Legitimate Multipolarity

• Applicants: Professorin Dr. Heike Holbig; Professorin Dr. Amrita Narlikar; Dr. Johannes Plagemann
• Subject Area: Political Science
• Term: from 2018 to 2023
• Project identifier: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) - Project number 394229330

• Final Report Year: 2024

Final Report Abstract

Legitimate Multipolarity sought to explore the relationship between a multipolar distribution of power in international affairs and the legitimacy of international institutions. To that end, we collected a large body of news data from across the globe commenting on and reporting about the G20, the World Trade Organization, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Incorporating views from small, large and medium sized countries in the Global South as well as Europe and the US, our data goes beyond conventional legitimacy research in IR, which typically rests primarily on data from western countries and few large non-western ones. One of our findings is the observation that publics in the Global South see an acute legitimacy crisis of global governance institutions that is either originating from or made worse by the intensification of major power rivalries in a multipolar world. Herein we differ from survey-based research that emphasizes the continuity of support for global governance by individuals worldwide. More specifically, institutions devised to at least in part adapt global governance to the realities of multipolarity, the G20 as well as a variety of inter-regional agreements in trade, are widely seen as poor substitutes to truly inclusive institutions, such as the UN or the WTO. More concerning still, we found little evidence for an appreciation of greater diversity in global governance following the rise of non-western powers such as China and India and a concomitant fragmentation of global governance.

Publications

• Whither Chinese IR? The Sinocentric subject and the paradox of Tianxia-ism. International Theory, 14(1), 57-87.
  Chu, Sinan
  
• From a legitimacy deficit to an existential crisis. The Crises of Legitimacy in Global Governance, 107-121. Routledge.
  Narlikar, Amrita
  
• The paradox of competing connectivity strategies in Asia. Third World Quarterly, 42(10), 2265-2281.
  Plagemann, Johannes; Datta, Sreeradha & Chu, Sinan
  
• Dissociation via Alternative Institutions: The Establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and US-China Conflict. Historical Social Research 47 (2): 109–37.
  Sinan Chu
  
• Fantastic Theories and Where to Find Them: Rethinking Interlocutors in Global IR. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 50(3), 700-729.
  Chu, Sinan
  
• How not to negotiate: the case of trade multilateralism. International Affairs, 98(5), 1553-1573.
  Narlikar, Amrita
  
• Multilateralism, Liberal Values, and the Global South. In Brahima Coulibaly and Kemal Dervis (eds): Essays on a 21st Century Multilateralism that Works for All, Washington DC: Brookings Institution.
  Amrita Narlikar
  
• Wir sind nicht alle. Verlag C.H.BECK oHG.
  Plagemann, Johannes & Maihack, Henrik
  
• In the Eyes of the Beholders: The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions under Multipolarity. International Studies Quarterly, 68(2).
  Chu, Sinan; Holbig, Heike; Narlikar, Amrita & Plagemann, Johannes
  
• Nichtwestliche Perspektiven in den Internationalen Beziehungen. Handbuch Internationale Beziehungen, 263-285. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
  Chu, Sinan