State and Multilateralism: History and Perspectives

  • Mario TelòEmail author
Part of the United Nations University Series on Regionalism book series (UNSR, volume 5)


There is an evident gap between the increasing relevance of multilateral regimes, arrangements and organizations on the one hand and the existing multidisciplinary research on this crucial side of global governance and international life.

The chapter looks first at the three periods of history of multilateral cooperation amongst states, second at the current legitimacy and efficiency gaps and third at the future alternative scenarios.

On the one hand, a fragmented and contingent, instrumental multilateral cooperation is emerging within the current multipolar world. On the other, the EU experience looks as a laboratory for a broader tendency towards a new multilateral global agenda: even the various cooperation cultures characterizing the old and emergent powers and regional entities abroad look as not entirely incompatible with the need of limiting the current implementation gaps, spreading up diffuse reciprocity and improving the contingent legitimacy of the twentieth century.


Free Trade Global Governance Regional Cooperation National Sovereignty Multilateral Institution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



I would like to express my thanks to the GARNET Network of excellence (6th FP EU Commission) for funding my research at the LSE (Centre for international relations and library) in 2009/2010. Moreover, I would like to express my gratitude to the St Antony’s College, its warden, Prof. M. MacMillan, Oxford (and notably the Centre for European Studies and his director, Prof. K. Nikolaidis) and the Columbia University, New York (Centre for European Studies and his director, Prof. Vicki de Grazia) for welcoming me as a visiting scholar, inviting me to present my research in seminars and allowing me to accede to the university and college libraries during the same academic year.


  1. Acharya, A., & Johnson, A. I. (Eds.). (2007). Crafting cooperation. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
  2. Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
  3. Balassa, B. (1961). The theory of economic integration. London: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  4. Bhagwati, J. (2004). In defence of globalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bobbio, N. (1989). Il futuro della democrazia. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
  6. Bull, H. (1977). The anarchical society. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Calder, K., & Fukuyama, F. (Eds.). (2008). East Asian multilateralism. Baltimore: East Asian University.Google Scholar
  8. Chabod, F. (1995) Idea d’Europa e politica d’equilibrio. Bologna. Mulino.Google Scholar
  9. Chabod, F. (2000). Storia dell’idea d’Europa. In Y. Hersant (Ed.), Europes. Paris.Google Scholar
  10. Cheneval, F. (2007). La Cité des peuples. Paris: CERF.Google Scholar
  11. Deutsch. K., & and others. (1957). Political community in the North Atlantic area, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Ferry, J. M. (2006). La voie kantienne. Paris: CERF.Google Scholar
  13. Fraenkel, J. (1997). Regional trading blocs in the world trade system. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
  14. Gamble, A., & Lane, D. (Eds.). (2010). The European Union and world politics. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  15. Gilpin, R. (1981). War and change in world politics. Cambridge: CUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Green, M., & Gill, B. (Eds.). (2009). Asia’s new multilateralism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Habermas, J. (1996). Kant’s Idee des ewigen Friedens aus dem historischen Abstand von 200 Jahren. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  18. Habermas, J. (1998). Die Postnationale Konstellation. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  19. Hass, E. (1958). The uniting of Europe: Political, social and economic forces. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Haas, E.B. (1980). “Why collaborate? Issue-linkage and international regimes” in World Politics. Vol. 32, n.3., pp 371–374.Google Scholar
  21. Held, D. (1995). Democracy and the global order. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Held, D., & McCrew, A. (Eds.). (2002). Governing globalization. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hettne, B. (2005). Regionalism and world order. In L. Van Langenhove, M. Farrell, & B. Hettne (Eds.), Global politics of regionalism. London: Pluto Press, pp. 269–285.Google Scholar
  24. Hill, C., & Smith, M. (2005) International relations and the European Union, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 404–406.Google Scholar
  25. Heydon, K., & Woolcock, S. (2009). The rise of bilateralism. Tokyo: United Nations Press.Google Scholar
  26. Hoffmann, St. (1961). International system and international law. In K. Knorr & S. Verba (Eds.), The international system. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Ikenberry, J. (2011). The liberal Leviathan. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kant, E. (1797). Treaty on perpetual peace. Google Scholar
  29. Keohane, R. & Nye, J. (1969) Power and Interdependence, Newyork, Harper Collins.pp. 268–280.Google Scholar
  30. Keohane, R. O. (1986, Winter). Reciprocity in international relations. International Organizations, 40(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Keohane R. and Nye J. (1989) Power and Interdependence, New York, Mareea collin 68–80.Google Scholar
  32. Keohane, R. O. (2004). After hegemony. Preface, Princeton University Press (first edition 1984)Google Scholar
  33. Keohane, R. O., Haftendorn, H., & Wallander, C. A. (1999). Conclusions. In Imperfect unions (p. 325). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Kindleberger, Ch. (1973). The World in Depression. 1929–1939, University of California Press 1973.Google Scholar
  35. Kindleberger, Ch. (1996). World Economic Privacy 1500–1990, Oxford University Press 1996.Google Scholar
  36. Lane, Th. (2008, February). Regionalism as a condition for a new internationalism. The Federal Trust. Google Scholar
  37. Malamud, A., & Stavridis, S. (2011). Parliaments and parliamentarians as international actors. In Asghate Research companion. Farnham/Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  38. Marchetti, R. (2011). Models of global democracy: In defence of cosmo-federalism. In D. Archibugi, M. Koenig-Archibugi, & R. Marchetti (Eds.), Global democracy: Normative and empirical perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Mattli, W. (1999). The logic of regional integration. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mearsheimer, J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  41. Moravcsick, A. (2008, November-December). The myth of Europe’s ‘democratic deficit’. Intereconomics: Journal of European Economic Policy, 43(6), 331–340.Google Scholar
  42. Moravcsick, A., Keohane, R., & Macedo, S. (2009, Winter). Democracy-enhancing multilateralism. P. O’Brien       and A.  Clesse, (Eds.) Two Hegemonies London Ashgate 2002. International Organization, 63, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  44. Quing, P. (2005) On China’s multilateral foreign policy viewed from report of the work of government: 1986–2005. Foreign Affairs Review.Google Scholar
  45. Reus-Smit (1997). The constitutional structure of international society and the nature of fundamental institutions, in International Organization, Vol.51, n.4., pp. 555–589.Google Scholar
  46. Ruangsilp, B. (2007, Winter). ‘Regional bloc’ in South East Asian history: A brief overview. Asia Pacific Journal of EU studies, 5(2).Google Scholar
  47. Ruggie, J. G. (Ed.). (1983). Multilateralism matters. New York: Columbia University Press, 167–175.Google Scholar
  48. Ruggie, J. G. (Ed.). (2008). Embedding global markets. Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  49. Sapir, A. (1998). The political economy of EC regionalism. European economic Review, 42, 712–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Scharpf, F. W. (1999). The problem solving capacity of multilevel governance. Florence: EUI.Google Scholar
  51. Tarrow, S. (2005). The new transnational activism. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Taylor, M. (1987). The possibility of cooperation. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
  53. Telò, M. (2003). The open method of coordination. In M. J. Rodrigues (Ed.), The knowledge economy. London: Elgar.Google Scholar
  54. Telò, M. (Ed.). (2007). EU and new regionalism. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  55. Telò, M. (2009). International relations. A European perspective (pp. 90–93). London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  56. Telò, M. (2010). Pertinence et limites des thèses fédéralistes. Vers une constitution mixte?In N. Levrat & F. Esposito (Eds.), Europe: de l’intégration à la fédération (pp. 163–176). Louvain-la-Neuve: Université de Genève.Google Scholar
  57. Timmerman, M., & Tsuchiyama, J. (Eds.). (2008). Institutionalizing East Asia. Tokyo: UN University.Google Scholar
  58. Weiler J. H. H., et al. (Eds.). (2003). Integration in an expanding EU. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  59. Wouters, J. (2007). The UN and the EU: Partners in multilateralism. EU diplomacy papers, 4. Google Scholar
  60. Zacharia, F. (2009). The post-American, world. London: Penguin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for European StudiesUniversité Libre de BruxellesBruxellesBelgium

Personalised recommendations