The Limits to Governance by Theo Papaioannou Catherine Lyall

Author:Theo Papaioannou, Catherine Lyall [Theo Papaioannou, Catherine Lyall]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781409491781
Barnesnoble:
Publisher: Ashgate Publishing Ltd
Published: 2012-12-28T00:00:00+00:00

The Eschatology of Social Theory

Simply pointing out that many of the empirical features of the new biosecurity governance regime are at odds with theoretical predictions is not in itself a particularly pressing problem for proponents of globalization. It can simply be dismissed as an anomaly. What is needed is a more convincing explanation. Rosenberg’s (2001) suggestion is that there is nothing for globalization theory to explain as the phenomena we see fit perfectly well with classical social theory. His point is that modern state sovereignty – internal political primacy and external political equality (Rosenberg 2005, 19) – with politics a self-contained realm of activity are consequences of how we organize our economic lives. Throughout most of history economic production and distribution of wealth have been organized through complex hierarchies of political economy (ibid., 19–20). But today the mode of wealth creation involves ‘contractual relations of exchange among people who are legally and politically equal’ (ibid., 20) and hence requires the formation of civil society, distinct from the state. This in turn required the withdrawal of the state and its reconstitution as the provider of conditions where the private sphere can flourish, through for example, the enforcement of contracts and the provision of security, broadly defined.

As such, the notion that the state might hollow out and cede sovereignty both above and below, shifting towards governance rather than government, can be misleading. The co-existence of state sovereignty with expanding global inter-connectedness is entirely consistent with, and at the extreme may even be a precondition of the global expansion of trade; as might a reassertion of state sovereignty and power and its execution through new non-state actors. If governments decide that self-regulation below and international arrangements above are the best way of providing security then they can use them. Similarly, if they think that another structure is more appropriate then it is hard to see how social theory will get in the way. What appears to be a shift from government to governance, can easily be understood as its opposite: namely a retreat from international agreements (Pearson et al. 2001) and security through transparency (Walker 2003), a reconfiguration of security at the state level and then its varied imposition which is producing changes to pre-existing forms of regulation from below.

Rosenberg’s assertion that globalization theorists are ideological amplifiers of the Zeitgeist rather than its interpreters (Rosenberg 2005, 7) seems harsh, but may not be unfair. The extent of the limits to governance based approaches can be understood by exploring the knowledge claims of globalization theorists in the light of Beck’s (1992) assertion that social changes are driving a change in risk assessment and risk management from a concern with knowing risks, to a concern with the risks associated with ways of knowing.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.