The Debate about Collective Goods in the Context of Contemporary Issues of Global Governance

111
DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-2-109-116
Institute of Business Studies (IBS-MOSCOW), 82, Vernadskogo Prosp., Moscow, 119571, Russian Federation;
A. Kazantsev (andrka@mail.ru),
Moscow State Institute of International Relations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (MGIMO University), 76, Vernadskogo Prosp., Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation;
National Research University Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya Str., Moscow, 101000, Russian Federation;
L. Fljyan (fljyan@mail.ru),
Northern University, 10/1 Alek Manukyan Str., 0017 Yerevan, Republic of Armenia;
S. Medvedeva (svetamedvedeva@mail.ru),
Moscow State Institute of International Relations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (MGIMO University), 76, Vernadskogo Prosp., Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation

Acknowledgements. This paper is a part of MGIMO University research program no. 1921-01-02.


Abstract. This article is dedicated to three interconnected concepts – “collective goods”, “free rider” and “hegemony” in the context of modern politics. We analyze three theoretical approaches to the problem of provision of collective goods by hegemonic states. These approaches are: neoliberal, (neo) realist and World-System Theory. Basing on these theoretical premises, we analyze the debate about free-riding in the Western political discourse (especially among US allies) and we point out that particular interests of US can be disguised as “collective goods”. Basing on this, we analyze discussions about free-riding both in the Western world (among NATO and EU members) and among US allies in the Pacific region (Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand). We point out that in fact US can use the concept of collective goods to push their own agenda. Than we move to popular in western political science idea that China is a global free rider – for instance in the sphere of sea lane security and global energy security. Basing on A. Kennedy works, we demonstrate that China in fact does not wish to make western powers pay the costs of collective goods. China is rather afraid that western powers will exploit his resources. This idea is supported with the evidence, gathered during in-depth interview with Chinese diplomats and foreign policy experts. Having said that, paper points out that mentioned cases mark the importance of the concept of trust. Trust is well-studied in the field of behavioral economics, but IR theory doesn`t usually takes the concept of trust into account. Also this paper raises a question about including historical and cultural topics in the theory of international relations. Basing on analysis of different ways to incorporate economic arguments in IR theory, authors point out that modern IR theory lacks economic argumentation. Paper concludes with the idea that IR theory should capitalize on behavioral economics.

Keywords: IR theories, collective goods, hegemony, global governance, free-riding issue, foreign policy strategy, collective security, energy security, NATO


REFERENCES

  1. Zhilina I.U. Doverie v ekonomike [Trust in the economy]. ESPR, 2008, no. 1. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/doverie-v-ekonomike/viewer (accessed 07.09.2020).
  2. Medvedev S.A., Tomashov I.A. Kontseptsiya global’nykh obshchestvennykh blag [Global public goods concept]. International Organizations Research Journal, 2009, no. 2 (24), pp. 21-28.
  3. Olson M. The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1965. 165 p.
  4. Olson M. The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social Rigidities. New Haven, Yale University Press, 1982. 276 p.
  5. Gilpin R. The Political Economy of International Relations. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1987. 472 p.
  6. Keohane R.O., Nye J.S.Jr. Power and interdependence: world politics in transition. Boston, Little-Brown, 1989. 273 p.
  7. Gol’tsov A.G. Geopoliticheskaya rol’ zapada v sovremennom mire: lider, gegemon ili imperiya? [Geopolitical role of the West in the modern world: leader, hegemon or empire?]. Politiya, 2017, no. 2 (85), pp. 113-128.
  8. Kindleberger Ch.P. Hierarchy versus Inertial Cooperation. International Organization, 1986, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 841-847.
  9. Keohane R.O. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in World Political Economy. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1984. 312 p.
  10. Keohane R.O. The Demand for International Regimes. International Organization, 1982, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 325-355.
  11. Gilpin R.G. No one loves political realist. Security Studies, 1996, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 3-26.
  12. Gilpin R.G. The Theory of Hegemonic War. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 1988, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 591-613. DOI: 10.2307/204816
  13. Webb M.C., Krasner S.D. Hegemonic stability theory: an empirical assessment. Review of International Studies, 1989, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 193-198.
  14. Hopkins T.K. World-Systems Analysis: Theory and Methodology (Explorations in the World Economy). Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications, 1982. 200 p.
  15. Arrighi G. The long twentieth century: money, power, and the origins of our times. London, Verso, 1994. 416 p.
  16. Sullivan L.J. A New Approach to Burden Sharing. Foreign Policy, 1985, no. 60, pp. 91-110.
  17. President Eisenhower delivers Cold War “domino theory” speech. History, 1954, 7 April. Available at: https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/eisenhower-gives-famous-domino-theory-speech (accessed 07.09.2020).
  18. Korostikov M. Vosem’ stran NATO narastili v 2019 godu voennye rashody do 2% VVP [Eight NATO countries boost military spending to 2% of GDP in 2019]. Kommersant, 25.06.2019. Available at: https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/4011887 (accessed 07.09.2020).
  19. Schoen J.W. Are NATO allies really getting a “free ride”? Here’s what the numbers say. CNBC, 2017, 6 July. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/06/nato-allies-military-spending-trump.html (accessed 07.09.2020).
  20. Bell J.P., Hendrickson R.C. NATO’s Visegrad allies and the bombing of Qaddafi: The Consequence of alliance free-riders. The Journal of Slavic Military Studies, Routledge, 2012, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 149-161.
  21. Arrighi G. Adam Smith in Beijing: Lineages of the Twenty-First Century. New Political Economy, 2009, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 149-153. Available at: doi.org/10.1080/13563460802673390
  22. Kennedy A. China and the Free-Rider Problem: Exploring the Case of Energy Security. Political Science Quarterly, 2015, vol. 130, no. 1, pp. 27-50.
  23. Chinese Oil Demand Is Almost Back to Pre-Virus Crisis Levels. Bloomberg Green, 18.05.2020. Available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-18/chinese-oil-demand-is-almost-back-to-pre-virus-crisis-levels (accessed 07.09.2020).
  24. Kleine-Ahlbrandt S.T. Beijing, Global Free-Rider. Foreign Policy, November 12, 2009. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/11/12/beijing-global-free-rider/ (accessed 05.08.2020).
  25. Mauss M. Essai sur le don. Forme et raison de l’échange dans les sociétés archaïques. Paris, L’Année Sociologique, 1925. 248 p.
  26. Goh B., Chen Y. China pledges $124 billion for new Silk Road as champion of globalization. Reuters, 14.05.2017. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-silkroad-africa-idUSKBN18A02I (accessed 07.09.2020).
  27. Liu Weidong, Dunford M. Inclusive Globalization: Unpacking China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Area Development and Policy, 2016, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 1-18. DOI: 10.1080/23792949.2016.1232598
  28. Vinogradov A.O. Asimmetrichnyi otvet, ili strategiya Kitaya v global’nom mire [Asymmetric response, or China’s strategy in the global world]. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences, 2015, no. 1, pp. 116-134.
  29. Mikhalev M.S. “Odin poyas, odin put’” kak novaya vneshnepoliticheskaya strategiya KNR. Kratkii analiz vnutrikitaiskoi diskussii [“One belt, one road” Project as a new foreign policy strategy of the PRC. Brief analysis of the internal Chinese discussion]. Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law, 2016, vol. 9, no. 6. Available at: https://doi.org/10.23932/2542-0240-2016-9-6-88-103 (accessed 07.09.2020).

Registered in System SCIENCE INDEX

For citation:
Lebedev S., Kazantsev A., Fljyan L., Medvedeva S. The Debate about Collective Goods in the Context of Contemporary Issues of Global Governance. World Eonomy and International Relations, 2021, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 109-116. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-2-109-116



Comments (0)

No comments

Add comment







Indexed

 

 

 

 

Dear authors! Please note that in the VAK List of peer-reviewed scientific journals, in which the main scientific results of dissertations for the degree of candidate and doctor of sciences should be published for the “MEMO Journal” the following specialties are recorded:
economic sciences:
5.2.5. World Economy.
5.2.1. Economic Theory
5.2.3. Regional and Branch Economics
political sciences:
5.5.4. International Relations
5.5.1. History and Theory of Politics
5.5.2. Political Institutions, Processes, Technologies

 

Current Issue
2024, vol. 68, No. 4
Topical Themes of the Issue:
  • Financial Contagion Propagation in Europe under the Impact of Global Shocks
  • Regional Powers on the African Continent: Trends and Prospects
  • Investment Activity of the PRC in the Kyrgyz Republic
  • “Land Grabbing” Concept: Global and National Aspects
Submit an Article
INVITATION FOR PUBLICATION
The Editorial Board invites authors to write analytical articles on the following topics:
  • changes in the processes of globalization in modern conditions
  • formation of the new world order
  • shifts in civilization at the stage of transition to a digital society

The editors are also interested in publishing synthesis articles / scientific reviews revealing the main trends in the development of certain regions of the world - Latin America, Africa, South Asia, etc.