Show description

As Sassen (2004) argues, the realm of the national and the realm of the global are not two mutually exclusive domains. The state is neither an autonomous actor constrained only by the structural anarchy of the international order, nor is it being dismissed as irrelevant in the context of the emergence of a new cosmopolitanism. Drawing on Robertson’s (1995) earlier work, Holton (2008) refers to “methodological glocalism” as a way of “retaining a sense of the significance of nation-states and institutions whilst also incorporating transnational processes in the global field” (p.

Actors from all sectors are brought together to “advocate and promulgate” ten core principles drawn from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ILO’s Fundamental Principles on Rights and Work, the Rio Principle on Environment and Development, and the United Nations Convention Against Corruption. It seeks to promote these core values through the “development, implementation, and disclosure of environmental, social and governance policies and practices” (http://www. org). However, as Sholte (2000) appropriately points out, it is the IFIs, the World Trade Organisation, and the OECD which have overshadowed agencies such as the ILO and UNESCO on questions of managing globalization.

For Kooiman (1993), the concepts of diversity, dynamics and complexity are central features of governance itself. The socio-political system is increasingly differentiated, characterized by multiple centers, and is one in which “Actors are continuously shaped by (and in) the interactions, in which they relate to each other” (Kooiman 2003: 2). Kooiman (2003) argues that it is the role of government to enable 24 GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES ON GOVERNANCE interactions, encourage many and varied arrangements for coping with policy, and ensure equitable distribution of services between actors through self- and co-regulation and public–private partnerships, or what Kooiman calls “types of societal interactions” and “modes and orders of governance”.