University of Essex

GV212-5-AU-CO:
International Institutions

The details

Year: 2023/24

Department: Government

Campus: Colchester Campus

Term: Autumn

Level: Undergraduate: Level 5

Status: ReassessmentOnly

Start date: Thursday 05 October 2023

End date: Friday 15 December 2023

Credits: 15

Last updated: 19 May 2022

Requisites for this module

Pre-requisites: (none)

Co-requisites: (none)

Pre and / or co-requisites: (none)

Prohibited modules: (none)

Key module (requisite for): (none)

Key module for

(none)

Module description

This course offers a comprehensive overview of the role of international institutions in promoting international cooperation. The course assumes and builds upon students' prior understanding of theories of international relations and of international politics.

The module is designed around the following question: Do international institutions promote international cooperation? In particular, the course analyzes the main challenges to international cooperation, and how international institutions (IIs) can help to overcome them. To answer this question, the module relies on three pillars: First, it introduces a set of theories to help understanding cooperation among states. Second, it applies these theories to the analysis of some of the most important IIs. Finally, the last part of the module reviews the effects of IIs both on the behaviour of states, and on international markets.

By the end of the module, the students should be able to: (i) understand and identify the central problems for cooperation in an anarchic world; (ii) identify and explain key concepts for the analysis of international institutions; (iii) use theories to analyze the role of international institutions in world politics; (iv) demonstrate analytical and critical thinking skills when analyzing political phenomena.

Module aims

The main aim of this module is to teach students to think and write critically about International Institutions using theories and methods of political science. Students will develop the ability to think and make reasoned arguments using positive theories and supported by the best available empirical evidence. These aims, and objectives are achieved through a variety of teaching and learning strategies such as lectures, in-depth seminar sessions, reflective presentations and independently produced assignments.

Module learning outcomes

By the end of the module, the students should be able to:

1. Identify the main approaches, concepts, and methods employed in the study of international institutions;
2. Use theories to explain the causes and effects of international cooperation;
3. Demonstrate analytical and critical thinking skills when analysing political phenomena.

Module information

No additional information available.

Learning and teaching methods

This module will be taught over 2 hours per week

Bibliography

Simmons, B.A. and Martin, L.L. (2013) ‘International Organizations and Institutions’, in Handbook of international relations. 2nd ed. London: SAGE. Available at: https://essex.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=2763228680007346&institutionId=7346&customerId=7345&VE=true.
Barnett, M.N. and Finnemore, M. (1999a) ‘The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations’, International Organization, 53(04), pp. 699–732. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081899551048.
‘The Emergence of Cooperation among Egoists’ (no date). Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1961366.pdf.
Barnett, M.N. and Finnemore, M. (1999b) ‘The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations’, International Organization, 53(04), pp. 699–732. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081899551048.
Robert O. Keohane (2011) ‘The Promise of Institutionalist Theory’, International Security, 20(1), pp. 39–51. Available at: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/447387/summary.
John J. Mearsheimer (2011) ‘The False Promise of International Institutions’, International Security, 19(3), pp. 5–49. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2539078.
Carlsnaes, W., Risse-Kappen, T. and Simmons, B.A. (2013) Handbook of international relations. 2nd ed. London: SAGE. Available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446247587.n13.
Wendt, A. (1992) ‘Anarchy is What States Make of It’, International Organization, 46(2), pp. 391–425. Available at: https://www-cambridge-org.uniessexlib.idm.oclc.org/core/journals/international-organization/article/anarchy-is-what-states-make-of-it-the-social-construction-of-power-politics/B03BC7C9AAC5211B6DC319C077C1A854.
W. Abbott, K. et al. (2000) ‘The Concept of Legalization’, International Organization, 54(3), pp. 401–419. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081800551271.
Finnemore, M. and Toope, S.J. (2001) ‘Alternatives to “Legalization”: Richer Views of Law and Politics’, International Organization, 55(3), pp. 743–758. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/00208180152507614.
Kahler, M. (2000) ‘Conclusion: The Causes and Consequences of Legalization’, International Organization, 54(3), pp. 661–683. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081800551244.
Goldstein, J. et al. (2001) ‘Response to Finnemore and Toope’, International Organization, 55(3), pp. 759–760. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/00208180152507623.
Lipson, C. (1991) ‘Why are some international agreements informal?’, International Organization, 45(04). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300033191.
Abbott, K.W. and Snidal, D. (1998b) ‘Why States Act through Formal International Organizations’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42(1), pp. 3–32. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002798042001001.
Hawkins, D.G. (2006) Delegation and agency in international organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=174476.
Johnson, T. and Urpelainen, J. (2014) ‘International Bureaucrats and the Formation of Intergovernmental Organizations: Institutional Design Discretion Sweetens the Pot’, International Organization, 68(01), pp. 177–209. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818313000349.
Schneider, C.J. (2011) ‘Weak States and Institutionalized Bargaining Power in International Organizations1’, International Studies Quarterly, 55(2), pp. 331–355. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2011.00651.x.
Becker, H.S. and Richards, P. (2007) Writing for social scientists: how to start and finish your thesis, book, or article. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Available at: https://search-ebscohost-com.uniessexlib.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=268521&site=ehost-live&authtype=sso&custid=s9814295.
King, G., Keohane, R.O. and Verba, S. (1994) Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Available at: https://search-ebscohost-com.uniessexlib.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=75114&site=ehost-live&authtype=sso&custid=s9814295.
King, G., Keohane, R.O. and Verba, S. (2021) Designing social inquiry: scientific inference in qualitative research. New edition. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Available at: https://app.kortext.com/Shibboleth.sso/Login?entityID=https://idp0.essex.ac.uk/shibboleth&target=https://app.kortext.com/borrow/1820536.
‘Careful Commitments: Democratic States and Alliance Design’ (no date). Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/10.1086/682074.pdf.
Putnam, R.D. (1988b) ‘Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games’, International Organization, 42(03). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027697.
Donno, D. (2010) ‘Who Is Punished? Regional Intergovernmental Organizations and the Enforcement of Democratic Norms’, International Organization, 64(04), pp. 593–625. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818310000202.
‘Why Comply? The Domestic Constituency Mechanism’ (no date). Available at: https://www-cambridge-org.uniessexlib.idm.oclc.org/core/journals/international-organization/article/why-comply-the-domestic-constituency-mechanism/11237F977932D564B1391659ED4219D8.
Simmons, B.A. (1998) ‘Compliance With International Agreements’, Annual Review of Political Science, 1(1), pp. 75–93. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.1.1.75.
Chayes, A. and Chayes, A.H. (1993b) ‘On compliance’, International Organization, 47(02). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027910.
Downs, G.W., Rocke, D.M. and Barsoom, P.N. (1996b) ‘Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation?’, International Organization, 50(03). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300033427.
Jana Von Stein (no date) ‘Do Treaties Constrain or Screen? Selection Bias and Treaty Compliance’, The American Political Science Review [Preprint]. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/30038968?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents.
Beth A. Simmons and Daniel J. Hopkins (2005) ‘The Constraining Power of International Treaties: Theory and Methods’, The American Political Science Review [Preprint]. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/30038969?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents.
Johnson, T. (2017) Organizational Progeny. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://doi-org.uniessexlib.idm.oclc.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198717799.001.0001.
Moravcsik, A. (1999) ‘A New Statecraft? Supranational Entrepreneurs and International Cooperation’, International Organization, 53(2), pp. 267–306. Available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-organization/article/new-statecraft-supranational-entrepreneurs-and-international-cooperation/D1151B6620FD0D214E47DC6D6CA5756E.
Young, O.R. (1999) ‘Comment on Andrew Moravcsik, ‘A New Statecraft? Supranational Entrepreneurs and International Cooperation’, International Organization, 53(4), pp. 805–809. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081899551075.
Pollack, M.A. (1997) ‘Delegation, Agency and Agenda Setting in the European Community’, International Organization, 51(1), pp. 99–134. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2703953#metadata_info_tab_contents.
McGillivray, F. and Smith, A. (2000) ‘Trust and Cooperation Through Agent-specific Punishments’, International Organization, 54(4), pp. 809–824. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081800551370.
Bakaki, Z. (2016) ‘Deconstructing Mediation: A Case Study of the Cod Wars’, Negotiation Journal, 32(1), pp. 63–78. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/nejo.12147.
Bakaki, Z. and Böhmelt, T. (2022) ‘New deals “The Second After Leaving?” IO withdrawal and bilateral trade agreements’, The British Journal of Politics and International Relations [Preprint]. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/13691481221082454.
Dorussen, H. and Ward, H. (2008) ‘Intergovernmental Organizations and the Kantian Peace: A Network Perspective’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52(2), pp. 189–212. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27638603#metadata_info_tab_contents.
Boehmer, C., Gartzke, E. and Nordstrom, T. (2004) ‘Do Intergovernmental Organizations Promote Peace’, World Politics, 57(1), pp. 1–38. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25054282#metadata_info_tab_contents.
Bearce, D.H. and Bondanella, S. (2007b) ‘Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence’, International Organization, 61(04). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818307070245.
Pevehouse, J.C. (2002b) ‘Democracy from the Outside-In? International Organizations and Democratization’, International Organization, 56(3), pp. 515–549. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081802760199872.

The above list is indicative of the essential reading for the course.
The library makes provision for all reading list items, with digital provision where possible, and these resources are shared between students.
Further reading can be obtained from this module's reading list.

Assessment items, weightings and deadlines

Coursework / exam	Description	Deadline	Coursework weighting
Coursework	2022-23 ONLY IF REQUIRED BY EXAM BOARD

Exam format definitions

Remote, open book: Your exam will take place remotely via an online learning platform. You may refer to any physical or electronic materials during the exam.
In-person, open book: Your exam will take place on campus under invigilation. You may refer to any physical materials such as paper study notes or a textbook during the exam. Electronic devices may not be used in the exam.
In-person, open book (restricted): The exam will take place on campus under invigilation. You may refer only to specific physical materials such as a named textbook during the exam. Permitted materials will be specified by your department. Electronic devices may not be used in the exam.
In-person, closed book: The exam will take place on campus under invigilation. You may not refer to any physical materials or electronic devices during the exam. There may be times when a paper dictionary, for example, may be permitted in an otherwise closed book exam. Any exceptions will be specified by your department.

Your department will provide further guidance before your exams.

Overall assessment

Coursework	Exam
100%	0%

Reassessment

Coursework	Exam
100%	0%

Module supervisor and teaching staff

Supervisor: Dr Zorzeta Bakaki, email: zbakak@essex.ac.uk.

Teaching staff: Dr. Zorzeta Bakaki

Contact details: Module Supervisor: Dr. Zorzeta Bakaki - zbakak@essex.ac.uk / Module Administrator: Jasini Hobbs - govquery@essex.ac.uk

Availability

Available to incoming Essex Abroad / Exchange students: Yes

Available to Outside Option: Yes

Available to Audit: No

External examiner

Name: Dr Stefano Pagliari

Institution: City, University of London

Academic role: Senior Lecturer in International Politics

Resources

Teaching materials: Available via Moodle

Lecture recording: Of 20 hours, 20 (100%) hours available to students:
0 hours not recorded due to service coverage or fault;
0 hours not recorded due to opt-out by lecturer(s).

Further information

Department website: Government

Disclaimer: The University makes every effort to ensure that this information on its Module Directory is accurate and up-to-date. Exceptionally it can be necessary to make changes, for example to programmes, modules, facilities or fees. Examples of such reasons might include a change of law or regulatory requirements, industrial action, lack of demand, departure of key personnel, change in government policy, or withdrawal/reduction of funding. Changes to modules may for example consist of variations to the content and method of delivery or assessment of modules and other services, to discontinue modules and other services and to merge or combine modules. The University will endeavour to keep such changes to a minimum, and will also keep students informed appropriately by updating our programme specifications and module directory.

The full Procedures, Rules and Regulations of the University governing how it operates are set out in the Charter, Statutes and Ordinances and in the University Regulations, Policy and Procedures.

Module Directory

GV212-5-AU-CO:International Institutions