade globalizations and so on.

But high intensity interstate wars declined by almost 80% and

no persistent breakdowns of big power relationships occurred.

If from the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s, the tension between private networks and

public hierarchies dominated the headlines, the second decade

of the new millennium is more complicated in that both private and

public hierarchies are challenged by emerging public and private networks.

An important trigger for these developments are the massive differences

in the economic performance of major states since the end of the Cold War.

The slide you see compares the gross domestic product of Russia,

China, Japan, and the United States, and the European Union.

The graph tells you two striking stories.

One is the astonishing rise of China, not only in absolute terms but

also relative to the stagnant regional rival Japan and the United States.

The others, the stagnation of Russia, not only in absolute terms but

also relative to the EU in the west and China to its east.

Why should we care about this measure?

Because aggregate economic power at some point

has a good chance of translating into political might.

This was true for Britain in the 19th century and for the United States

in the 20th century, and could well be true for China in the 21st century.

Much has been written about the dynamics of great power rivalry and

particularly about periods of power transition.

This year, the centennial of the first World War has evoked many accounts

of the parallels with today's strategic competition and

the potential of a broad-based unraveling of networks.

However, given deeper economic integration and

a more formalized international system, a more likely outcome would be

competitive cooperation whereby actors strive for

the center of the network rather than the top of traditional hierarchies.

The defining challenge for international organizations

will therefore be to avoid being paralyzed by rising tensions among states and

be a proactive broker for international corporation.

[MUSIC]

Explore our Catalog

Join for free and get personalized recommendations, updates and offers.

Coursera provides universal access to the world’s best education, partnering with top universities and organizations to offer courses online.

© 2018 Coursera Inc. All rights reserved.

Download on the App Store

Get it on Google Play