Change search
Refine search result
1 - 13 of 13
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Bäckstrand, Karin
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Kuyper, Jonathan W.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science. University of Oslo, Norway.
    The democratic legitimacy of orchestration: the UNFCCC, non-state actors, and transnational climate governance2017In: Environmental Politics, ISSN 0964-4016, E-ISSN 1743-8934, Vol. 26, no 4, p. 764-788Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Is orchestration democratically legitimate? On one hand, debates concerning the legitimacy and democratic deficits of international politics continue unabated. On the other, the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has progressively engaged in processes of orchestration culminating in the 2015 Paris Agreement. Scholarship on orchestration has almost exclusively focused on how to ensure effectiveness while excluding normative questions. This lacuna is addressed by arguing that orchestration should be assessed according to its democratic credentials. The promises and pitfalls of orchestration can be usefully analyzed by applying a set of democratic values: participation, deliberation, accountability, and transparency. Two major orchestration efforts by the UNFCCC both pre- and post-Paris are shown to have substantive democratic shortfalls, not least with regard to participation and accountability. Ways of strengthening the democratic legitimacy of orchestration are identified.

  • 2.
    Kuyper, Jonathan
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Democratic Deliberation in the Modern World: The Systemic Turn2015In: Critical review (New York, N.Y.), ISSN 0891-3811, E-ISSN 1933-8007, Vol. 27, no 1, p. 49-63Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The normative ideals and feasibility of deliberative democracy have come under attack from several directions, as exemplified by a recent book version of a special issue of this journal. Critics have pointed out that the complexity of the modern world, voter ignorance, partisanship, apathy, and the esoteric nature of political communications make it unlikely that deliberation will be successful at creating good outcomes, and that it may in fact be counterproductive since it can polarize opinions. However, these criticisms were aimed at micro theories of deliberative democracy. The new systemic turn in deliberative democracy avoids these problems by positing a system-wide division of labor in a nation-state: experts and ordinary citizens check each other's opinions; partisanship and even ignorance can spur deliberation among citizens; and citizens may remain apathetic about some issues but deliberate about others. So long as the overall level of systemic deliberation increases, instead of decreases, the ideal of deliberation is still relevant in a society as complex as ours.

  • 3.
    Kuyper, Jonathan
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    The Means and Ends of Deliberative Democracy: Rejoinder to Gunn2017In: Critical review (New York, N.Y.), ISSN 0891-3811, E-ISSN 1933-8007, Vol. 29, no 3, p. 328-350Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This rejoinder represents a final installment in a debate between myself and Paul Gunn over the feasibility and desirability of deliberative democracy. Here I argue that our debate has helped clarify an ambivalence in the literature surrounding the ends and means of deliberative democracy. I specify two ways to understand both ends and means, establish their importance in deliberative theory, and show how they can be combined. I conclude by showing how this systemic view incorporates and overcomes several challenges facing modern democracy, such as the necessity of expert authority, the role of partisanship, and the problem of social complexity.

  • 4.
    Kuyper, Jonathan
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Transformative pathways to world government: a historical institutionalist critique2015In: Cambridge Review of International Affairs, ISSN 0955-7571, E-ISSN 1474-449X, Vol. 28, no 4, p. 657-679Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Proposals for world government (WG) have come from a variety of sources including international relations (IR) scholars, economists, normative political theorists and global justice academics. In general, these visions are couched as ideal models to be approximated as closely as possible. The key argument of the article is that, in evaluating the democratic potential of these proposals, we should focus upon the process of designing and building a WG. This is because there is an ineluctable gap between ideal conceptualization and non-ideal realization that emerges through institutionalization. I employ a historical institutionalist lens to describe and problematize potential institutional shifts along a WG pathway. I argue that institutionalizing these ideal visions in our current, non-ideal context would actually exacerbate the democratic deficit. Specifically, building a WG would likely entrench existing inequalities, expand the authority of unaccountable bureaucrats and limit institutional improvements over time. These three points respectively undercut three core values of democratization: equal participation, accountability and institutional revisability. Given this argument, I conclude that an incremental approachwhich focuses on advancing values rather than moving towards an ideal modelrepresents a more productive pathway for global democratization.

  • 5.
    Kuyper, Jonathan
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Bäckstrand, Karin
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Schroeder, Heike
    Institutional Accountability of Nonstate Actors in the UNFCCC: Exit, Voice, and Loyalty2017In: Review of Policy Research, ISSN 1541-132X, E-ISSN 1541-1338, Vol. 34, no 1, p. 88-109Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    How are nonstate actors within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) held to account? In this article, we introduce the concept of institutional accountability to complement the wider literature(s) on accountability in climate governance. Within institutional frameworks, actors employ rules, norms, and procedures to demand justifications from one another. In light of those justifications, actors then use exit, voice, or loyalty to positively or negatively sanction each other. To depict the dynamics of institutional accountability, we analyze the role of nonstate actors in the nine constituency groups of the UNFCCC. We outline the constituency structure and the population of observer organizations. We then identify examples where nonstate actors employed institutional rules in tandem with exit, voice, or loyalty to foster accountability. In making this analysis we draw upon three years of on-site participation at UNFCCC meetings, document analysis, and more than 40 semistructured interviews with state and nonstate actors. We conclude by discussing the scope and conditions under which institutional accountability may occur in other issue areas of global governance.

  • 6.
    Kuyper, Jonathan W.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Advancing Justice and Democracy beyond' the State: Feasibility through Flexibility2016In: Political Studies, ISSN 0032-3217, E-ISSN 1467-9248, Vol. 64, no 2, p. 417-435Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The literature on international political theory is replete with proposals to make world politics a more just and democratic place. This article explores how the cosmopolitan design project can be made more tractable in a world composed of sovereign nation states. Specifically, it argues that flexibility mechanisms - tools common in international cooperation - enhance the feasibility of design. The article draws upon the recent work on political feasibility and argues that economic, institutional and cultural constraints can be overcome by using flexibility mechanisms. In order to gain traction on the argument, prescriptions made in the field of intellectual property rights are analysed. Thomas Pogge and Allen Buchanan, Tony Cole and Robert Keohane have separately advanced institutional proposals to reform the global essential medicine system. The article details how feasibility can be enhanced through flexibility in light of these proposals, and makes a suggestion about their comparative feasibility and desirability.

  • 7.
    Kuyper, Jonathan W.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Against Global Parliament2015In: Swiss Political Science Review, ISSN 1420-3529, Vol. 21, no 1, p. 158-179Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Experimentation is often thought to be a key quality of any legitimate democratic system. Employing global parliamentary proposals as a heuristic, this article suggests that top-down models for global democratization - proffered by liberal cosmopolitans and world government scholars - may create path-dependencies which foreclose options for experimenting with alternative institutional designs in the future. Drawing upon historical institutionalism, the structure, sequence, and setting of top-down proposals are outlined to show how experimentation with other forms of democracy may be constrained in problematic ways. Following this assessment, the article suggests that striving for democratic values under a pluralist arrangement of global governance may facilitate incremental institutional development and promote experimentation over time.

  • 8.
    Kuyper, Jonathan W.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Designing institutions for global democracy: flexibility through escape clauses and sunset provisions2013In: Ethics & Global Politics, ISSN 1654-4951, E-ISSN 1654-6369, Vol. 6, no 4, p. 195-215Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    How can advocates of global democracy grapple with the empirical conditions that constitute world politics? I argue that flexibility mechanisms-commonly used to advance international cooperation-should be employed to make the institutional design project of global democracy more tractable. I highlight three specific reasons underpinning this claim. First, flexibility provisions make bargaining over different institutional designs more manageable. Second, heightened flexibility takes seriously potential concerns about path-dependent institutional development. Finally, deliberately shortening the time horizons of agents by employing flexibility provisions has cognitive benefits as it forces designers to focus specifically on issues of feasibility as well as desirability. I discuss a range of flexibility mechanisms and highlight the utility of sunset provisions and escape clauses. From this analysis, I build an argument for the usage of small-scale democratic experiments through which citizens (or their representatives) have a say in global policy making.

  • 9.
    Kuyper, Jonathan W.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Global democratization and international regime complexity2014In: European Journal of International Relations, ISSN 1354-0661, E-ISSN 1460-3713, Vol. 20, no 3, p. 620-646Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    How can democracy best be pursued and promoted in the existing global system? In this article, I propose a novel suggestion: democratization should occur at the level of international regime complexity. Because each issue-area of world politics is distinct, we require tailor-made (as opposed to one-size-fits-all) responses to the global democratic deficit. I conceptualize global democracy as an ongoing process of democratization in which a set of core normative values are more or less satisfied. I explicate equal participation, accountability, and institutional revisability as those key standards. I argue that the democratization of regime complexes should occur across two distinct planes: (1) the realm of multilateral negotiations; and (2) institutional forms of democratic experimentalism between rule-makers and rule-takers. I evaluate and defend the potential of this argument by analyzing the intellectual property rights regime complex. Because intellectual property rights represent a 'tough case' for global democrats, we should be optimistic about the democratization of alternative regime complexes.

  • 10.
    Kuyper, Jonathan W.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Systemic Representation: Democracy, Deliberation, and Nonelectoral Representatives2016In: American Political Science Review, ISSN 0003-0554, E-ISSN 1537-5943, Vol. 110, no 2, p. 308-324Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article explores the relationship between non-electoral representatives and democratic legitimacy by combining the recent constructivist turn in political representation with systemic work in deliberative theory. Two core arguments are advanced. First, non-electoral representatives should be judged by their position in a wider democratic system. Second, deliberative democracy offers a productive toolkit by which to evaluate these agents. I develop a framework of systemic representation which depicts the elemental parts of a democratic system and assigns normative standards according to the space occupied. The framework gives priority of democratic analysis to the systemic level. This helps mitigate a central concern in the constructivist turn which suggests that representatives mobilize constituencies in ways that are susceptible to framing and manipulation. I engage in case-study analysis of the collapsed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement to unpack the different spaces occupied by non-electoral representative and elucidate the varied democratic demands that hinge on this positioning.

  • 11.
    Kuyper, Jonathan W
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    The democratic potential of systemic pluralism2014In: Global Constitutionalism - Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law, ISSN 2045-3817, E-ISSN 2045-3825, Vol. 3, no 2, p. 170-199Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 12.
    Kuyper, Jonathan W.
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Bäckstrand, Karin
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Accountability and Representation: Nonstate Actors in UN Climate Diplomacy2016In: Global Environmental Politics, ISSN 1526-3800, E-ISSN 1536-0091, Vol. 16, no 2, p. 61-81Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Observer organizations in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are clustered into nine constituency groups. Each constituency has a focal point (representative) to mediate between the Secretariat and the 1800 NGOs admitted during each Conference of the Parties meeting by collating information, coordinating interactions, offering logistical support, and providing collective representation. Drawing upon a series of interviews with constituency groups and other qualitative data, we explore how the focal point of each constituency group remains accountable to the observer organizations he or she represents. We make two major contributions. First, we map the accountability mechanisms that exist between the observer organizations and focal points in each constituency. Second, we argue that variation in the usage of accountability mechanisms across constituencies corresponds to the existence of parallel bodies operating outside the UNFCCC. This article speaks to broader issues of accountability and representation in global climate governance.

  • 13.
    Kuyper, Jonathan W.
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
    Squatrito, Theresa
    International courts and global democratic values: Participation, accountability, and justification2017In: Review of International Studies, ISSN 0260-2105, E-ISSN 1469-9044, Vol. 43, no 1, p. 152-176Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In a post-Cold War era characterised by globalisation and deep interdependence, the actions of national governments increasingly have an effect beyond their own territorial borders. Moreover, key agents of global governance - international organisations and their bureaucracies, non-state actors and private agents - exercise pervasive forms of authority. Due to these shifts, it is widely noted that world politics suffers from a democratic deficit. This article contributes to work on global democracy by looking at the role of international courts. Building upon an original dataset covering the 24 international courts in existence since the end of the Second World War, we argue that international courts are able to advance democratic values and shape democratic practices beyond the state. They can do so by fostering equal participation, accountability, and public justification that link individuals directly with sites of transnational authority. We contend that the ability of international courts to promote these values is conditioned by institutional design choices concerning access rules, review powers, and provisions regarding judicial reason-giving. We canvass these design features of different international courts and assess the promises and pitfalls for global democratisation. We conclude by linking our analysis of international courts and global democratisation with debates about the legitimation and politicisation of global governance at large.

1 - 13 of 13
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf