Fragmentation or Integration of Global Economic Governance

  • Jonathan Luckhurst


This chapter analyzes the consequences of decentralizing strategic, political, and cognitive authority for the fragmentation or integration of the global economic architecture. Both effects are evident in the analysis; however, there has been greater evidence of growing integration rather than fragmentation, incorporating a wider group of authoritative actors in global economic governance. This greater inclusivity and integration indicates how decentralizing authority has strengthened instead of weakened the global economic architecture. The chapter also addresses the relevance of narratives about ‘the West versus the rest’ for contemporary global economic governance. It concludes that, partly due to decentralizing authority, strategic, political, and policy alliances do not currently conform to a clear ‘West’ against ‘the rest’ logic in multilateral economic cooperation.


  1. Acharya, A. (2014). The end of American world order. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  2. Adler, E. (2008). The spread of security communities: Communities of practice, self-restraint, and NATO’s post-Cold War transformation. European Journal of International Relations, 14(2), 195–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergsten, C. F. (1997). Open regionalism. Peterson Institute for International Economics. (Working paper 97-3). Accessed 27 June 2017.
  4. Bremmer, I. (2012). Every nation for itself: Winners and losers in a g-zero world. New York: Portfolio.Google Scholar
  5. Bremmer, I. (2016, Fall). After the G-zero: Overcoming fragmentation. Eurasia Group: Politics First, pp, 3–23. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  6. Broome, A., & Seabrooke, L. (2015). Shaping policy curves: Cognitive authority in transnational capacity building. Public Administration, 93(4), 1–17. (Early Access Version).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Büthe, T., & Mattli, W. (2011). The new global rulers: The privatization of regulation in the world economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buzan, B. (2010). China in international society: Is ‘peaceful rise’ possible? The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 3, 5–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cervo, A. (2010). Brazil’s rise on the international scene: Brazil and the world. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, 53, 7–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cooper, A. F. (2010). The G20 as an improvised crisis committee and/or a contested “steering committee” for the world. International Affairs, 86(3), 741–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cooper, A. F., & Thakur, R. (2013). The Group of Twenty (G20). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Drezner, D. W. (2017, June 5). Can America lead in the age of Trump? Washington Post. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  13. European Commission. (2006, October 24). EU – China: Closer partners, growing responsibilities. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament. Brussels: European Commission, from Accessed 27 June 2017.
  14. Fensom, A. (2017, May 22). New life for the TPP? The Diplomat. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  15. Ferguson, N. (2012). Civilization: The west and the rest. London/New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  16. Friedberg, A. L. (2005). The future of U.S.–China relations. Is conflict inevitable? International Security, 30(2), 7–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Garcia-Duran, P., & Eliasson, L. J. (2017). The public debate over transatlantic trade and investment partnership and its underlying assumptions. Journal of World Trade, 51(1), 23–42.Google Scholar
  18. Goldthau, A. (2017, June 2). Trump’s decision to quit the Paris agreement may be his worst business ‘deal’ yet. The Conversation. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  19. Grabel, I. (2011b). Promising avenues, false starts and dead ends: Global governance and development finance in the wake of the crisis. Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) (Working paper series no. 241). University of Massachusetts Amherst.Google Scholar
  20. Harris Rimmer, S. (2015). A critique of Australia’s G20 presidency and the Brisbane summit 2014. Global Summitry, 1(1), 41–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Helleiner, E. (2010). A Bretton Woods moment? The 2007–2008 crisis and the future of global finance. International Affairs, 86(3), 619–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Helleiner, E. (2016a). Finance. In A. Acharya (Ed.), Why govern? Rethinking demand and progress in global governance (pp. 174–191). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Helleiner, E. (2016b). Legacies of the 2008 crisis for global financial governance. Global Summitry, 2(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Henckels, C. (2016). Protecting regulatory autonomy through greater precision in investment treaties: The TPP, CETA, and TTIP. Journal of International Economic Law, 19(1), 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Higgott, R. (2016). Regional worlds, regional institutions: Towards the regional economic institutionalisation of east Asia? CSGR (Working paper no. 280/16). Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation, University of Warwick. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  26. Hirano, K. (2017, May 14). Actions of ‘TPP 11’ likely to influence Japan-U.S. trade talks. Japan times. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  27. Hufbauer, G. C., & Cimino-Isaacs, C. (2015). How will TPP and TTIP change the WTO system? Journal of International Economic Law, 18, 679–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Huntington, S. P. (1997). The clash of civilizations: Remaking of world order. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  29. Ikenberry, G. J. (2008). The rise of China and the future of the west: Can the liberal system survive? Foreign Affairs, 87(1), 23–37.Google Scholar
  30. Ikenberry, G. J. (2011). Liberal leviathan: The origins, crisis, and transformation of the American world order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  31. IMF. (2008). Global financial stability report: Containing systemic risks and restoring financial soundness. Washington, DC: IMF.Google Scholar
  32. International Labour Organization [ILO] and International Institute for Labour Studies [IILS]. (2011, November). A review of global fiscal stimulus. EC-IILS joint discussion paper series, no. 5. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  33. James, H. (2011). International order after the financial crisis. International Affairs, 87(3), 525–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Johnston, A. I. (2008). Social states: China in international institutions, 1980–2000. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1999). Transnational advocacy networks in international and regional politics. International Social Science Journal, 51(159), 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Keohane, R. O. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Kirkpatrick, G. (2009). The corporate governance lessons from the financial crisis. OECD Journal: Financial Market Trends (3), 61–87. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  38. Kirshner, J. (2014). American power after the financial crisis. Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Kirton, J. J. (2013). G20 governance for a globalized world. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  40. Kissinger, H. A. (2012, March/April). The future of U.S.-Chinese relations. Foreign Affairs, 91(2), 44–55, from Accessed 14 Sept 2017.
  41. Krauthammer, C. (1990). The unipolar moment. Foreign Affairs: America and the World, 70(1), 23–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kupchan, C. A. (2012). The democratic malaise: Globalization and the threat to the west. Foreign Affairs, 91(1), 62–67. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  43. Layne, C. (2012). This time it’s real: The end of unipolarity and the pax Americana. International Studies Quarterly, 56(1), 203–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Luckhurst, J. (2015). Latin America in the G20: Insiders or outsiders? Latin American Policy, 6(1), 19–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Luckhurst, J. (2016). G20 since the global crisis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  46. Mahbubani, K. (2008, May/June). The case against the West: America and Europe in the Asian century. Foreign Affairs, 87(3), 111–124. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  47. Mansfield, E. D., & Milner, H. V. (1999). The new wave of regionalism. International Organization, 53(3), 589–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2010). The gathering storm: China’s challenge to US power in Asia. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 3(4), 381–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Noland, M. (2016, September 28). Scoring the Trump trade plan: Magical thinking. Peterson Institute for International Economics. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  50. Norrlof, C., & Reich, S. (2015). American and Chinese leadership during the global financial crisis: Testing Kindleberger’s stabilization functions. International Area Studies Review, 18(3), 227–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. O’Sullivan, M. L. (2017, June 2). How Trump is surrendering America’s soft power. Bloomberg. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  52. Pagliari, S. (2012). Who governs finance? The shifting public-private divide in the regulation of derivatives, rating agencies and hedge funds. European Law Journal, 18(1), 44–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Prasad, E., & Sorkin, I. (2009, March 5). Assessing the G-20 stimulus plans: A deeper look. Brookings Institution. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  54. Pu, X. (2012). Socialisation as a two-way process: Emerging powers and the diffusion of international norms. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 5, 341–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Putnam, R. D., & Bayne, N. (1984). Hanging together: The seven-power summits. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Reich, S., & Lebow, R. N. (2014). Good-bye hegemony! Power and influence in the global system. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rodrik, D. (2012). The globalization paradox: Why global markets, states, and democracy can’t coexist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Rodrik, D. (2013, April 10). What the world needs from the BRICS. Project Syndicate. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  59. Rudd, K. (2009, February). The global financial crisis. Australian Politics, Society & Culture: The Monthly, pp. 20–29. Accessed 19 Nov 2016.
  60. Ruggie, J. G. (1982). International regimes, transactions, and change: Embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. International Organization, 36(2), 379–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schirm, S. A. (2013). Global politics are domestic politics: A societal approach to divergence in the G20. Review of International Studies, 39(3), 685–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Shambaugh, D. (2013). China goes global: The partial power. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Sinclair, T. J. (2014). The new masters of capital: American bond rating agencies and the politics of creditworthiness. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Slaughter, S. (2013). The prospects of deliberative global governance in the G20: Legitimacy, accountability, and public contestation. Review of International Studies, 39(1), 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Smith, A. (2017, April 24). The man who was supposed to be integral to Trump’s economic policy appears to be losing influence. Business Insider. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  66. Stuenkel, O. (2016). Post-Western world: How emerging powers are remaking global order. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  67. Telò, M. (2001). Introduction: Globalization, new regionalism and the role of the European Union. In M. Telò (Ed.), European Union and new regionalism. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  68. Tomiyama, A. (2017, June 3). Vietnam remains committed to TPP, prime minister says. Nikkei Asian Review. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  69. Utzig, S. (2010). The financial crisis and the regulation of credit rating agencies: A European banking perspective. ADBI (Working paper series, no. 188).Google Scholar
  70. Walt, S. M. (2011, November/December). The end of the American era. The National Interest, 116, 6–17.Google Scholar
  71. Wilson, D., Burgi, C. & Carlson, S. (2011, June 24). The BRICs remain in the fast lane. BRICs Monthly, Issue No: 11/06, from Accessed 27 June 2017.
  72. Woods, N. (2010). Global governance after the financial crisis: A new multilateralism or the last gasp of the great powers? Global Polity, 1(1), 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. World Bank. (2017a, March). Global outlook: Subdued growth, shifting policies, heightened uncertainty. In World Bank (Ed.), Global economic prospects, January 2017: Weak investment in uncertain times (pp. 1–56). Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  74. World Bank. (2017b, April 23). World Bank and AIIB sign cooperation framework. Press release. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  75. World Bank. (2017c). World development report 2017: Governance and the law. Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  76. Worstall, T. (2016, December 22). Donald Trump’s one truly worrying appointment: Peter Navarro’s White House national trade council. Forbes. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  77. Wouters, J., Goddeeris, I., Natens, B., & Ciortuz, F. (2014). Some critical issues in EU–India free trade agreement negotiations. European Law Journal, 20, 848–869. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  78. WTO. (2017, April 12). Trade recovery expected in 2017 and 2018, amid policy uncertainty. Press release. Accessed 27 June 2017.
  79. Xi, J. (2017, January 17). President Xi’s speech to Davos in full. Davos: World Economic Forum. Accessed 25 Jan 2017.
  80. Zakaria, F. (2008). The post-American world. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  81. Zoellick, R. B. (2005, September 21). Whither China: From membership to responsibility? Remarks to National Committee on U.S.-China relations. New York: U.S. Department of State Archive. Accessed 27 June 2017.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan Luckhurst
    • 1
  1. 1.University of GuadalajaraGuadalajaraMexico

Personalised recommendations