Taming Hegemony
Informal Institutions and the Challenge to Western Liberal Order
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12907386 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jochen Prantl (0000-0001-8920-447X, Australian National University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2014 |
| Volume | 7 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 449-482 |
| Publication date | 2014-09-05 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Chinese Journal of International Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1750-8916 • E-ISSN: 1750-8924 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/cjip/pou036 |
| OpenAlex | W2137705341 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 15 |
| References cited | 12 |
This article develops the argument that informal institutions-'G-x groupings', 'contact groups', 'core groups'-provide a vital space to renegotiate the terms and conditions of US hegemony. With the global balance of power shifting, US hegemony today is no longer seen as the exclusive framework to solve urgent collective action problems-major armed conflict, nuclear non-proliferation, climate change, global financial stability. These problems are of global significance and litmus tests for two key properties of US hegemonic power: the ability to maintain order and to provide public goods. As the global financial crisis of 2008 has demonstrated, emerging powers consider US hegemony as part of the problem rather than the framework through which to develop solutions. The substantial challenges for liberal institutions to adapt to major shifts in the global distribution of power and to act as effective problem-solvers has led to growing recourse to alternative mechanisms of collective action that operate in and around the liberal institutional architecture. However, they are not the convenient support structure for the renegotiation of Western liberal order on exclusive US terms. Informal institutions are platforms for contestation with an open outcome. Contestation includes the possibility of developing new patterns and understandings that may ultimately replace Western liberal order. The social contract between hegemonic leader and followers can be revoked. The contract will be up for termination if there is a widely shared belief that the hegemon fails to deliver sufficient public goods and proves to be incapable of performing its system maintenance functions
Hegemony · International relations · Media studies · Order (exchange · Political science · Politics · Sociology · International Development and Aid · Law · Public Administration
The Origins of Informality
The International Relations of East Asia
International cooperation in times of polycrisis
How informal intergovernmental organizations facilitate cooptation and promote peaceful change in times of power rivalry
Leveraging diplomatic power and influence on the UN Security Council
The Soviet Legacy and the Global South’s Reactions to Russian Invasion of Ukraine in the UN General Assembly
Connectivity and Order
The Role of China and India in the G20 and BRICS
Canary in the coal mine? China, the Unga, and the changing world order
Rising powers and order contestation
Informal Reform of the United Nations Security Council
The United States, China, and Strategic Technologies
The dynamics of informal institutions and counter-hegemony
The untold story
Leadership and performance in informal institutions
War and Change in World Politics
Liberal Internationalism 3.0
China Goes Global
China, The United States, and Global Order
From Non-Proliferation to Post-Proliferation
Uneven patterns of governance
Unspoken Rules and Superpower Dominance
Rules of the Game in International Politics
The limits of hegemonic stability theory
Informal Groups of States and the UN Security Council
Explaining Institutional Change
| Unique citing works | 15 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,5 |
| Citation span | 2016 - 2026 (11) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 15 |