Delegating diplomacy
Rhetoric across agents in the United Nations General Assembly
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9964128 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Julia Gray (0000-0003-0324-9146, University of Pennsylvania, corresponding author), Alex Baturo (Dublin City University) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 87 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 718-736 |
| Publication date | 2021-03-21 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Review of Administrative Sciences (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-8523 • E-ISSN: 1461-7226 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852321997560 |
| OpenAlex | W3138469902 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 21 |
| References cited | 64 |
When political principals send agents to international organizations, those agents are often assumed to speak in a single voice. Yet, various types of country representatives appear on the international stage, including permanent representatives as well as more overtly “political” government officials. We argue that permanent delegates at the United Nations face career incentives that align them with the bureaucracy, setting them apart from political delegates. To that end, they tend to speak more homogeneously than do other types of speakers, while also using relatively more technical, diplomatic rhetoric. In addition, career incentives will make them more reluctant to criticize the United Nations. In other words, permanent representatives speak more like bureaucratic agents than like political principals. We apply text analytics to study differences across agents’ rhetoric at the United Nations General Assembly. We demonstrate marked distinctions between the speech of different types of agents, contradictory to conventional assumptions, with implications for our understandings of the interplay between public administration and agency at international organizations. Points for practitioners Delegations to international organizations do not “speak with one voice.” This article illustrates that permanent representatives to the United Nations display more characteristics of bureaucratic culture than do other delegates from the same country. For practitioners, it is important to realize that the manner in which certain classes of international actors “conduct business” can differ markedly. These differences in tone—even among delegates from the same principal—can impact the process of negotiation and debate
Agency (philosophy · Bureaucracy · Diplomacy · Economics · Government (linguistics · Incentive · Negotiation · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Rhetoric · Social science · Sociology · European Union Policy and Governance · Law · Peacebuilding and International Security · Public Administration · Public Policy and Administration Research
One Theme to Unite Them All? Rhetorical Signals and Unanimity in the UN Security Council
Machine learning in public administration research
Sustainability in the UN
Place as argument in the rhetoric of the 78th session of the United Nations General Assembly
Policy recommendations of international bureaucracies
Explaining sentiment shifts in UN system annual reporting
Does habitus provide the framework for Scandinavian cooperation
Focusdata
High-Level Leader Visits
Placing machine learning into the hermeneutic circle
Conflict management or conflict resolution
The Geneva effect
Seeded Sequential LDA
Speech is silver, resolutions are gold
The Incentives of Leaders in International Organizations
Speaking of civilians
Lessons from public administration for global governance
International bureaucracy and the United Nations system
Strategic Communication in Dictatorships
Autocratic Audiences and Linguistic Complexity
Words to unite nations
The Forging of Bureaucratic Autonomy
Organizational Progeny
Delegation under anarchy
Quanteda
Bureaucrats or Politicians? Part I
A new readability yardstick.
Rules for the World
At Home with the Diplomats
International bureaucracies and their influence on policy-making
Understanding state preferences with text as data
Explaining Expulsions of U.S. Diplomatic Personnel from Latin America, 1991–2016
International practices
Which Countries Send More Delegates to Climate Change Conferences? Analysis of UNFCCC COPs, 1995–2015
The League of Nations
Communication
International Review of Administrative Sciences
Bureaucrats and Politicians in Western Democracies
Staff growth in international organizations
The Making of the Charter of the United Nations. 1
The Position of the Executive and Administrative Heads of the United Nations International Organizations
Permanent Delegations to the League of Nations
Diplomatic practices at the United Nations
The European Convention
Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European Community
National Representation in the United Nations
International Pecking Orders
Delegation to Supranational Institutions
Institutional Design and Bureaucrats’ Impact on Political Control
Who governs? Delegations and delegates in global trade lawmaking
Life of Brian Revisited
Affective News
Why States Act through Formal International Organizations
Treating International Institutions as Social Environments
The Diplomatic Core
Legitimacy and the Cognitive Sources of International Institutional Change
Diplomacy Through Agents
Diversionary Foreign Policy in Democratic Systems
Commercial Diplomacy and Political Risk
Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence
The New Diplomacy and the Quest for Peace
Deriving Data from Delegates to International Assemblies
Economists in International Organizations
The agent-structure problem in international relations theory
Institutionalization in the United Nations General Assembly
The Career Connection
Institutional Foundations of Legislative Speech
Two Logics of Indirect Governance
Agents or Trustees? International Courts in their Political Context
The Play of International Practice
Takingstock
Norms, culture, and world politics
The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations
The Qualities of Leadership
| Unique citing works | 21 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 4,2 |
| Citation span | 2021 - 2026 (6) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 21 |