Global governance and Eurasian international organisations: lessons learned and future agenda
The paper summarises the findings of this special issue and suggests
avenues for future research. It concludes that the Eurasian regionalisms’
development in the 2010s was influenced, among other factors,
by Russia’s concerns about external threats and by its control over
the Eurasian space. However, the design of the regional institutions
does not make them incompatible with global governance. The
cooperation between global and regional institutions varies depending
on the agenda of the specific regional organisation. In addition to
direct competition between global and regional institutions, there
may be an indirect one through offering access to different forms of
economic benefits. Through this indirect strategy, regional institutions
may reduce the incentives for individual countries to comply
with their obligations to global institutions. This paper also places
Eurasia within a global context of analysis and considers similar
trends world-wide as well as outlines the agenda for future studies
of global versus regional governance.
The 2012 G8 summit, hosted by US president Barack Obama at the presidential retreat of Camp David in Maryland on 18-19 May, promises to be a particularly significant event. It takes place in the political lead-up to the US presidential election in November 2012, and is being held in tandem with a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Chicago on 20-21 May. The summit will feature a full-strength agenda, including a global economy struggling to generate growth and jobs, delivery of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as the due date of 2015 moves closer, and security in troubled regions and countries where the G8’s core mission of promoting democracy and reform is acutely at stake. The G8 Camp David Summit publication features articles by German chancellor Angela Merkel and Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper on the key issues that will be under discussion.
An background publication produced for every G20 summit, with contributions from G20 leaders and international experts on the issues on the G20 agenda.
For the past 37 years, the annual G8 summits have generated a wide breadth of declarations and communiqués binding the leaders to hard commitments across a diverse range of global policy issues. The extent to which the G8 members comply with their annual commitments has, in recent years, become a hotly contested topic, pitting academics, politicians, policy wonks and newsmakers against each other in an effort to understand whether commitments by the G8 do, in fact, matter. Given this era of ongoing domestic political constraints and conflicting global demands, does the G8 have the ability and, indeed, the capacity not only to make, but also to keep the commitments its members collectively generate at their annual summits?
The article analyses the EU activity in assisting developing countries to develop energy sector throughperspective of the functional approach. The author identifies the EU approach by assessing EU compliance with the G8 commitments on assisting developing countries to develop energy sector. The assessment is made on the basis of the analysis of EU implementation of its commitments made in four major spheres of international engagement for energy development, such as ensuring developing countries’ access to modern energy sources, clean energy development, raw natural energy resources, sustainable management and environmental protection. In order to ensure comprehensive and unbiased assessment the author applies the methodology of global governance delivery function approach and compares EU compliance with compliance of other traditional donors such as USA and emerging donors such as Russia. In conclusion some recommendations on how to raise effectiveness in assisting developing countries to develop energy sector are made for the Russian Federation.
The world’s financial crisis made worth an effort to rethink the existing model of global economic governance. One of the striking things among the others – is the insufficient level of global financial regulation. Experts do not share a common view on the functioning of the system. Some of them consider the system of global governance was not ready to react to the new challenges and to sustain the pressure of critical events. Others will defend the system, admitting that only some slight changes into it would make possible to cope with the current problems. The truth, as very often, is probably somewhere in between. The necessity to modify the pattern of functioning of the global financial institutions is clear. The institutions themselves should be made more viable and efficient and their competences to manage different aspects of global economy should be substantially enlarged. How useful could an EU experience be in achieving the new global governance goals?
The role of the EU as a model for global institutions
One of the popular answers to the challenges of the modern world is the concept of global governance. Does it exist really/ This is the questyion J/ Kirton answers in his book.
The article deals with the processes of building the information society and security in the CIS in accordance with modern conditions. The main objective is to review existing mechanisms for the formation of a common information space in the Eurasian region, regarded as one of the essential aspects of international integration. The theoretical significance of the work is to determine the main controls of the regional information infrastructure, improved by the development of communication features in a rapid process.The practical component consists in determining the future policies of the region under consideration in building the information society. The study authors used historical-descriptive approach and factual analysis of events having to do with drawing the contours of today's global information society in the regional refraction.
The main result is the fact that the development of information and communication technologies, and network resources leads to increased threats of destabilization of the socio-political situation in view of the emergence of multiple centers that generate the ideological and psychological background. Keeping focused information policy can not be conceived without the collective participation of States in the first place, members of the group leaders of integration - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Currently, only produced a comprehensive approach to security in the information field in the Eurasian region, but the events in the world, largely thanks to modern technology, make the search for an exit strategy with a much higher speed. The article contributes to the science of international relations, engaging in interdisciplinary thinking that is associated with a transition period in the development of society. A study of current conditions in their relation to the current socio-political patterns of the authors leads to conclusions about the need for cooperation with the network centers of power in the modern information environment, the formation of alternative models of networking, especially in innovation and scientific and technical areas of information policy, and expanding the integration of the field in this region on the information content.
This special publication for the 2012 New Delhi Summit is a collection of articles by government officials from BRICS countries, representatives of international organizations, businessmen and leading researchers.
The list of Russian contributors includes Sergei Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia, Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the Trade Negotiations Department of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development, Vladimir Dmitriev, Vnesheconombank Chairman, Alexander Bedritsky, advisor to the Russian President, VadimLukov, Ambassador-at-large of the Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry, and representatives of the academic community.
The publication also features articles by the President of Kazakhstan NursultanNazarbayev and internationally respected economist Jim O’Neil, who coined the term “BRIC”. In his article Jim O’Neil speculates about the future of the BRICS countries and the institution as a whole.
The publication addresses important issues of the global agenda, the priorities of BRICS and the Indian Presidency, the policies and competitive advantages of the participants, as well as BRICS institutionalization, enhancing efficiency and accountability of the forum.