Heterarchy: Toward Paradigm Shift in World Politics

References

• Abrahamsen, R. and Williams, M.C., 2010. Security beyond the state: private security in international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ahmed, A.S., 2013. The thistle and the Drone: how America’s War on Terror Became a Global War on Tribal Islam. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Albert, M., Buzan, B., and Zürn, M., eds. 2013. Bringing sociology to international relations: world politics as differentiation theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alter, K.J. and Raustiala, K., 2018. ‘The Rise of International Regime Complexity’. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 14 (1), 18.2–18.21. 27 June. doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-030830.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, B., 1983. Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Archer, M.S., 1995. Realist social theory: the morphogenetic approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bauman, Z., 1998. Globalization: the Human Consequences. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bayoumi, T., 2017. Unfinished business: the unexplored causes of the financial crisis and the lessons yet to be learned. New Haven and London: Yale University Press for the International Monetary Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Beisheim, M. and Liese, A., eds. 2014. Transnational Partnerships: effectively providing for sustainable development? Houndmills: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Belmonte, R. 2018. Political Power in a Changing World: A Categorization of the Extra-State Authorities. Paper presented at the 25th International Political Science Association World Congress “Borders and Margins”, Brisbane, 21–25 July 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Biermann, F., ed., 2009. International organizations in global environmental governance. London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Birnbaum, P., 1982. La logique de l’État. Paris: Fayard.
   Google Scholar
• Block, F. and Keller, M.R., 2011. State of innovation: the U.S. government’s role in technology innovation. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Blyth, M., 2013. Austerity: the history of a dangerous idea. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brenner, N., et al., ed., 2003. State/space: a reader. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Bruff, I. and Tansel, C.B., 2019. “Authoritarian Neoliberalism: trajectories of knowledge production,” Globalizations, 16 (3), 233–244. doi:10.1080/14747731.2018.1502497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bull, H., 1977. The anarchical society: a study of order in world politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cassese, S., 2016. Territori e potere. Bologna: Il Mulino.
   Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 1990. The changing architecture of politics: structure, agency and the future of the State. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 1995. “Globalization and the Changing Logic of Collective Action”. International Organization, 49 (no. 4), 595–625. Autumn. DOI: 10.1017/S0020818300028459.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 1997. “Paradoxes of the Competition State: the dynamics of political globalization”. Government and Opposition, 32 (no. 2), 251–274. Spring. DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-7053.1997.tb00161.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 1998. Neomedievalism, Civil War and the New Security Dilemma: globalisation as durable disorder. Civil Wars, 1 (no. 1), 36–64. Spring. DOI: 10.1080/13698249808402366.
   Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 1999. Globalization and the Erosion of Democracy. European Journal of Political Research, vol. 36 (no. 1), 1–26. August doi:10.1111/1475-6765.00461
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 2001. “From ‘Iron Triangles’ to ‘Golden Pentangles’? Globalizing the Policy Process”. Global Governance, 7 (no. 4), 397–410. October doi:10.1163/19426720-00704005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 2009. “Multi-Nodal Politics: globalisation is What Actors Make of It”. Review of International Studies, 35 (no. 2), 421–449. April doi:10.1017/S0260210509008584
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 2010. Rethinking world politics: a Theory of Transnational Neopluralism. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 2014. “Rethinking Financial Regulation: risk, Club Goods and Regulatory Fatigue”. In: T. Oatley and W. Kindred Winecoff, eds. Handbook of the international political economy of monetary relations. Cheltenham and Northamption, Mass: Edward Elgar, pp. 343–363.
   Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 2016. “The Limits of Global Governance: transnational Neopluralism in a Complex World”. In: R. Marchetti, ed. Partnerships in International Policymaking: civil Society and Public Institutions in European and Global Affairs. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 31–47.
   Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 2020. From Theory to Practice: the Paradox of Neoliberal Hegemony in 21st Century World Politics. B. Martill and S. Schindler, eds. Theory as Ideology in International Relations: the Politics of Knowledge. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, April2020 140–164.
   Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., (Cheltenham, Glos. And Northamption, Mass.), forthcomingintangivles, 2021. Business and Politics in an Age of Intangibles and Financialization. A. Kellow, T. Porter, and K. Ronit, eds. Handbook on business and politics.Cheltenham, Glos. And Northampton, Mass.: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G. and Prichard, A., 2018. The New Anarchy: globalisation and Fragmentation in 21st century world politics, special issue on anarchy and international relations theory. Journal of International Political Theory, 13 (no. 3), 378–394. October doi:10.1177/1755088217713765
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Claire, C.A., Haufler, V., and Porter, T., eds. 1999. Private authority and international affairs. Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coole, D.H. and Frost, S., 2010. New materialisms. Ontology, Agency, and Politics(Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Cudworth, E. and Hobden, S., 2011. Posthuman international relations: complexity, ecologism and global politics. London: Zed.
   Google Scholar
• Daddow, O., 2017. International relations theory. 3rd edition. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Dardot, P. and Laval, C., 2014. La nouvelle raison du monde (Paris: la Découverte/Poche); English language edition The New Way of the World. In: (2013). On neoliberal society. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Dauvergne, P. and Lebaron, G., 2014. Protest Inc.: the corporatization of activism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Davidson, J.D. and Rees-Mogg, W., 1997. The Sovereign Individual: mastering the transformation to the information age. New York: Simon & Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, T., 2014. NGOs: a new history of transnational civil society. London: C. Hurst.
   Google Scholar
• De Wilde, P., et al., ed., 2019. The struggle over borders: cosmopolitanism and communitarianism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Durkheim, É., 1893/1933. The division of labor in society, trans. george simpson. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, M.G., 2005. Policy transfer in global perspective. London: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Ferrarese, M.R., 2000. Le istituzioni della globalizzazione. Diritto e diritti nella società transnazionale. Bologna: Il Mulino.
   Google Scholar
• Frey, C.B., 2019. The technology trap: capital, labor and power in the age of automation. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, T.L., 2005. The world is flat: a brief history of the 21st century. 1st edition. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• Friedrichs, J., 2001. The Meaning of New Medievalism. European Journal of International Relations, 7 (4), 475–502. doi:10.1177/1354066101007004004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallarotti, G.M., 2000. The Advent of the Prosperous Society: the rise of the guardian state and structural change in the world economy. Review of International Political Economy, 7 (no. 1), 1–52. Spring. DOI: 10.1080/096922900347036.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geldenhuys, D., 2009. Contested states in world politics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Gemzik-Salwach, A. and Opolski, K., eds. 2017. Financialization and the economy. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Genschel, P. and Seelkopf, L., 2015. The Competition State. In: S. Leibfried, et al., ed. The Oxford handbook of transformations of the state, pp. 1–23. Oxford: Oxford University Press online.
   Google Scholar
• Goldbach, R., 2015. Global governance and regulatory failure: the political economy of banking. Basingstoke, Hants: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, R.J., 2016. The rise and fall of American growth: the U.S. standard of living since the Civil War. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Guillén, M.F., 2015. The Architecture of collapse: the global system in the 21st century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haas, P. ed. 1997. Knowledge, power, and international policy coordination, specialissue of international organization. Vol. 46no. 1Winter. Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina Press
   Google Scholar
• Hall, R.B. and Biersteker, T.J., eds. 2003. The emergence of private authority in global governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hardt, M. and Negri, A., 2000. Empire. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haskel, J. and Westlake, S., 2018. Capitalism without capital: the rise of the intangible economy. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Herman, A., 2012. Freedom’s Forge: how American Business Produced Victory in World War II. New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Higgott, Underhill and Bieler., 2000. Non-State Actors and Authority in the Global System. London: Routledge
   Google Scholar
• Holloway, J., 2002. Change the world without taking power: the meaning of revolution today. London: Pluto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, P.T. and Nexon, D.H., 1999. Relations Before States: substance, process and the study of world politics. European Journal of International Relations, 3 (no. 5), 291–332.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, R. and Sørensen, G., 2010 . Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. 4th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press
   Google Scholar
• Kahler, M. and Lake, D.A., eds. 2003. Governance in a Global Economy: political Authority in Transition. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kanter, R.M., 1985. The Change Masters: innovation and Entrepreneurship in the American Corporation. Glencoe, Ill: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy, P., 1988. The rise and fall of the great powers. New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Key, V.O., Jr., 1953. Politics, parties, and pressure groups. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.
   Google Scholar
• Kolossov, V. and John, O., 1998. Pseudo-states as Harbingers of a New Geopolitics: the example of the trans-dniester moldovan republic. Geopolitics, 3 (no. 1), 151–176. doi:10.1080/14650049808407612
   Google Scholar
• Kolsto, P., 2006. The Sustainability and Future of Unrecognized Quasi-states. Journal of Peace Research, vol. 43 (no. 6), 723–740. doi:10.1177/0022343306068102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotkin, J., 1992. Tribes: how race, religion and identity determine success in the new global economy. New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Kurki, M., 2008. October. Democracy and Conceptual Contestability: Reconsidering Conceptions of Democracy in Democracy Promotion, September 2010, International Studies Review, 12 (3):362. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2486.2010.00943.x
   Google Scholar
• Laffey, M. and Barkawi, T., 1999. “The Imperial Peace: democracy, force and globalization”. European Journal of International Relations, 5 (4), 403–434. doi:10.1177/1354066199005004001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lake, D.A., 1999. Global Governance: a Relational Contracting Approach. In: A. Prakash and J.A. Hart, eds. Globalization and Governance. London: Routledge, 31–53.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B., 2005. Reassembling the Social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, T., 2012. Ontology and the study of social reality: emergence, organisation, community, power, social relations, corporations, artefacts and money. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36 (no. 2), 345–385. doi:10.1093/cje/ber050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leon, T.C., 1973. Nationalism in the middle ages. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Lindblom, C.E., 1977. Politics and markets: the world’s political-economic systems. New |York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Lindblom, C.E., 2001. The Market System: what It Is, In: How it works, and what to make of it. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Litan, R.E. and Rauch, J., 1998. American finance for the 21st century. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Litor, L., Menahem, G., and Bar-Mor, H., 2020. The Rise of the Regulatory Constitutional Welfare State, Publicization, and Constitutional Social Rights: the Case of Israel and Britain. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 691 (September), 189–205. doi:10.1177/0002716220964385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macdonald, T. and Macdonald, K., 2020. Towards a ‘Pluralist’ World Order: creative Agency and legitimacy in global institutions. European Journal of International Relations, 26 (no. 2), 518–544. doi:10.1177/1354066119873134
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marchetti, R., 2016. Global strategic engagement: states and non-state actors in global governance. Lanham, Md: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Marchetti, R., 2017. Partnerships in International Policymaking:Civil Society and Public Institutions in European and Global Affairs. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Mazzuccato, M., 2013. The entrepreneurial State: debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths. New York: Anthem Press.
   Google Scholar
• McKeon, N., 2017. Transforming Global Governance in the Post-2015 Era: towards an equitable and sustainable world. Globalizations, 14 (no. 4), 487–503. November doi:10.1080/14747731.2016.1244757
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milanovic, B., 2016. Global Inequality: a new approach for the age of globalization. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press for Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Minc, A., 1993. Le nouveau Moyen Âge. Paris: Gallimard.
   Google Scholar
• Mügge, D., 2006. Private-Public Puzzles: inter-firm competition and transnational private regulation. New Political Economy, 11 (no. 2), 177–200. June doi:10.1080/13563460600655524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman, S., 2006. Does Power Have a Place? Hegemony, Antagonism and Radical Politics. In: M. Haugaard and H.H. Lentner, eds. Hegemony and power: consensus and coercion in contemporary politics. Lanham, Md: Lexington Books, 169–184.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E., 1990. Governing the Commons: the Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom, V., Tiebout, C.M., and Warren, R., 1961. The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: a theoretical inquiry. American Political Science Review, vol. 55 (no. 4), 831–842. September doi:10.1017/S0003055400125973
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piketty, T. 2017. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pizzorno, A., 2001. Natura della disuguaglianza, potere politico e potere privatonella società in via di globalizzazione. Stato e mercato, 62 agosto, 201–236.
   Google Scholar
• Porras, S. and Alejandra, (2020). “Transnational State Elites and the Neoliberal Project in Mexico,” unpublished paper under review
   Google Scholar
• Prichard, A., 2017. “Collective Intentionality, Complex Pluralism and the Problem of Anarchy”. Journal of International Political Theory, 13 (no. 3), 360–377. doi:10.1177/1755088217715789
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, R.D., 1988. Diplomacy and Domestic Policy: the logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42 (no. 3), 427–460. Summer doi:10.1017/S0020818300027697
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rifkin, J., 2011. The Third Industrial Revolution: how Lateral Power is Transforming Energy, the Economy, and the World. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan and St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Risse, T., 2011. Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood: introduction and Overview,” in Risse. In: Governance Without a State?: policies and Politics in Areas of Limited Statehood. New York: Columbia University Press. pp.1–38.
   Google Scholar
• Risse, T., Börzel, T.A., and Draudee, A., eds. 2018. The Oxford Handbook of Governance and Limited Statehood. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, A., 2010. The Logic of Discipline: global Capitalism and the Architecture of Government. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ronit, K. and Schneider, V., eds. 2000. Private Organisations in Global Politics. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Roos, J., 2019. Why Not Default? The Political Economy of Sovereign Debt. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Root, H.L., 2013. Dynamics Among Nations: the Evolution of Legitimacy and Development in Modern States. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenau, J.N. (1990). “The Governance of Fragmegration: neither a World Republic Nor a Global Interstate System”, paper presented at the World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Quebec City, 1–5 August
   Google Scholar
• Schain, M.A., 2019. The Border: policy and Politics in Europe and the United States. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scholte, J.A., 2000. Globalization: a critical introduction. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Schwab, K., 2016. The fourth industrial revolution. London: Portfolio Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, J.C., 1998. Seeing like a state: how certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shiller, R.J., 2003. The new financial order: risk in the 21st century . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Slaughter, A.-M., 2004. A new world order. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Srnicek, N., 2013. Representing complexity: the material construction of world politics. International Relations. In: Unpublished PhD Thesis. London: London School of Economics and Political Science.
   Google Scholar
• Stiglitz, J.E. (2019). People, Power, and Profits: Progressive Capitalism in an Age of Discontent. New York: W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Strange, S., 1996. The retreat of the state: the diffusion of power in the world economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stringham, E.P., 2015. Private governance: creating order in economic and social life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tiberghien, Y., 2007. Entrepreneurial States: reforming Corporate Governance in France. In: Japan, and Korea .Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Waltz, K., 1979. Theory of International Politics. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Wight, C., 2006. Agents, structures and international relations: politics as ontology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, O.E., 1975. Markets and Hierarchies. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, O.E., 1985. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wolin, S., 2016. (1966/2016). Politics and Vision: continuity and Innovation in Western Political Thought . Princeton expanded edition: N.J.: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar