Read more
This book analyses the role of institutionalised summits in international governance, adding a fresh perspective to the controversial debate over the value of institutionalised summits for international governance.
It argues that the contribution of these summits to negotiating and implementing international agreements on policy change is ambivalent. Based on an innovative theoretical model the books proposes that states strategically select summits with their specific institutional design for advancing their policy preferences. Developing the route to the summit and the route from the summit as precise causal mechanisms, the author argues that these choices explain the ambivalence of summit involvement. With empirically rich case studies on the Group of 7 (G7) and the European Council, the book provides a rare systematic comparison of different summits. The empirical record shows strikingly similar patterns for the G7 and the European Council, but it also points to variation deserving further attention in the study of summits in different institutional environments.
It will be of interest to researchers in International Relations, Global Governance, and European Politics, and those interested in global institutions and decision-making.
List of contents
Chapter 1 - Institutionalised summits in international governance: Promoting and limiting change Chapter 2 - Institutional selection as a nested game on policy change Chapter 3 - Selecting summits: A theoretical model Chapter 4 - The G7 at the centre of international macroeconomic management Chapter 5 - G7 diplomacy in the fight against state-sponsored terrorism Chapter 6 - The European Council negotiating the Savings Tax Directive Chapter 7 - European Council leadership in reforming European emissions trading Conclusion
About the author
Daniel Odinius holds a PhD in Political Science from the University of Bamberg, Germany, where he also completed a Master’s degree focusing on international and European politics. He was a visiting researcher with the G7 Research Group at the Munk School for Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto. In his current position at the German Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs in Berlin, Daniel’s work concentrates on European cohesion policy. His research interests include international institutions, international negotiations, European politics, and foreign policy.
Summary
This book analyses the role of institutionalised summits in international governance, adding a fresh perspective to the controversial debate over the value of institutionalised summits for international governance.
It argues that the contribution of these summits to negotiating and implementing international agreements on policy change is ambivalent. Based on an innovative theoretical model the books proposes that states strategically select summits with their specific institutional design for advancing their policy preferences. Developing the route to the summit and the route from the summit as precise causal mechanisms, the author argues that these choices explain the ambivalence of summit involvement. With empirically rich case studies on the Group of 7 (G7) and the European Council, the book provides a rare systematic comparison of different summits. The empirical record shows strikingly similar patterns for the G7 and the European Council, but it also points to variation deserving further attention in the study of summits in different institutional environments.
It will be of interest to researchers in International Relations, Global Governance, and European Politics, and those interested in global institutions and decision-making.
