Institutionalism beyond methodological nationalism? The new interdependence approach and the limits of historical institutionalism

Abstract

This article critiques New Interdependence Approach (NIA) explanations of global regulation, positing instead a State Transformation Approach (STA). Rightly critical of state-centric frameworks on the politics of globalisation, the NIA seeks to explain the emergence and distributional outcomes of global regulatory regimes, arguing that they stem from struggles sparked by overlapping rules that cut across national boundaries and which reshape domestic and international institutions. While the NIA presents a useful description of this process, and its efforts to overcome methodological nationalism are welcome, its explanatory power is limited by its roots in historical institutionalism, which fails to specify adequately the context that shapes political struggles, producing unsystematic, ad hoc accounts. Conversely, the STA explicitly locates struggles over global regulatory regimes within the wider context of evolving global capitalism and associated shifts in the nature of statehood, providing a more grounded and determinate explanation of outcomes. The argument is illustrated empirically throughout with reference to the global anti-money laundering regime. This study’s findings raise question marks regarding historical institutionalism’s potential to advance International Political Economy.

Keywords:

• Global governance
• methodological nationalism
• state transformation
• global regulation
• historical institutionalism
• governance

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Tom Chodor, Kanishka Jayasuriya, Tom Pegram, and especially Lee Jones, for their valuable feedback on earlier versions of this article. I am very grateful to the anonymous reviewers and editors of the Review of International Political Economy for one of the most thoughtful and constructive review processes I have ever participated in. The final output is immeasurably better for their input, though I remain solely responsible for it. Jan Mairhöfer assisted ably with copy editing. Research for this article was generously funded by an Australian Research Council Discovery Project grant DP170102647, ‘Rising Powers and State Transformation’.

Funding

This work was supported by an Australian Research Council Discovery Project grant DP170102647, ‘Rising Powers and State Transformation’.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Australian Research Council.

Notes on contributors

Shahar Hameiri

Shahar Hameiri is Associate Professor of International Politics at the School of Political Science and International Studies, University of Queensland. His latest co-authored books are International Intervention and Local Politics, and Governing Borderless Threats, both with Cambridge University Press. His work has also appeared in leading journals, including International Studies Quarterly and European Journal of International Relations. He tweets @ShaharHameiri.