1. Is there something new in global politics? How to regulate it, anyway? Evangelische Akademie Loccum Conference on Global Governance December 13, 2002 Klaus Segbers Free University of Berlin

2. Content/ Overview: 0Intro/ general remarks 1The new global context 2 Future scenarios

3. 0A moving target... What is the polis? What about is the science about the polis? There are few permanent answers... and today, there is a crisis of interpretation: are we „losing control“?

4. 0.1Globalization as a political project? No. While there are groups and individuals propagating de-limitation and neo-liberalism, this is not decisive. G. is the product of technical innovations (digitalization, bio- and nanotechnology), of the increasing role of borderless flows, of the commodification of time and space, and of insufficient regulation tools (governance). The result is g. by default, not by design.

5. 0.2Globalization as a U.S. tool? No. The U.S. is currently a very powerful, though also fragmented country, and it is a big corporate marketplace. But it does not execute a global masterplan. G. is the outcome of utility driven moves by millions of heterogeneous players who act everywhere on different levels and in diverse spheres every day.

6. 0.3Globalization as result of a new context? Yes. Post-Westphalian context is gone Post- Cold War context is basically gone 9/11 as a symbol of a new environment

7. 0.4New Concepts New Centralities (Saskia Sassen) Soft institutions (Saskia Sassen) Network Society (Manuel Castells) Flows (Manuel Castells) Scapes (Arjun Appadurai) Patchworks

8. 1.1Directions of Development 1 ACTORS Polis, state as unitary actors, black boxes, container units Multitude of actors, different levels, patchwork

9. 1.2 Patchwork Territories/ Regions Sectors/ FIGs Admin Groups/ Bureaucracies Social Actors Interactions

10. 1.3Directions of Development 2 INSTITUTIONS and RULES Formal, complementary, top-down Informal, overlapping, multi-level

11. 1.4Directions of Development 3 ACTION Sovereign, consistent, directed Fragmented, ad-hocistic

12. 1.5Directions of Development 4 INTERACTION Diplomacy, negotiations, sequential Bargaining, responding to externally generated agendas, flows and scapes

13. 1.6Directions of Development 5 FIELD of ACTION Territory, borders, demarcation domestic/ foreign Blurred boundaries; patchworks; new mapping/ cartography required; transnational, shifting identities

14. 1.7Directions of Development 6 TOPICS, ISSUES, CLEAVAGES Traditional in/security; distribution of power, of wealth; paths of development „Cultural turn“; identity modules; secularism vs. fundamentalisms;new divides of digital education and access

15. 2.1.1Future scenarios 1: The coming anarchy Values of outcome: Low stability, low cooperation Many or more levels of political action, weakly interconnected. Many players of different origin and potentials. Huge variety in terms of resource potentials.

16. 2.1.2Anarchy... Flows becoming ever more uncontrollable European democracies are prone to an erosion of basic rules of liberal democracies Weakening of legitimacy of representative organs Limited democratic authority of other actors. Survivability of Western-type societies is under question; no alternative visions, but fundamentalist opponents of secular, liberal societies

17. 2.2.1Future scenarios 2: Learning from experience Value of outcomes: Increasing relative stability (medium to long term), increasing cooperation (multi-level) Many levels of political action, increasingly interconnected by institutions, norms, rules and values. Many players of different origin and potentials, following basic rules of the game. Organic mixture between different types of resources.

18. 2.2.2Learning - rules Legitimacy of decision making bodies in a multilevel, multipolar world is hard to achieve. But still, political processes can be organized by rules. Patchwork-like configurations are even harder to legitimize. But payoffs between traditional, formal legitimacy, and participation of citizens on different levels depending on their contributions and qualifications, should be openly discussed.

19. 2.3.1Future scenarios 3: Selective stability Value of outcome: Selective In/stability, Selective Cooperation Some levels of political action, partly interconnected. Many players of different origin and capabilities. Certain variety in terms of resource potentials.

20. 2.3.2Selective stabilization This scenario does not differ much from the scenario of a coming anarchy in its basic assumptions: The environment of European and other OECD countries and societies is becoming much more difficult and unpredictable. Yet the asumption here is that it may be possible to organize core spaces which are able to more or less preserve basic values and habits of liberal and plural societies – as a democratic gated and fortified communities.

21. 2.3.3 Legitimacy problems may be easier to overcome in gated communities smaller than most nation states, like city regions. Democracy could be defined in such a way that participation is linked to certain qualifications and contributions of groups of citizens. For comunities bigger than states, legitimacy problems will be bigger, too. Actually, they seem unsurmountable.

22. 2.4How to rank... For audiences like this one, these outcomes may be hard to swallow. Still: Do we have alternatives? If not - do we have preferences? In terms of games, we may conclude that learning > gated communities > anarchy, so: if learning is not achievable, and attempts to implement it anyway beyond capabilities may produce anarchy, then...

23. 2.5How to cope Defending and propagating, or resisting/ denouncing globalization are pointless. There is not much use in praying for or fighting with changing weather. Concepts like governance and regulation are often related to designer phantasies. There may be new useful concepts: navigating, moderating and enabling. These may be concepts to operate in a new, complex environment.

24. How and where to find this ? http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~segbers >>> statements, global politics