New Institutionalization of World Politics

The article examines the current state and major achievements of the research on international institutions and their role in world politics. The author explores the meaning of this notion, which due to its multiple interpretations, remains problematic. He differentiates the understanding of “institution” as rules of the game in society from its alternative conceptualization as an association, which becomes an actor of social interaction. Despite the various approaches regarding “international institutions”, the author includes in his definition both existing norms of international interaction and their reflection in organizational structures. Given the practice of conducting international affairs, it is possible to identify various types, including institutions-norms, institutions-organizations, institutions-integration groups, institutionsclubs, institutions-practices and institutions-dialogues. The author does not only characterize these types, he attempts to employ them to reconstruct the broad institutional map of the world in its evolution since the end of the Cold War. The author views the operations of the current international institutions as a part of the growth of structural complexity of the world. The emergence of new players on the international arena – non-state, formal and informal, permanent and temporary – impacts international affairs in a substantial way. Moreover, the multiple connections tied between these actors, the rise of their needs and ambitions and the growth of tensions also add to the complexity of the current institutional dynamics. These developments stimulate proliferation of international institutions, which find themselves responsible for the new tasks, including establishing communications between states and non-state actors, coordination of their interests, resolution of disputes and prevention of conflicts. In the context of growing global problems, which cannot be solved by single country alone, international institutions integrate efforts of multiple states, in order to respond to the specific set of challenges.

1. Batalov E. (2014a). Americanskaya politicheskaya mysl XX veka [American Political Thought XX Century]. Мoscow: Progress - Traditsia. 616 p.

2. Batalov E. (2014b). Kholodnaya voyna okonchena. Krestovyi pokhod prodolzhaetsya [The Cold War is over. The "crusade" continues]. Amerikanskyi ezhegodnik. Moscow.

3. Batyuk V. (2008a). Sovetsko-amerikanskie i rosiisko-amerikanskie dvustoronnie rezhimy. [The SovietAmerican and Russian-American bilateral regimes]. Thesis abstract. Мoscow.

4. Batyuk V. (2008b). Тrudnoe partnerstvo. Dvustoronnie rezhimy i instituty v rossiisko-amerikanskih otnosheniyah posle okonchania “kholodnoi voyny”. [A difficult partnership. Bilateral regimes and institutions in Russian-American relations after the end of the "cold war"]. Мoscow: Prometei. 212 p.

5. Baylis J., Smith S. (2001). The Globalization of World Politics. An Introduction to International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 636 p.

6. Bogaturov A. (2003). Sistemnaja istorija mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij v chetyreh tomah. Tom tretij. [The System History of International Relations in Four Volumes. Vol. 3]. Moscow: NOFMO. 720 p.

7. Bull H. (1977). The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. N. Y: Columbia University Press. 335 p.

8. Crawford R. (1996). Regime Theory in the Post-Cold War World. Rethinking Neoliberal Approaches to International Relations. Brookfield: Eldershot. 153 p.

9. Davydov Y. (ed.) (1990). Sovremennaya zapadnaja sociologija. Slovar'. [Modern Western sociology. Dictionary]. Moscow: Politizadat. 432 p.

10. Dobrynin A. (1997). Sugubo doveritel’no [Strictly Confidential]. Moscow: Ladomir. 688 p.

11. Drury G. (1999). Politicheskiye instituty s tochki zreniya prava [Political Institutions in Terms of the Law]. Politicheskaya nauka: novye napravlenia. Мoscow: Veche. 816 p.

12. Hoffman S. (1980). Primacy or World Order. McGraw-Hill Inc. 352 р.

13. Ikenberry J. (2001). After Victory. Institutions, Strategic Restraint and Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 312 p.

14. Krasner S. (1982). Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables. International Organization. Vol. 36. No 2: 185 – 205.

15. Lavrov S. (2005). Vneshnepoliticheskie itogi 2005 goda: razmyshlenija i vyvody [Foreign Policy Outcomes of 2005: Reflections and Conclusions]. Diplomaticheskij ezhegodnik. Available at: www.dipacademy.ru

16. Lazarev M. (1982). Slovar' mezhdunarodnogoprava. [Dictionary of international law]. Мoscow: Mezhdunarodnie otnoshenija. 245 p.

17. Lebedeva M. (2003). Mirovaya politika [World Politics]. Moscow: Aspect Press. 365 p.

18. Mearscheimer J. (1995). The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security. Vol. 19. No. 3: 5 – 49. DOI: 10.2307/2539078

19. North D. (1997). Instituty, institucionalnyeizmenenia i funkcionirovanie ekonomiki. [Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance]. Мoscow: NACHALA.190 p. Available at: http://lib.rus. ec/b/351951

20. North D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 159 p.

21. Patrushev S. (2009). Institucional'naya politologiya: chetvert veka spustya [Institutional political science: a quarter of a century later]. Sovremennye institucional'nye issledovanija: Sostojanie, problemy, perspektivy. Politicheskajanauka. No 3. 212 p.

22. Peters B. (1999). Politicheskiye instituty: vchera i segodnya [Political Institutions: Yesterday and Today]. Politicheskaya nauka: novye napravleniya. Мoscow: Veche. 816 p.

23. Petrovskii V. (1998). Aziatsko-tihookeanskie rezhimy bezopasnosti posle «holodnoj vojny»: evoljucija, perspektivy rossijskogo uchastija [Asia-Pacific security Regimes after the "Cold War": evolution and prospects of Russia's participation]. Moscow: Pamjatniki istoricheskoj mysli. 264 p.

24. Pobedash D. (2010). Mezhdunarodnye rezhimy nerasprostraneniya yadernogo oruzhiya. [The international nuclear non-proliferation regimes]. Ekaterinburg. 30 p.

25. Prigozhin I., Stengers I. (1994). Vremja. Haos. Kvant. [Time. Chaos. Quantum]. Moscow: Progress. 262 p.

26. Reinalda B. (2009). Routledge History of International Organizations. N.Y.: Routledge. 880 p.

27. Rotstein B. (1999). Politicheskiye instituty: obschie problem [Political Institutions: Common Problems]. Politicheskaya nauka: novye napravleniya. Мoscow: Veche. 816 p.

28. Safonov M. (2003). Zapadnye issledovaniya mezhdunarodnyh institutov [Western studies of international institutions]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. Vol. 1. № 1 (1).

29. Schechter M. (2010). Historical Dictionary of International Organizations. Lanham: Scarecrow Press. 368 p.

30. Shakleina T., Baykov A. (2013). Megatrendy [Megatrends]. Moscow: Aspect Press Publ.

31. Slaughter A.-M. (2004). A New World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 368 p.

32. Soros G. (1999). Krizis mirovogo kapitalizma. [The Crisis of World Capitalism]. Moscow: Infra-M. 262 p.

33. Semitin G. (ed.) (1999). Politicheskaya entsiklopedija [Political encyclopedia]. Vol. 1. Moscow: Misli. 752 p.

34. Shakleina T. (2012). Rossija i SShA v mirovoj politike. [Russia and the United States in world politics]. Moscow: Aspect Press. 212 p.

35. Veblen Т. (1984). Teoriya prazdnogo klassa. [The Theory of the Leisure Class] Мoscow: Progress. 336 p.

36. Weingast B. (1999). Politicheskie instituty s pozicii koncepcii ratsionalnogo vybora [Political Institutions from the Viewpoint of the Concept of Rational Choice]. Politicheskaya nauka: novye napravlenya. Мoscow: Veche. 816 p.

37. Wrong D. (1994). The Problem of Order. What Unites and Divides Societies. N.Y.: Free Press. 354 p.

38. Young O. (1989). International Cooperation: Building Regimes for National Resources and the Environment. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 248 p.

39. Young O. (1999). Institutional Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. In:Public Administration and Public Policy. Vol. II; Governance in World Affairs. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 424 p.

40. Young O. (1997). Global Governance: Drawing Insights from the Environmental Experience. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. 364 p.

41. Young O. (2001). The Behavioral Effects of Environmental Regimes: Collective-Action vs. Social-Practice Models. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics. Vol. 1. № 1: 9 – 29.