Global Leadership and International Regime

Empirical Testing of Cooperation without Hegemony Paradigm on the Basis of 120 Multilateral Conventions Data Deposited to the United Nations System

Bibliographic Data

ID6278375
AuthorsLien Thi Quynh Le (0000-0003-4448-3115, Nagaoka University), Yoshiki Mikami (0000-0002-3421-6382, Nagaoka University), Takashi Inoguchi (University of Niigata Prefecture)
Year2014
Volume15
Issue4
Pages523-601
Publication date2014-12-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJapanese Journal of Political Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1468-1099 • E-ISSN: 1474-0060
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s1468109914000267
OpenAlexW2003424137
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited19

This study is an attempt to construct a quantitative link for international regimes with global leadership. The country's willingness to lead in solving global issues as the first mover in the formation of an international regime is measured and characterized by analyzing their ratification behavior in multilateral conventions deposited to the United Nations which shape ‘the rules of the game’ of the global community. For this purpose, a set of quantitative indicators, the Index of Global Leadership Willingness and the Global Support Index, was defined and calculated for each country based on its actual ratification year data for 120 multilateral conventions covering global issues such as peace and security, environment, commerce, communication, intellectual property protection, human rights, and labor. By proposing a framework of global leadership analysis, the study seeks to provide an empirical testing of the transformation of global governance towards cooperation without hegemony paradigm. The paper analyses changes in the leadership willingness indices of selected country groups, such as the G3, G7/8, and G20, over the century and finds that the will to drive the international agenda of these groups of leaders is in decline. Moreover, our study provides evidence to argue that our current world is actually without consistent global leadership across domains of the world affairs. Although several countries still show visible leadership in specific policy domains, such as environment and intellectual property, neither the G7/8 nor the G20 was playing a comparable role to those performed by the G3 a hundred years ago

Economics · Global governance · Global Leadership · Hegemony · Intellectual property · International relations · International trade · Multilateralism · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Ratification · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Development and Aid · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub