Adam Holesch

As International Organizations (IOs) have proliferated and expanded their mandates, they have become embedded in increasingly dense and interconnected regime complexes. These evolving governance structures pose new external challenges for IO secretariats, which must navigate relationships with both member states and other IOs within their sector. Yet, comparative evidence on how IO staff perceive these external influences remains scarce. This article addresses this gap in two steps. First, it introduces perceived autonomy as a new empirical variable, drawing on an original multi-IO survey. Second, it examines IO staff perceptions of interactions with other IOs. The results reveal that IO staff perceive moderate autonomy, with variations across four key global governance sectors—trade, finance, security, and climate change—as well as within them. Notably, IO staff do not view interactions with other IOs as particularly problematic, challenging common assumptions in the regime complexity literature about governance congestion. By reintroducing the perspective of IO staff into comparative global governance research, this article offers new insights into how governance complexity is experienced from within.

The European Union (EU) responded to democratic backsliding in Hungary and Poland by implementing a sanctions toolbox, which includes the Article 7 Treaty on European Union (TEU) mechanism, infringement procedures and funding conditionality. Whilst the Article 7 TEU procedure has been extensively studies and found to be ineffective, the efficacy of infringement procedures and the recently introduced funding conditionality – comprising the Conditionality Regulation, the Recovery and Resilience Facility and the Common Provisions Regulation – remains less understood. Drawing on the sanctions scholarship, we identify two central determinants for sanction effectiveness: the credibility of sanctions imposition and their economic costs. We then explore how they influence the effectiveness of the sanction mechanisms introduced by the EU by testing four hypotheses. The findings indicate that both infringement procedures and funding conditionality are only partially effective. This comparative analysis enhances our understanding of coercive mechanisms that can mitigate decline in democratic governance.

This article examines the evolving institutional challenges of global governance by analyzing four key sectors: trade, security, environment, and finance. Recent transformations have increased their complexity and fragmentation in these sectors, challenging the traditional dominance of intergovernmental organizations (IGOs). Based on the findings of the H2020 GLOBE project and a survey of 1,004 IGO staff, we discuss four major cross-sectoral challenges: decision-making gridlocks, organizational inefficiencies, weak institutional autonomy, and operational difficulties. Sectoral differences highlight the need for adaptive governance strategies, as a one-size-fits-all approach is insufficient. While IGO staff remain optimistic about their organizations’ ability to adapt, our study underscores the importance of reinforcing IGOs' in a rapidly shifting global landscape.

Following the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the ‘democratic backslider’ parties in Hungary (Fidesz) and Poland (Law and Justice) took differing stances on Russia, bringing their positions on the Rule of Law (RoL) conflict and within the broader alliance of Populist Radical Right (PRR) parties into question. Building on and advancing the theoretical framework of democratic backsliding and PRR party cooperation, this article assesses the impact of exogenous shocks triggered by external authoritarian actors on these types of collaborations. A detailed examination of the voting patterns of Fidesz, Law and Justice and other PRR parties in the European Parliament (EP) is undertaken, and their stances towards Russia and the RoL conflict before and after the invasion are weighed. The findings show that the invasion did not influence the dynamics of democratic backsliding. Despite the rhetoric, it actually brought Fidesz and Law and Justice closer together. While the attack led to a convergence of assertiveness towards Russia among the PRR parties, the Putin regime remains a divisive issue within the PRR family. The different positions towards Russia did not affect the support of PRRs for the backsliders.

La gobernanza global se ha aceptado ampliamente como objeto de estudio y como forma de “ver” la política mundial. Sin embargo, todavía sabemos poco acerca de cómo ha evolucionado la publicación en lo que concierne a tal materia. Este artículo ofrece la primera exploración sistemática de estos patrones. Utiliza un conjunto de datos original de investigación sobre gobernanza global para responder tres preguntas de primer orden: ¿cómo ha variado la publicación a lo largo del tiempo?; ¿en qué temas se han centrado los estudiosos?; ¿y quiénes han estado publicando en este ámbito de estudios? Los autores descubrieron que la investigación ha aumentado y se ha vuelto cada vez más diversa, pero de manera selectiva. Algunos temas marginados ocupan un lugar más destacado que en el resto de las relaciones internacionales, pero también hay omisiones importantes. Por lo demás, si bien la investigación ya no procede tanto de la región estadounidense, y las mujeres han sido comparativamente más activas en relación con otras áreas, la diversidad geográfica sigue siendo por demás limitada. Los académicos con sede en el Sur Global se perfilan como los primeros artífices de menos del 14 por ciento de todas las publicaciones. Para concluir, el artículo promueve la reflexión sobre las implicaciones que todo ello tiene para el campo de estudio referido.