V. Rittberger – författare

This volume analyzes changing patterns of authority in the global political economy with an in-depth look at the new roles played by state and non-state actors, and addresses key themes including the provision of global public goods, new modes of regulation and the potential of new institutions for global governance.

This volume analyzes changing patterns of authority in the global political economy with an in-depth look at the new roles played by state and non-state actors, and addresses key themes including the provision of global public goods, new modes of regulation and the potential of new institutions for global governance.

This volume analyzes changing patterns of authority in the global political economy with an in-depth look at the new roles played by state and non-state actors, and addresses key themes including the provision of global public goods, new modes of regulation and the potential of new institutions for global governance.

unlike the historical-descriptive or legalistic approaches still pervading the majority of publications on international organization, has an implicit (empirical-) theoretical orientation. As a concomitant development, Yalem notes an increasing methodological 6 sophistication among some students of international organization. However, except for some favorable comments on the evolving theory of international community formation, Yalem does not evaluate the contribution of the empirical-theory-cum­ methodology literature to the study of international organization. More recently, Riggs and his associates (1970) and Alger (1960-70; 1970) have taken it upon themselves to do just this. The analysis of the impact of bthavioralism on the study of the United Nations system by Robert Riggs and his associates is a rather devastating indictment. Though demonstrating a concern to present balanced and qualified conclusions from their pemsal of the relevant literature, they summarize their assessment in the following statement: Behavioral research has probably been the most disappointing in the area of its central concern, that of theory-building. The grand theories tend to be heuristic in nature, divorced from the essential data base; and the best-supported proposi­ tions have the natrowest theoretical significance. Despite its aims and pretensions, the approach has not yet produced a coherent set of explanatory propositions to bring order or scientific exactness to the study of international organization or any substantial segment of it (Riggs et al. , 1970: 230).