Gauging Global Governance: The Effectiveness of Transnational Public-Private Governance Initiatives
Type
fundamental research project
Start Date
2019
End Date
2022
Acronym
GGG
Status
ongoing
Keywords
Global governance
intergovernmental organizations
transnational public-private governance initiatives
performance
effectiveness
Description
New players, including firms and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), are engaging in global governance
(Cuttler et al. 1999, Hall and Biersteker 2002, Avant et al. 2010). With these new players have come new forms
of governing in which varying mixes of state and non-state actors cooperate (Abbott and Snidal 2009, Avant and
Westerwinter 2016). Among these innovations are transnational public-private governance initiatives (TGIs). TGIs
are institutions in which states and/or intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) work together with business and
civil society actors to govern global policy issues (Abbott and Snidal 2009). Examples include the Global Fund to
Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GF) in the health sector, and the Kimberley Process in the security area.
TGIs have been growing rapidly since the 1990s. According to a new dataset (Westerwinter 2018a), the number
of TGIs in 2017 was seven times greater than in 1990. Today, TGIs contribute to governing a broad range of global
policy domains, including environmental protection, human rights, health, trade, finance, and security.
Despite their proliferation, we know little about the effectiveness of TGIs, defined as the extent to which they
attain their goals. Existing evidence suggests that TGIs vary markedly in their effectiveness. In the global health
domain, for example, the GF has been highly effective, reaching a large number of people with HIV/AIDS drugs,
tuberculosis therapies, and malaria treatment (Liese and Beisheim 2011). The Children’s Vaccine Initiative, by
contrast, has performed poorly and has been unable to develop improved vaccinations for children (Muraskin
2002). In the labor rights area, the Common Code for the Coffee Community has contributed to improving the
social practices of coffee producers, while the Global Alliance for Workers and Communities has failed to enhance
workplace conditions in developing countries (Liese and Beisheim 2011).
This variation in TGI effectiveness raises important questions, addressed in the proposed project: 1) Are TGIs
effective instruments of global governance? 2) Why are some TGIs more effective than others? 3) How does the
effectiveness of TGIs compare with the effectiveness of IGOs?
Based on a mixed-method research design that combines case studies and statistical analysis, the results of our
research will benefit both scholars and policy-makers. Drawing on theories of international cooperation and
institutional complexity in global governance, our research will identify the factors that explain variation in TGI
effectiveness. The project will also provide an empirically grounded perspective on how TGIs compare with IGOs,
addressing the important question of whether the new forms of global governance matter. By so doing, we will
extend current understanding of new forms of global governance and provide insights for policy-makers and
activists thinking about creating new TGIs. We provide the first large-n, comparative analysis of the effectiveness
of different forms of global governance and one of the first studies that leverages a big data approach to the study
of global governance institutions. More generally, our results will provide insights about the provision of collective
goods at the global level and the quality and legitimacy of global governance.
(Cuttler et al. 1999, Hall and Biersteker 2002, Avant et al. 2010). With these new players have come new forms
of governing in which varying mixes of state and non-state actors cooperate (Abbott and Snidal 2009, Avant and
Westerwinter 2016). Among these innovations are transnational public-private governance initiatives (TGIs). TGIs
are institutions in which states and/or intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) work together with business and
civil society actors to govern global policy issues (Abbott and Snidal 2009). Examples include the Global Fund to
Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GF) in the health sector, and the Kimberley Process in the security area.
TGIs have been growing rapidly since the 1990s. According to a new dataset (Westerwinter 2018a), the number
of TGIs in 2017 was seven times greater than in 1990. Today, TGIs contribute to governing a broad range of global
policy domains, including environmental protection, human rights, health, trade, finance, and security.
Despite their proliferation, we know little about the effectiveness of TGIs, defined as the extent to which they
attain their goals. Existing evidence suggests that TGIs vary markedly in their effectiveness. In the global health
domain, for example, the GF has been highly effective, reaching a large number of people with HIV/AIDS drugs,
tuberculosis therapies, and malaria treatment (Liese and Beisheim 2011). The Children’s Vaccine Initiative, by
contrast, has performed poorly and has been unable to develop improved vaccinations for children (Muraskin
2002). In the labor rights area, the Common Code for the Coffee Community has contributed to improving the
social practices of coffee producers, while the Global Alliance for Workers and Communities has failed to enhance
workplace conditions in developing countries (Liese and Beisheim 2011).
This variation in TGI effectiveness raises important questions, addressed in the proposed project: 1) Are TGIs
effective instruments of global governance? 2) Why are some TGIs more effective than others? 3) How does the
effectiveness of TGIs compare with the effectiveness of IGOs?
Based on a mixed-method research design that combines case studies and statistical analysis, the results of our
research will benefit both scholars and policy-makers. Drawing on theories of international cooperation and
institutional complexity in global governance, our research will identify the factors that explain variation in TGI
effectiveness. The project will also provide an empirically grounded perspective on how TGIs compare with IGOs,
addressing the important question of whether the new forms of global governance matter. By so doing, we will
extend current understanding of new forms of global governance and provide insights for policy-makers and
activists thinking about creating new TGIs. We provide the first large-n, comparative analysis of the effectiveness
of different forms of global governance and one of the first studies that leverages a big data approach to the study
of global governance institutions. More generally, our results will provide insights about the provision of collective
goods at the global level and the quality and legitimacy of global governance.
Leader contributor(s)
Funder
Range
HSG + other universities
Range (De)
HSG + andere
Division(s)
Eprints ID
247895