Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T19:36:53.352Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2020

Louisa Bayerlein
Affiliation:
European University Institute
Christoph Knill
Affiliation:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Yves Steinebach
Affiliation:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
A Matter of Style?
Organizational Agency in Global Public Policy
, pp. 213 - 243
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D., & Zangl, B. (eds.). (2015). International organizations as orchestrators. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D., & Zangl, B. (2018). The governor’s dilemma: competence versus control in indirect governance (Working Paper No. SP IV 2018–101). WZB Discussion Paper. www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/177895Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W., Green, J. F., & Keohane, R. O. (2016). Organizational ecology and institutional change in global governance. International Organization, 70(2), 247–77.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (1998). Why states act through formal international organizations. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42(1), 332.Google Scholar
Aberbach, J. D., Putnam, R. D., & Rockman, B. A. (1981). Politicians and bureaucrats in western democracies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acs, A. (2018). Policing the administrative state. Journal of Politics, 80(4), 1225–38.Google Scholar
Adam, C., Bauer, M. W., Knill, C., & Studinger, P. (2007). The termination of public organizations: theoretical perspectives to revitalize a promising research area. Public Organization Review, 7(3), 221–36.Google Scholar
Adam, C., Steinebach, Y., & Knill, C. (2018). Neglected challenges to evidence-based policy-making: the problem of policy accumulation. Policy Sciences, 51(3), 269–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, S. O., Sarma, K. M., & Sinclair, L. (2002). Protecting the ozone layer: the United Nations history. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Andler, L. (2009). The secretariat of the global environment facility: from network to bureaucracy. In Bierman, F. & Siebenhüner, B. (eds.), Managers of global change: the influence of international environmental bureaucracies (pp. 203–24). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Andonova, L. B. (2017). Governance entrepreneurs: international organizations and the rise of global public–private partnerships. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Andrijasevic, R., & Walters, W. (2010). The International Organization for Migration and the international government of borders. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 28(6), 977–99.Google Scholar
Archer, C. (2015). International organizations. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Armingeon, K., & Beyeler, M. (2004). The OECD and European welfare states. Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Arrow, K. J. (1984). The economics of the agency. In Pratt, J. W. & Zeckhauser, R. J. (eds.), Principals and agents: the structure of business (pp. 3751). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Ashutosh, I., & Mountz, A. (2011). Migration management for the benefit of whom? Interrogating the work of the International Organization for Migration. Citizenship Studies, 15(01), 2138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asongu, S. (2014). How would monetary policy matter in the proposed African monetary unions? Evidence from output and prices. African Finance Journal, 16(2), 3463.Google Scholar
AusAID. (2012a). Australian multilateral assessment March 2012: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Canberra: Australian Government. https://dfat.gov.au/about-us/publications/Documents/fao-assessment.pdfGoogle Scholar
AusAID. (2012b). Australian multilateral assessment March 2012 International Labour Organization (ILO). Canberra: Australian Government. https://dfat.gov.au/about-us/publications/Documents/ilo-assessment.pdfGoogle Scholar
Baccaro, L. (2015). Orchestration for the ‘social partners’ only: internal constraints on the ILO. In Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D., & Zangl, B. (eds.), International Organizations as orchestrators (pp. 262–85). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baccaro, L., & Mele, V. (2012). Pathology of path dependency? The ILO and the challenge of new governance. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 65(2), 195224. https://doi.org/10.1177/001979391206500201Google Scholar
Balla, S. J., & Gormley, W. T. (2018). Bureaucracy and democracy: accountability and performance. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. (2001). Humanitarianism with a sovereign face: UNHCR in the global undertow. International Migration Review, 35(1), 244–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, M., & Coleman, L. (2005). Designing police: Interpol and the study of change in international organizations. International Studies Quarterly, 49(4), 593620.Google Scholar
Barnett, M., & Finnemore, M. (1999). The politics, power, and pathologies of international organizations. International Organization, 53(04), 699732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, M., & Finnemore, M. (2004). Rules for the world: international organizations in global politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Barrett, S. (2007). The smallpox eradication game. Public Choice, 130(1–2), 179207.Google Scholar
Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). How actors change institutions: towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 65107.Google Scholar
Bauer, M. W., & Ege, J. (2013). Commission civil servants and politics: de-politicised bureaucrats in an increasingly political organisation. In Neuhold, C., Vanhoonacker, S., & Verhey, L. (eds.), Civil servants and politics: a delicate balance (pp. 173204). Houndmills, UK; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bauer, M. W., & Ege, J. (2016). Bureaucratic autonomy of international organizations’ secretariats. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(7), 1019–37.Google Scholar
Bauer, M. W., & Ege, J. (2017). A matter of will and action: the bureaucratic autonomy of international public administrations. In Bauer, M. W., Knill, C., & Eckhard, S. (eds.), International bureaucracy: challenges and lessons for public administration research (pp. 1341). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bauer, M. W., Knill, C., & Eckhard, S. (eds.). (2017). International bureaucracy: challenges and lessons for public administration research. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bauer, S. (2007). The ozone secretariat: administering the Vienna convention and the Montreal protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer (Global Governance Working Paper No. 28). Amsterdam: Global Governance Project, www.die-gdi.de/uploads/media/WP28.pdf.Google Scholar
Bauer, S. (2009). The secretariat of the United Nations Environment Programme: tangled up in blue. In Biermann, F. & Siebenhüner, B. (eds.), Managers of global change: the influence of international environmental bureaucracies (pp. 169202). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, S., Andresen, S., & Biermann, F. (2012). International bureaucracies. In Biermann, F. & Pattberg, P. H. (eds.), Global environmental governance reconsidered (pp. 2744). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (2010). Agendas and instability in American politics (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bayerlein, L., & Knill, C. (2019). Administrative styles and policy styles. In Thompson, William R. (ed.) Oxford research encyclopedia of politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.618.Google Scholar
Beach, D. (2004). The unseen hand in treaty reform negotiations: the role and influence of the Council Secretariat. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(3), 408–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beisheim, M., & Liese, A. (2014). Transnational partnerships: effectively providing for sustainable development? Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Bendor, J., Glazer, A., & Hammond, T. H. (2001). Theories of delegation. Annual Review of Political Science, 4, 235–69.Google Scholar
Bennett, O. (2017). The end is nigh for the World Health Organisation. The Independent, 5 April. www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/obamacare-trump-health-ebola-flu-pandemic-who-reforms-cancer-tb-a7622416.htmlGoogle Scholar
Best, J. (2012). Ambiguity and uncertainty in international organizations: a history of debating IMF conditionality. International Studies Quarterly, 56(4), 674–88.Google Scholar
Betts, A. (2009). Institutional proliferation and the global refugee regime. Perspectives on Politics, 7(1), 53–8.Google Scholar
Betts, A. (ed.). (2011). Global migration governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Betts, A. (2012). UNHCR, autonomy, and mandate change. In Oestreich, J. E. (ed.), International organizations as self-directed actors (pp. 139–61). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Betts, A. (2013). Regime complexity and international organizations: UNHCR as a challenged institution. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 19(1), 6981.Google Scholar
Biermann, F. (2007). Reforming global environmental governance, from UNEP towards a world environment organization. In Swart, L. & Perry, E. (eds.), Global environmental governance: perspectives on the current debate (pp. 103–23). New York: Center for UN Reform Education.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., & Pattberg, P. H. (2012). Global environmental governance reconsidered. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biermann, F., & Siebenhüner, B. (2009a). Managers of global change: the influence of international environmental bureaucracies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., & Siebenhüner, B. (2009b). The influence of international bureaucracies in world politics: findings from the MANUS research program. In Biermann, F. & Siebenhüner, B. (eds.), Managers of global change: the influence of international environmental bureaucracies (pp. 319–49). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., & Siebenhüner, B. (eds.). (2009c). Managers of global change: the influence of international environmental bureaucracies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Biermann, F., Siebenhüner, B., Bauer, S., Busch, P.-O., et al. (2009). Studying the influence of international bureaucracies: a conceptual framework. In Biermann, F. & Siebenhüner, B. (eds.), Managers of global change: the influence of international environmental bureaucracies (pp. 3774). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Biermann, R. (2014). NATO’s troubled relations with partner organizations: a resource-dependence explanation. In Mayer, S. (ed.), NATO’s post-cold war politics: the changing provision of security (pp. 215–33). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Birnholtz, J. P., Cohen, M. D., & Hoch, S. V. (2007). Organizational character: on the regeneration of Camp Poplar Grove. Organization Science, 18(2), 315–32.Google Scholar
Blau, Peter M. (1955). The dynamics of bureaucracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Boschken, H. L. (1988). Strategic design and organizational change: Pacific coast seaports in transition. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2004). Strategy content and public service organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(2), 231–52.Google Scholar
Bradley, M. (2017). The International Organization for Migration (IOM): gaining power in the forced migration regime. Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 33(1), 97106.Google Scholar
Brechin, S. R., & Ness, G. D. (2013). Looking back at the gap: International Organizations as organizations twenty-five years later. Journal of International Organizations Studies, 4(Special Issue), 1439.Google Scholar
Broome, A. (2012). The politics of IMF–EU co-operation: institutional change from the Maastricht Treaty to the launch of the euro. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(4), 589605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broome, A., & Seabrooke, L. (2007). Seeing like the IMF: institutional change in small open economies. Review of International Political Economy, 14(4), 576601.Google Scholar
Broome, A., & Seabrooke, L. (2012). Seeing like an International Organisation. New Political Economy, 17(1), 116.Google Scholar
Brown, R. L. (2010). Measuring delegation. Review of International Organizations, 5(2), 141–75.Google Scholar
Burci, G. L., & Vignes, C.-H. (2004). World Health Organization. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
Busch, P.-O. (2009). The OECD environment directorate: the art of persuasion and its limitations. In Biermann, F. & Siebenhüner, B. (eds.), Managers of global change: the influence of international environmental bureaucracies (pp. 7599). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Busch, P.-O. (2014). Independent influence of international public administrations: contours and future directions of an emerging research strand. In Kim, S., Ashley, S., & Lambright, W. H. (eds.), Public administration in the context of global governance (pp. 4562). Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Busch, P.-O., & Liese, A. (2017). The authority of international public administrations. In Bauer, M. W., Knill, C., & Eckhard, S. (eds.), International bureaucracy (pp. 97122). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294320.Google Scholar
Cardesa-Salzmann, A. (2016). Multilateral environmental agreements and illegality. In Elliott, L. & Schaedla, W. H. (eds.), Handbook of transnational environmental crime (pp. 299321). Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Carney, T., & Bennett, B. (2014). Framing pandemic management: new governance, science or culture? Health Sociology Review, 23(2), 136–47.Google Scholar
CGD. (2013). Time for FAO to shift to a higher gear: a report of the CGD working group on food security. Center for Global Development. www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/FAO-text-Final.pdf.Google Scholar
Chan, L.-H. (2010). WHO: the world’s most powerful international organisation? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 64(2), 97–8.Google Scholar
Chen, C. (2011). UNEP institutional reform with its impact on developing countries. In Ashwani, K. & Messner, D. (eds.), Power shifts and global governance: challenges from South and North (pp. 301–20). London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
Chorev, N. (2012). The World Health Organization between north and south. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Chorev, N. (2013). Restructuring neoliberalism at the World Health Organization. Review of International Political Economy, 20(4), 627–66.Google Scholar
Chow, J. C. (2010). Is the WHO becoming irrelevant? Foreign Policy, 8 December, www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/12/08/is_the_who_becoming_irrelevant (accessed 17 February 2020).Google Scholar
Chwieroth, J. (2010). Capital ideas: the IMF and the rise of financial liberalization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Chwieroth, J. (2011). The crisis in global finance: political economy perspectives on international financial regulatory change. In Centre for International Affairs (ed.), Beyond national boundaries: building a world without walls (pp. 130). London: Academy of Korean Studies Press. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/41825/Google Scholar
Chwieroth, J. (2013). ‘The silent revolution’: how the staff exercise informal governance over IMF lending. Review of International Organizations, 8(2), 265–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claude, I. (1984). Swords into plowshares: the problems and progress of International Organization. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Clinton, C., & Sridhar, D. (2017). Who pays for cooperation in global health? A comparative analysis of WHO, the World Bank, the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. The Lancet, 390(10091), 324–32.Google Scholar
Cortell, A. P., & Peterson, S. (2006). Dutiful agents, rogue actors, or both? Staffing, voting rules, and slack in the WHO and WTO. In Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.), Delegation and agency in international organizations (pp. 255–80). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cox, R. W. (1973). ILO: limited monarchy. In Cox, R. W. & Jacobsen, H. K. (eds.), The anatomy of influence: decision making in international organization (pp. 102138). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Cox, R. W., & Jacobsen, H. K. (1973). The anatomy of influence: decision making in international organization. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Cutler, A. C., Haufler, V., & Porter, T. (1999). Private authority and international affairs. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Czempiel, E.-O., & Rosenau, J. N. (eds.). (1992). Governance without government: order and change in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dahan, Y., Lerner, H., & Milman-Sivan, F. (2012). Shared responsibility and the International Labour Organization. Michigan Journal of International Law, 34, 675743.Google Scholar
Das, T. (2010). Basically a house of experts: the production of World Health Organization information. African Health Sciences, 10(4), 390–4.Google Scholar
Davies, A. R., Doyle, R., & Pape, J. (2012). Future visioning for sustainable household practices: spaces for sustainability learning? Area, 44(1), 5460.Google Scholar
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 2047.Google Scholar
De Wijk, R. (1997). NATO on the brink of the new millennium: the battle for consensus. Dulles: Potomac Books Inc.Google Scholar
del Río, P. (2014). On evaluating success in complex policy mixes: the case of renewable energy support schemes. Policy Sciences, 47(3), 267–87.Google Scholar
Dembinski, M. (2012). NATO. In Freistein, K. & Leininger, J. (eds.), Handbuch Internationale Organisationen: Theoretische Grundlagen und Akteure. München: Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag GmbH.Google Scholar
Deni, J. R. (2014). Perfectly flawed? The evolution of NATO’s force generation process. in Mayer, S. (ed.), NATO’s post-cold war politics: the changing provision of security (pp. 176–93). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Desai, R. M., & Vreeland, J. R. (2011). Global governance in a multipolar world: the case for regional monetary funds. International Studies Review, 13(1), 109–21.Google Scholar
DFID. (2011a). Multilateral aid review: assessment for the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO). DFID. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/224927/FAO.pdfGoogle Scholar
DFID. (2011b). Multilateral aid review: assessment of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). DFID. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/67624/ilo.pdfGoogle Scholar
DFID. (2013a). Multilateral aid review: the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) – Update 2013. DFID. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/261653/FAO-2013-summary-assessment-update2.pdfGoogle Scholar
DFID. (2013b). Multilateral aid review: the International Organization for Migration. DFID. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/260150/IOM-2013-summary-assessment-update.pdfGoogle Scholar
Diehl, P. F. (2005). The politics of global governance: international organizations in an interdependent world. (3rd ed.). Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, H. (2008). Council secretariat’s role in the common foreign and security policy. European Foreign Affairs Review, 13, 149–66.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, H. (2015). Functionalism, multiple principals and the reform of the NATO secretariat after the Cold War. Cooperation and Conflict, 50(1), 128–45.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P. J. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In Zucker, L. G. (ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations: culture and environment (pp. 322). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–60.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, K., Kerwer, D., & Nölke, A. (eds.). (2009). Die organisierte Welt. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Dionne, G. (2010). Development and organisational practice: ethnography at the food and agriculture organisation of the United Nations (FAO) (PhD Thesis). McGill University.Google Scholar
Douglas, W. A., Ferguson, J.-P., & Klett, E. (2004). An effective confluence of forces in support of workers’ rights: ILO standards, US trade laws, unions, and NGOs. Human Rights Quarterly, 26(2), 273–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downie, D. L., & Levy, M. A. (2000). The UN environment programme at a turning point: options for change. In Chasek, P. (ed.), The global environment in the twenty-first century: prospects for international cooperation (pp. 355–77). Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
Downs, A. (1967). Inside bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Dumiak, M. (2012). Push needed for pandemic planning. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 90(11), 800–1.Google Scholar
Dunleavy, P. (1991). Democracy, bureaucracy and public choice economic explanations in political science. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Durant, R. F. (2009). Theory building, administrative reform movements, and the perdurability of Herbert Hoover. The American Review of Public Administration, 39(4), 327–51.Google Scholar
Eccleston-Turner, M., & McArdle, S. (2017). Accountability, international law, and the World Health Organization: a need for reform? GLOBAL HEALTH, 11(1), 2739.Google Scholar
Ecker-Ehrhardt, M. (2018). Self-legitimation in the face of politicization: why international organizations centralized public communication. The Review of International Organizations, 13(4), 519–46.Google Scholar
Eckhard, S. (2016). International assistance to police reform: managing peacebuilding. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Eckhard, S., & Ege, J. (2016). International bureaucracies and their influence on policy-making: a review of empirical evidence. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(7), 960–78.Google Scholar
Eckhard, S., & Kern, C. (2017). A business case for international bureaucrats? Why NATO and the OSCE endure after the Cold War. Presented at the ECPR General Conference, Oslo, 6–9 September.Google Scholar
Eckhard, S., Patz, R., & Schmidt, S. (2016). Coping with the sellout: bureaucratic governance and the UNESCO budget crisis. IPSA 24th World Congress of Political Science, Poznan, 23–28 July.Google Scholar
Eckhard, S., Patz, R., & Schmidt, S. (2019). Reform efforts, synchronization failure, and international bureaucracy: the case of the UNESCO budget crisis. Journal of European Public Policy, 26(11), 1639–56.Google Scholar
Ege, J. (2017). Comparing the autonomy of international public administrations: an ideal-type approach. Public Administration, 95(3), 555–70.Google Scholar
Ege, J. (2019). Learning from the commission case: the comparative study of management change in international public administrations. Public Administration, 97(2), 384–98.Google Scholar
Ege, J., & Bauer, M. W. (2017). How financial resources affect the autonomy of international public administrations. Global Policy, 8(S5), 7584.Google Scholar
Elie, J. (2010). The historical roots of cooperation between the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Organization for Migration. Global Governance, 16(3), 345–60.Google Scholar
Ellinas, A. A., & Suleiman, E. N. (2011). Supranationalism in a transnational bureaucracy: the case of the European Commission. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 49(5), 923–47.Google Scholar
Elliott, K. A., & Freeman, R. B. (2003). Can labor standards improve under globalization? Peterson Institute for International Economics. Retrieved from https://ideas.repec.org/b/iie/ppress/338.htmlGoogle Scholar
Ellis, D. C. (2010). The organizational turn in international organization theory. Journal of International Organizations Studies, 1(1), 1128.Google Scholar
Ende, M. (1963). Jim Button and Luke the engine driver. London, Bombay: G. G. Harrap.Google Scholar
Enkler, J., Schmidt, S., Eckhard, S., Knill, C., & Grohs, S. (2017). Administrative styles in the OECD: bureaucratic policy-making beyond formal rules. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(8), 637–48.Google Scholar
Enticott, G. (2004). Multiple voices of modernization: some methodological implications. Public Administration, 82(3), 743–56.Google Scholar
Evans, P., Haggard, S., & Kaufman, R. (1992). The state as problem and solution: predation, embedded autonomy, and structural change. In Haggard, S. & Kaufman, R. (eds.), The politics of economic adjustment: international constraints, distributive conflict and the state (pp. 139181). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
FAO. (2007). FAO: the challenge of renewal – report of the independent external evaluation of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Retrieved from www.fao.org/unfao/bodies/IEE-Working-Draft-Report/K0489E.pdfGoogle Scholar
FAO. (2013). FAO strategy for partnership with civil society organizations. FAO. Retrieved from www.fao.org/3/a-i3443e.pdfGoogle Scholar
FAO. (2017). Programme evaluation report 2017. Rome: FAO. Retrieved from www.fao.org/3/a-mt142e.pdfGoogle Scholar
FAO. (2018). Evaluation of FAO Strategic Objective 1: contribute to the eradication of hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. FAO. Retrieved from www.fao.org/3/I9572EN/i9572en.pdfGoogle Scholar
Faraj, S., & Xiao, Y. (2006). Coordination in fast-response organizations. Management Science, 52(8), 1155–69.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2003). A performative perspective on stability and change in organizational routines. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(4), 727–52.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94118.Google Scholar
Fidler, D. P. (2004). SARS: governance and the globalization of disease. Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Fidler, D. P. (2009). H1N1 after action review: learning from the unexpected, the success and the fear. Future Microbiology, 4(7), 767–69.Google Scholar
Finnemore, M. (1993). International Organizations as teachers of norms: the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and science policy. International Organization, 47(4), 565–97.Google Scholar
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887917.Google Scholar
Flockhart, T. (2014). Post-bipolar challenges: new visions and new activities. In Mayer, S. (ed.), NATO’s post-Cold War politics: the changing provision of security (pp. 7188). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.Google Scholar
Fouilleux, È. (2009). À propos de crises mondiales... Revue Française de Science Politique, 59(4), 757–82.Google Scholar
Franke, U. (2018). The United Nations and regional security organizations in Africa, Europe and the North-Atlantic region. In Aris, Stephen, Snetkov, Aglaya, & Wenger, Andreas (eds.), Inter-organizational relations in international security (pp. 3349). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Freeman, R., & Sturdy, S. (2014). Knowledge, policy and coordinated action: mental health in Europe. In Freeman, R. & Sturdy, S. (eds.), Knowledge in policy: embodied, inscribed, enacted (pp. 6178). Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Freitas, R. (2013). The global human mobility architecture. In Reinalda, B. (ed.), Routledge handbook of International Organization (pp. 473–85). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gasper, D. (2000). Evaluating the ‘logical framework approach’ towards learning-oriented development evaluation. Public Administration and Development, 20(1), 1728.Google Scholar
Geiger, M., & Pécoud, A. (2010). The politics of international migration management. In Geiger, M. & Pécoud, A. (eds.), The politics of international migration management (pp. 120). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Geiger, M., & Pécoud, A. (2013). Migration, development and the ‘migration and development nexus’. Population, Space and Place, 19(4), 369–74.Google Scholar
Geiger, M., & Pécoud, A. (2014). International organisations and the politics of migration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(6), 865–87.Google Scholar
Georgi, F. (2010). For the benefit of some: the International Organization for Migration and its global migration management. In Geiger, M. & Pécoud, A. (eds.), The politics of international migration management (pp. 4572). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Georgi, F., & Schatral, S. (2012). Towards a critical theory of migration control: the case of the International Organization for Migration (IOM). In Geiger, M. & Pécoud, A. (eds.) The new politics of international mobility: migration management and its discontents (pp. 193222). Osnabrück: Institute for Migration Research and Intercultural Studies (IMIS).Google Scholar
Gerring, J. (2008). Case selection for case‐study analysis: qualitative and quantitative techniques. In Box-Steffensmeier, J. M., Brady, H. E., & Collier, D. (eds.), The Oxford handbook of political methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Godlee, F. (1998). Change at last at WHO: but will the regions play ball? BMJ, 317, 296300.Google Scholar
Gordenker, L. (1987). Refugees in international politics. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Gostin, L. O., Sridhar, D., & Hougendobler, D. (2015). The normative authority of the World Health Organization. Public Health, 129(7), 854–63.Google Scholar
Gottwald, M. (2010). Competing in the humanitarian marketplace: UNHCR’s organizational culture and decision-making processes. UNHCR, Policy Development and Evaluation Service, available at www.unhcr.org/research/working/4cb41ef49/competing-humanitarian-marketplace-unhcrs-organizational-culture-decision.html.Google Scholar
Gould, E. R. (2006). Delegating IMF conditionality: understanding variations in control and conformity. In Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.), Delegation and agency in international organizations (pp. 281311). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grabel, I. (2011). Not your grandfather’s IMF: global crisis, ‘productive incoherence’ and developmental policy space. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 35(5), 805–30.Google Scholar
Graham, E. R. (2014). International organizations as collective agents: fragmentation and the limits of principal control at the World Health Organization. European Journal of International Relations, 20(2), 366–90.Google Scholar
Graham, E. R. (2015). Money and multilateralism: how funding rules constitute IO governance. International Theory, 7(1), 162–94.Google Scholar
Graham, E. R. (2017). Follow the money: how trends in financing are changing governance at International Organizations. Global Policy, 8, 1525.Google Scholar
Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1996). Understanding radical organizational change: bringing together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1022–54.Google Scholar
Grundmann, R. (2001). Transnational policy networks and the role of advocacy scientists: from ozone layer protection to climate change. In Bierman, F., Brohm, R., & Dingwerth, K. (eds.), Proceedings of the 2001 Berlin Conference on the human dimensions of global environmental change ‘global environmental change and the nation-state’ (pp. 405–14). Potsdam: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.Google Scholar
Haas, E. B. (1964). Beyond the nation-state: functionalism and International Organization. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Haas, P. M. (2008). Climate change governance after Bali. Global Environmental Politics, 8(3), 17.Google Scholar
Haas, P. M. (ed.). (2016). Epistemic communities, constructivism, and international environmental politics. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Haas, P. M., & McCabe, D. (2001). Amplifiers or dampeners: international institutions and social learning in the management of global environmental risks. In Learning to manage global environmental risks: a comparative history of social responses to climate change, ozone depletion, and acid rain (Vol. 1, pp. 323–48). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Haftel, Y. Z., & Thompson, A. (2006). The independence of International Organizations – concept and applications. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50(2), 253–75.Google Scholar
Hall, N. (2013). Moving beyond its mandate? UNHCR and climate change displacement. Journal of International Organizations Studies, 4(1), 91108.Google Scholar
Hall, N. (2015). Money or mandate? Why International Organizations engage with the climate change regime. Global Environmental Politics, 15(2), 7997.Google Scholar
Hall, N. (2016). Displacement, development, and climate change: international organizations moving beyond their mandates. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hanrieder, T. (2014). Gradual change in international organisations: agency theory and historical institutionalism. Politics, 34(4), 324–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanrieder, T. (2015). The path-dependent design of international organizations: federalism in the World Health Organization. European Journal of International Relations, 21(1), 215–39.Google Scholar
Hanrieder, T., & Kreuder-Sonnen, C. (2014). WHO decides on the exception? Securitization and emergency governance in global health. Security Dialogue, 45(4), 331–48.Google Scholar
Harman, S. (2010). The World Bank and HIV/AIDS: setting a global agenda. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hartlapp, M. (2007). On Enforcement, management and persuasion: different logics of implementation policy in the EU and the ILO. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 45(3), 653–74.Google Scholar
Hawkins, D. G., & Jacoby, W. (2006). How agents matter. In Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.), Delegation and agency in international organizations (pp. 199228). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.) (2006). Delegation and agency in international organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heclo, H. (1977). A Government of strangers: executive politics in Washington. Washington: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Helfer, L. R. (2006). Understanding change in International Organizations: globalization and innovation in the ILO. Vanderbilt Law Review, 59(3), 646726.Google Scholar
Helfer, L. R. (2008). Monitoring compliance with un-ratified treaties: the ILO experience. Law and Contemporary Problems, 71(1), 193218.Google Scholar
Henderson, D. A. (2016). The development of surveillance systems. American Journal of Epidemiology, 183(5), 381–86.Google Scholar
Hendrickson, R. C. (2006). Diplomacy and war at NATO: the Secretary General and military action after the Cold War. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.Google Scholar
Hendrickson, R. C. (2014). The changing role of NATO’s Secretary General. In Mayer, S. (ed.), NATO’s post-Cold War politics: the changing provision of security (pp. 124–39). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hensler, R. (2005). As the UNO celebrates its 60th anniversary, Geneva adopts new mechanisms to serve international community. In Dembinski-Gourmard, D. (ed.), International Geneva yearbook 2005–2006: organization and activities of international institutions in Geneva (Vol. 19). Geneva: United Nations Publications.Google Scholar
Herz, D., Schattenmann, M., Dortants, S. L., Linke, K., & Steuber, S. (2008). Professional education for international organizations: preparing students for international public service. Frankfurt a. M: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Heymann, D. L., & Rodier, G. (2004). SARS: a global response to an international threat. The Brown Journal of World Affairs, 10(2), 185–97.Google Scholar
Hildyard, N. (1991). Editorial: open letter to Eduoard Saouma, Director- General of FAO. The Ecologist, 21(2), 43–6.Google Scholar
Hood, C., & Lodge, M. (2006). The politics of public service bargains: reward, competency, loyalty – and blame. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hooghe, L. (2001). The European Commission and the integration of Europe: images of governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hooghe, L., Marks, G., Lenz, T., Bezuijen, J., Ceka, B., & Derderyan, S. (2017). Measuring international authority: a postfunctionalist theory of governance (Vol. 3). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2015). Delegation and pooling in International Organizations. The Review of International Organizations, 10(3), 305–28.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: the role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16(6), 618–36.Google Scholar
Howlett, M. (2003). Administrative styles and the limits of administrative reform: a neo-institutional analysis of administrative culture. Canadian Public Administration/Administration Publique Du Canada, 46(4), 471–94.Google Scholar
Howlett, M. (2004). Administrative styles and regulatory reform: institutional arrangements and their effects on administrative behavior. International Public Management Review, 5(2), 1335.Google Scholar
Hughes, S., & Haworth, N. (2011). The International Labour Organization: coming in from the cold. Oxford and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hurd, I. (2013). International Organizations: politics, law, practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hustedt, T., & Salomonsen, H. H. (2014). Ensuring political responsiveness: politicization mechanisms in ministerial bureaucracies. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 80(4), 746–65.Google Scholar
ILO. (2018). Programme and budget for the biennium 2018–19. ILO. Retrieved from www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/–ed_mas/–program/documents/genericdocument/wcms_582294.pdfGoogle Scholar
Imber, M. F. (1994). Environment, security and UN reform. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Inomata, T. (2016). Building institutional and managerial foundations for a new structure for environmental governance with the United Nations system. In Kuokkanen, T., Couzens, E., Honkonen, T., & Lewis, M. (eds.), International environmental law-making and diplomacy: insights and overviews (pp. 96110). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
IOM. (2013). IOM in the EU member states, Norway and Switzerland. Brussels: IOM. Retrieved from www.iom.int/sites/default/files/country/docs/AUP00550-RO-Brussels-Regional-Strategy.pdfGoogle Scholar
IOM. (2017a). Council 108th session: programme and budget for 2018 (No. C/108/6). IOM. Retrieved from https://governingbodies.iom.int/system/files/en/council/108/C-108–6%20-%20Programme%20and%20Budget%20for%202018.pdfGoogle Scholar
IOM. (2017b). Constitution and basic texts. IOM. Retrieved from http://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/iom_constitution_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
Ivanova, M. (2005). Assessing UNEP as anchor institution for the global environment: lessons for the UNEO debate. Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy Working Paper Series, 5(1).Google Scholar
Ivanova, M. (2009). UNEP as anchor organization for the global environment. In Biermann, F., Siebenhüner, B., & Schreyögg, A. (eds.), International Organizations in global environmental governance (pp. 151–73). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ivanova, M. (2013). The contested legacy of Rio+ 20. Global Environmental Politics, 13(4), 111.Google Scholar
Jachtenfuchs, M. (2005). The monopoly of legitimate force: denationalization, or business as usual. European Review, 13(S1), 3752.Google Scholar
Jann, W. (2002). Der Wandel verwaltungspolitischer Leitbilder: Von Management zu Governance? In König, K. (ed.), Verwaltung und Verwaltungsforschung: Deutsche Verwaltung an der Wende zum 21. Jahrhundert: Deutsche Verwaltung an der Wende zum 21. Jahrhundert (pp. 279303). Speyer: Forschungsinstitut für Öffentliche Verwaltung.Google Scholar
Jinnah, S. (2010). Overlap management in the World Trade Organization: secretariat influence on trade-environment politics. Global Environmental Politics, 10(2), 5479.Google Scholar
JIU (2012). Review of management, administration and decentralization in the World Health Organization (WHO). Part I: review of management and administration of WHO, JIU/REP/2012/6.Google Scholar
Johnson, T. (2016). Cooperation, co-optation, competition, conflict: international bureaucracies and non-governmental organizations in an interdependent world. Review of International Political Economy, 23(5), 737–67.Google Scholar
Johnson, T., & Urpelainen, J. (2014). International bureaucrats and the formation of intergovernmental organizations: institutional design discretion sweetens the pot. International Organization, 68(1), 177209.Google Scholar
Kamradt-Scott, A. (2016). WHO’s to blame? The World Health Organization and the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa. Third World Quarterly, 37(3), 401–18.Google Scholar
Kaplan, L. S. (2004). NATO divided, NATO united: the evolution of an alliance. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
Kaplan, L. S. (2010). NATO and the UN: a peculiar relationship. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.Google Scholar
Karns, M. A., Mingst, K. A., & Stiles, K. W. (2004). International Organizations: the politics and processes. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
Kaufman, H. (1960). The forest ranger: a study in administrative behavior. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1999). Transnational advocacy networks in international and regional politics. International social science journal, 51(159), 89101.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (2005). After hegemony: cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.Google Scholar
Knill, C. (2001). The Europeanisation of national administrations: patterns of institutional change and persistence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Knill, C., & Bauer, M. W. (2016). Policy-making by international public administrations: concepts, causes and consequences. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(7), 949–59.Google Scholar
Knill, C., Bayerlein, L., Grohs, S., & Enkler, J. (2019). Bureaucratic influence and administrative styles in International Organizations. Review of International Organizations, 14(1), 83106.Google Scholar
Knill, C., Eckhard, S., & Grohs, S. (2016). Administrative styles in the European Commission and the OSCE-Secretariat: striking similarities despite different organisational settings. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(7), 1057–76.Google Scholar
Knill, C., Enkler, J., Schmidt, S., Eckhard, S., & Grohs, S. (2017). Administrative styles of international organizations: can we find them, do they matter? In Bauer, M. W., Knill, C., & Eckhard, S. (eds.), International bureaucracy: challenges and lessons for public administration research (pp. 4371). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Knill, C., & Grohs, S. (2015). Administrative styles of EU institutions. In Bauer, M. W. & Trondal, J. (eds.), The Palgrave handbook of the European administrative system (pp. 93107). Wiesbaden: Springer.Google Scholar
Knill, C., & Lehmkuhl, D. (2002). Private actors and the state: internationalization and changing patterns of governance. Governance, 15(1), 4163.Google Scholar
Knill, C., & Lenschow, A. (2001). ‘Seek and ye shall find!’: linking different perspectives on institutional change. Comparative Political Studies, 34(2), 187215.Google Scholar
Knill, C., & Lenschow, A. (2005). Compliance, competition and communication: different approaches of European governance and their impact on national institutions. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 43(3), 583606.Google Scholar
Koch, A. (2014). The politics and discourse of migrant return: the role of UNHCR and IOM in the governance of return. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(6), 905–23.Google Scholar
Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., & Snidal, D. (2001). The rational design of international institutions. International Organization, 55(04), 761–99.Google Scholar
Koschut, S. (2018). Inter (b)locking institutions: NATO, the EU, the OSCE and inter-organizational European security governance. In Aris, Stephen, Snetkov, Aglaya, & Wenger, Andreas (eds.), Inter-organizational relations in international security (pp. 85103). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Koser, K. (2010). Introduction: international migration and global governance. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 16(3), 301–15.Google Scholar
Krasner, S. D. (1999). Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kydland, F. E., & Prescott, E. C. (1977). Rules rather than discretion: the inconsistency of optimal plans. Journal of Political Economy, 85(3), 473–92.Google Scholar
La Hovary, C. (2015). A challenging ménage à trois? International Organizations Law Review, 12(1), 204–36.Google Scholar
Laffont, J.-J., & Martimort, D. (2002). The theory of incentives: the principal–agent model. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lall, R. (2017). Beyond institutional design: explaining the performance of international organizations. International Organization, 71(2), 245–80.Google Scholar
Landman, J. C. (2002). The evolution of the OSCE – A perspective from the Netherlands. In Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg /IFSH (ed.), OSCE Yearbook 2001 (pp. 8193). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Lavenex, S. (2016). Multilevelling EU external governance: the role of international organizations in the diffusion of EU migration policies. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(4), 554–70.Google Scholar
Lazaric, N., & Denis, B. (2005). Routinization and memorization of tasks in a workshop: the case of the introduction of ISO norms. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5), 873–96.Google Scholar
Leca, B., & Naccache, P. (2006). A critical realist approach to institutional entrepreneurship. Organization, 13(5), 627–51.Google Scholar
Lee, G., Benoit‐Bryan, J., & Johnson, T. P. (2012). Survey research in public administration: assessing mainstream journals with a total survey error framework. Public Administration Review, 72(1), 8797.Google Scholar
Lee, K. (2009). The World Health Organization (WHO). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lenz, T., Bezuijen, J., Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2015). Patterns of international organization: task specific vs. general purpose. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 49, 107–32.Google Scholar
Levinson, D. J. (2011). Parchment and politics: the positive puzzle of constitutional commitment. Harvard Law Review, 124(3), 659746.Google Scholar
Liese, A. (2010). Explaining varying degrees of openness in the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). In Jönsson, C. & Tallberg, J. (eds.), Transnational actors in global governance: patterns, explanations and implications (pp. 88108). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Liese, A., & Weinlich, S. (2006). Die Rolle von Verwaltungsstäben internationaler Organisationen. Lücken, Tücken und Konturen eines (neuen) Forschungsgebiets. In Bogumil, J., Jann, W., & Nullmeier, F. (eds.), Politik Und Verwaltung (PVS-Sonderheft 37) (pp. 491–525). Wiesbaden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Lindley-French, J. (2006). The North Atlantic Treaty Organization: the enduring alliance. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lipson, C. (1984). International cooperation in economic and security affairs. World Politics, 37(1), 123.Google Scholar
Littoz-Monnet, A. (ed.). (2017). The politics of expertise in International Organizations: how international bureaucracies produce and mobilize knowledge. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Loescher, G. (2001). The UNHCR and World Politics: state interests vs. institutional autonomy. International Migration Review, 35(1), 3356.Google Scholar
Loh, C., Galbraith, V., & Chiu, W. (2004). The media and SARS. In Loh, C. (ed.), At the epicentre: Hong Kong and the SARS outbreak (pp. 195214). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
Lyne, M. M., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (2006). Who delegates? Alternative models of principals in development aid. In Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.), Delegation and agency in International Organizations (pp. 4176). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Maguire, S., Hardy, C., & Lawrence, T. B. (2004). Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging fields: HIV/AIDS treatment advocacy in Canada. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 657–79.Google Scholar
Mahon, R., & McBride, S. (2008). The OECD and global governance. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Manulak, M. W. (2017). Leading by design: informal influence and international secretariats. The Review of International Organizations, 12(4), 497522.Google Scholar
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Organizations. (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Marcussen, M., & Trondal, J. (2011). The OECD civil servant: caught between Scylla and Charybdis. Review of International Political Economy, 18(5), 592621.Google Scholar
Margulis, M. E. (2014). Trading out of the global food crisis? The World Trade Organization and the geopolitics of food security. Geopolitics, 19(2), 322–50.Google Scholar
Margulis, M. E. (2017). The global governance of food security. In Koops, J. A. & Biermann, R. (eds.), Palgrave Handbook of inter-organizational relations in world politics (pp. 503–25). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.Google Scholar
Martin, L. (2006). Distribution, information, and delegation to international organizations: the case of IMF conditionality. In Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.), Delegation and agency in International Organizations (pp. 140–64). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Maupain, F. (2013). The future of the International Labour Organization in the global economy. Portland: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Mayer, P. (2008). Civil society participation at the margins: the case of NATO and OSCE. In Steffek, J. & Kissling, C. (eds.), Civil society participation in European and global governance: a cure for the democratic deficits (pp. 109–15). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mayer, S. (2014a). Introduction: NATO as an Organization and Bureaucracy. In NATO’s post-Cold War politics: the changing provision of security (pp. 127). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mayer, S. (ed.). (2014b). NATO’s post-Cold War politics: the changing provision of security. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mayer, S., & Theiler, O. (2014). Coping with complexity: informal political forums at nato’s headquarters. In Mayer, S. (ed.), NATO’s post-Cold war politics: the changing provision of security (pp. 140–58). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mayntz, R., & Derlien, H.-U. (1989). Party patronage and politicization of the West German administrative elite 1970–1987 – toward hybridization? Governance, 2(4), 384404.Google Scholar
McCalla, R. B. (1996). NATO’s persistence after the cold war. International Organization, 50(3), 445–75.Google Scholar
McCubbins, M. D. (1985). The legislative design of regulatory structure. American Journal of Political Science, 29(4), 721–48.Google Scholar
McKeon, N. (2009). The United Nations and civil society: legitimating global governance–whose voice? London: Zed Books Ltd.Google Scholar
McKittrick, A. (2008). UNHCR as an autonomous organisation: complex operations and the case of Kosovo (No. 50). Working Paper: Oxford, Refugee Studies Centre Oxford University.Google Scholar
Jr McNeil, D. G. (2014). Polio’s return after near eradication prompts a global health warning. The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2014/05/06/health/world-health-organization-polio-health-emergency.htmlGoogle Scholar
Mearsheimer, J. J. (1994). The false promise of international institutions. International Security, 19(3), 549.Google Scholar
Megens, I. (1998). The role of NATO’s bureaucracy in shaping and widening the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. In Reinalda, B. & Verbeek, B. (eds.), Autonomous policy making by International Organizations (pp. 120–33). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Merton, R. K. (1957). Social theory and social structure. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, R. E., Egger‐Peitler, I., Höllerer, M. A., & Hammerschmid, G. (2014). Of bureaucrats and passionate public managers: institutional logics, executive identities, and public service motivation. Public Administration, 92(4), 861–85.Google Scholar
Michiels, L., & den Boer, R. (2016). Forging partnerships for the future: IOM and the private sector. Geneva: IOM. Retrieved from https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/ps_photobook.pdfGoogle Scholar
Miller, G. J. (2005). The political evolution of principal–agent models. Annual Review of Political Science, 8(1), 203–25.Google Scholar
Mingst, K. A. (1990). The United States and the World Health Organization. In Karns, M. P. & Mingst, K. A. (eds.), The United States and multilateral institutions: patterns of changing instrumentality and influence (pp. 205–30). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mintrom, M., & Norman, P. (2009). Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. Policy Studies Journal, 37(4), 649–67.Google Scholar
Moe, T. M. (1990). Political institutions: the neglected side of the story. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 6 (Special Issue), 213–53.Google Scholar
Momani, B. (2005). Limits on streamlining Fund conditionality: the International Monetary Fund’s organizational culture. Journal of International Relations and Development, 8(2), 142–63.Google Scholar
MOPAN (2013). MOPAN 2013 assessments: World Health Organisation (WHO). Institutional assessment report (No. 1). MOPAN. Retrieved from www.mopanonline.org/assessments/who2013/MOPAN_2013-_WHO_Vol._I.pdfGoogle Scholar
MOPAN (2016). MOPAN 2015–16 assessments: International Labour Organization Institutional assessment report. MOPAN. Retrieved from www.mopanonline.org/assessments/ilo2015-16/Mopan%20ILO%20[interactive]%20[final].pdfGoogle Scholar
MOPAN (2017). MOPAN 2015–16 assessments: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Institutional assessment report. MOPAN. Retrieved from www.mopanonline.org/assessments/unep2015-16/Mopan%20UNEP%20report%20[interactive]%20[final].pdfGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (1999). A new statecraft? Supranational entrepreneurs and international cooperation. International Organization, 53(2), 267306.Google Scholar
Morth, U. (2000). Competing frames in the European Commission: the case of the defence industry and equipment issue. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(2), 173–89.Google Scholar
Moschella, M. (2010). Governing risk: the IMF and global financial crises. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mouritzen, H. (2013). In spite of reform: NATO HQ still in the grips of nations. Defense & Security Analysis, 29(4), 342–55.Google Scholar
NATO. (2017a). Annual report of the Secretary-General. NATO. Retrieved from www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2018_03/20180315_SG_AnnualReport_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
NATO. (2017b). The science for peace and security programme. NATO. Retrieved from www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_85373.htm?Google Scholar
Nay, O. (2011). What drives reforms in international organizations? External pressure and bureaucratic entrepreneurs in the UN response to AIDS. Governance, 24(4), 689712.Google Scholar
Nay, O. (2012). How do policy ideas spread among international administrations? Policy entrepreneurs and bureaucratic influence in the UN response to AIDS. Journal of Public Policy, 32(1), 5376.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, S. C. (2014). Playing favorites: how shared beliefs shape the IMF’s lending decisions. International Organization, 68(2), 297328.Google Scholar
Ness, G. D., & Brechin, S. R. (1988). Bridging the gap: international organizations as organizations. International Organization, 42(02), 245–73.Google Scholar
Newland, K. (2010). The governance of international migration: mechanisms, processes, and institutions. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 16(3), 331–43.Google Scholar
Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (2003). Delegation to international organizations: agency theory and World Bank environmental reform. International Organization, 57(02), 241–76.Google Scholar
Niskanen, W. A. (1971). Bureaucracy and representative government. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Noetzel, T., & Schreer, B. (2009). Does a multi-tier NATO matter? The Atlantic alliance and the process of strategic change. International Affairs, 85(2), 211–26.Google Scholar
OECD/FAO. (2016). International regulatory co-operation and international organisations: the case of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). OECD/FAO. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/FAO_Full-Report.pdfGoogle Scholar
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145–79.Google Scholar
Pache, A.-C., & Santos, F. (2010). When worlds collide: the internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 455–76.Google Scholar
Page, E. C. (1985). Political authority and bureaucratic power: a comparative analysis. Brighton: Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Page, E. C. (2012). Policies without politicians: bureaucratic influence in comparative perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, G. W. (1995). Environment: the international challenge: essays. Wellington: Victoria University Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, J. R. (2015). How do policy entrepreneurs influence policy change? Framing and boundary work in EU transport biofuels policy. Environmental Politics, 24(2), 270–87.Google Scholar
Parmigiani, A., & Howard-Grenville, J. (2011). Routines revisited: exploring the capabilities and practice perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 413–53.Google Scholar
Parsanoglou, D. (2015). Organizing an international migration machinery: the intergovermental committee for European migration. In Venturas, L. (ed.), International ‘migration management’ in the early Cold War. The Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration (pp. 5585). Corinth: University of the Peloponnese.Google Scholar
Patz, R., & Goetz, K. H. (2019). Managing money and discord in the UN: budgeting and bureaucracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pécoud, A. (2013). ‘Suddenly, migration was everywhere’: the conception and future prospects of the Global Migration Group. Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved from www.migrationpolicy.org/article/suddenly-migration-was-everywhere-conception-and-future-prospects-global-migration-groupGoogle Scholar
Pécoud, A. (2017). What do we know about the International Organization for Migration?Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(10), 1621–38.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Hærem, T., & Hillison, D. (2010). Comparing organizational routines as recurrent patterns of action. Organization Studies, 31(7), 917–40.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T., Hærem, T., & Hillison, D. (2011). The (n)ever-changing world: stability and change in organizational routines. Organization Science, 22(6), 1369–83.Google Scholar
Pernet, C. A., & Ribi Forclaz, A. (2019). Revisiting the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO): international histories of agriculture, nutrition, and development. The International History Review, 41(2), 345–50.Google Scholar
Peters, B. G. (2010). The politics of bureaucracy (6th ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Peters, B. G. (2013). Strategies for comparative research in political science. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Peters, B. G., & Hogwood, B. W. (1988). The death of immortality: births, deaths and metamorphoses in the U.S. federal bureaucracy, 1933–1982. American Review of Public Administration, 18(2), 119.Google Scholar
Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2004a). Politicization of the civil service: concepts, causes, consequences. In Peters, B. G. & Pierre, J. (eds.), The politicization of the civil service in comparative perspective: the quest for control (pp. 113). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2004b). The politicization of the civil service in comparative perspective: a quest for control. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–68.Google Scholar
Pollack, M. A. (1997). Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European Community. International Organization, 51(1), 99134.Google Scholar
Pollack, M. A. (2003). The engines of European integration: delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the EU. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pollack, M. A. (2006). Delegation and discretion in the European Union. In Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (eds.), Delegation and agency in International Organizations (pp. 165–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Public management reform: a comparative analysis. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and managing public organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Reinalda, B. (1998). Autonomous policy making by International Organizations (Vol. 5). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reinalda, B. (2013). Routledge handbook of International Organization. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reinalda, B., & Verbeek, B. (eds.). (2003). Autonomous policy making by International Organisations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rhodes, R., t’Hart, P., & Noordegraaf, M. (eds.). (2007). Observing government elites: up close and personal. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Richardson, J., Gustafsson, G., & Jordan, G. (1982). The concept of policy style. In Richardson, J. (ed.), Policy styles in Western Europe (pp. 116). London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (eds.). (1999). The power of human rights: international norms and domestic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rittberger, V., & Zangl, B. (2006). International Organization. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Roberts, N. C., & King, P. J. (1991). Policy entrepreneurs: their activity structure and function in the policy process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 1(2),147–75.Google Scholar
Rochester, J. M. (1986). The rise and fall of international organization as a field of study. International Organization, 40(4), 777813.Google Scholar
Ross, S. (2011). The World Food Programme in global politics. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Rothgang, H., & Schneider, S. (eds.). (2015). State transformations in OECD countries: dimensions, driving forces, and trajectories. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Rourke, F. E. (1969). Bureaucracy, politics, and public policy. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Sabel, C. F., & Zeitlin, J. (2008). Learning from difference: the new architecture of experimentalist governance in the EU. In Sabel, C. F. & Zeitlin, J. (eds.), Experimentalist governance in the European Union: towards a new architecture (pp. 128). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Salvato, C., & Rerup, C. (2011). Beyond collective entities: multilevel research on organizational routines and capabilities. Journal of Management, 37(2), 468–90.Google Scholar
Sandford, R. (1994). International environmental treaty secretariats: stagehands or actors. In Bergesen, H. O. & Parmann, G. (eds.), Green globe yearbook of international co-operation on environment and development (Vol. 17). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scharpf, F. W. (1994). Games real actors could play: positive and negative coordination in embedded negotiations. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 6(1), 2753.Google Scholar
Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45(2), 109–19.Google Scholar
Schnapp, K.-U. (2004). Ministerialbürokratien in westlichen Demokratien: Eine vergleichende Analyse [Ministerial Bureaucracies in Western Democracies: A Comparative Analysis]. Opladen: Leske & Budrich.Google Scholar
Seabrooke, L., & Nilsson, E. R. (2015). Professional skills in international financial surveillance: assessing change in IMF policy teams. Governance, 28(2), 237–54.Google Scholar
Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the grass roots: a study of politics and organization. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Senghaas-Knobloch, E. (2004). Auftrag und Möglichkeiten der Internationalen Arbeitsorganisation (ILO) unter den Bedingungen der Globalisierung. Arbeit, 13(3), 236–47.Google Scholar
Sharma, P. (2013). Bureaucratic imperatives and policy outcomes: the origins of World Bank structural adjustment lending. Review of International Political Economy, 20(4), 667–86.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. J. (2007). World food security: a history since 1945. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. J. (2009). Global food and agricultural institutions. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sikkink, K. (1986). Codes of conduct for transnational corporations: the case of the WHO/UNICEF code. International Organization, 40(4), 815–40.Google Scholar
Simmons, B. A., & Danner, A. (2010). Credible commitments and the international criminal court. International Organization, 64(2), 225–56.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative behavior: a study of decision-making processes in administrative organizations. (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, D., Isba, R., Kredo, T., Zani, B., Smith, H., & Garner, P. (2013). World Health Organization guideline development: an evaluation. PLOS ONE, 8(5), e63715.Google Scholar
Smith, R. (1995). The WHO: change or die. British Medical Journal, 310 (6979), 543–4.Google Scholar
Snidal, D. (1990). IGOs, regimes, and cooperation: challenges for international relations theory. In Karns, M. P. & Mingst, K. A. (eds.) The United States and multilateral institutions: patterns of changing instrumentality and influence (pp. 221–41). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Standing, G. (2008). The ILO: an agency for globalization? Development and Change, 39(3), 355–84.Google Scholar
Stene, E. O. (1940). An approach to a science of administration. American Political Science Review, 34(6), 1124–37.Google Scholar
Stiglitz, J. (2002). Globalization and its discontents. New York: W.W. Norton, Inc.Google Scholar
Stone, D. (2008). Global public policy, transnational policy communities, and their networks. Policy Studies Journal, 36(1), 1938.Google Scholar
Stone, R. W. (2011). Controlling institutions: International Organizations and the global economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stone, R. W. (2013). Informal governance in international organizations: introduction to the special issue. The Review of International Organizations, 8(2), 121–36.Google Scholar
Stone Sweet, A., & Palmer, E. (2017). A Kantian system of constitutional justice: rights, trusteeship, balancing. Global Constitutionalism, 6(3), 377411.Google Scholar
Strang, D., & Chang, P. M. Y. (1993). The International Labor Organization and the welfare state: institutional effects on national welfare spending, 1960–80. International Organization, 47(2), 235–62.Google Scholar
Suri, J. (2006). The normative resilience of NATO: a community of shared values amid public discord. In Wenger, A., Nuenlist, C., & Locher, A. (eds.), Transforming NATO in the Cold War: challenges beyond deterrence in the 1960s (pp. 1530). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tallberg, J. (2000). The anatomy of autonomy: an institutional account of variation in supranational influence. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(5), 843–64.Google Scholar
Tallberg, J., Lundgren, M., Sommerer, T., & Squatrito, T. (2017). Explaining policy norm adoption by International Organizations (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 3059442). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3059442Google Scholar
Tallberg, J., Sommerer, T., Squatrito, T., & Jönsson, C. (2014). Explaining the transnational design of International Organizations. International Organization, 68(4), 741–74.Google Scholar
Tallberg, J., Sommerer, T., Squatrito, T., & Jönsson, C. (2015). Replication data for: explaining the transnational design of international organizations [Data set]. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/HQ7ZCLGoogle Scholar
Tallberg, J., Sommerer, T., Squatrito, T., & Lundgren, M. (2016). The performance of International Organizations: a policy output approach. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(7), 1077–96.Google Scholar
Tarasofsky, R. (2002). International environmental governance: strengthening UNEP. UCN/IAS.Google Scholar
Thomann, L. (2008). The ILO, tripartism, and NGOs: do too many cooks really spoil the broth? In Steffek, J., Kissling, C., & Nanz, P. (eds.), Civil society participation in European and global governance: a cure for the democratic deficit? (pp. 7194). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.Google Scholar
Thouez, C., & Channac, F. (2006). Shaping international migration policy: the role of regional consultative processes. West European Politics, 29(2), 370–87.Google Scholar
Tomescu-Hatto, O. (2014). Self-presentation and impression management: NATO’s new public diplomacy. In Mayer, S. (ed.), NATO’s post-Cold War politics: the changing provision of security (pp. 89103). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.Google Scholar
Tortora, P., & Steensen, S. (2014). Making earmarked funding more effective: Current practices and a way forward. Better Policies for Better Lives Report, (1).Google Scholar
Trebilcock, M. J., & Howse, R. (2004). Trade policy & (and) labor standards. Minnesota Journal of Global Trade, 14, 261300.Google Scholar
Trondal, J., Marcussen, M., Larson, T., & Veggeland, F. (2010) Unpacking International Organisations. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F., & Fern, M. J. (2012). Examining the stability and variability of routine performances: the effects of experience and context change. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1407–34.Google Scholar
Unger, C. R. (2019). International organizations and rural development: the FAO perspective. The International History Review, 41(2), 451–8.Google Scholar
Vabulas, F., & Snidal, D. (2013). Organization without delegation: informal intergovernmental organizations (IIGOs) and the spectrum of intergovernmental arrangements. The Review of International Organizations, 8(2),193220.Google Scholar
Van Daele, J. (2008). The International Labour Organization (ILO) in past and present research. International Review of Social History, 53(3), 485511.Google Scholar
van der Lugt, C., & Dingwerth, K. (2015). Governing where focality is low: UNEP and the principles for responsible investment. In Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D., & Zangl, B. (eds.), International organizations as orchestrators (pp. 237–61). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Slyke, D. M. (2007). Agents or stewards: using theory to understand the government-nonprofit social service contracting relationship. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(2), 157–87.Google Scholar
Venturas, L. (ed.). (2015). International ‘migration management’ in the early Cold War: the intergovernmental committee for European migration. Corinth: University of the Peloponnese.Google Scholar
Venzke, I. (2010). International bureaucracies from a political science perspective – agency, authority and international institutional law. In Bogdandy, A., Wolfrum, R., Bernstorff, J., Dann, P., & Goldmann, M. (eds.), The exercise of public authority by international institutions: advancing international institutional law (pp. 6798). Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Verbeek, B. (1998). International organizations: the ugly duckling of international relations theory. In Reinalda, B. & Verbeek, B. (eds.), Autonomous Policy Making by International Organizations (pp. 1126). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Verhoest, K., Peters, B. G., Bouckaert, G., & Verschuere, B. (2004). The study of organisational autonomy: a conceptual review. Public Administration and Development, 24(2), 101–18.Google Scholar
Vermeulen, P., Zietsma, C., Greenwood, R., & Langley, A. (2016). Strategic responses to institutional complexity. Strategic Organization, 14(4), 277–86.Google Scholar
Vetterlein, A. (2012). Seeing like the World Bank on poverty. New Political Economy, 17(1), 3558.Google Scholar
Viola, L. A. (2015). The governance shift: from multilateral IGOs to orchestrated networks. In Mayntz, R. (ed.), Negotiated reform: the multilevel governance of financial regulation (pp. 1736). Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
Vogel, D. (1986). National styles of regulation: environmental policy in Great Britain and the United States. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Vreeland, J. R. (2003). The IMF and economic development. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wallander, C. A. (2000). Institutional assets and adaptability: NATO after the Cold War. International Organization, 54(4), 705–35.Google Scholar
Weaver, C. (2008). Hypocrisy trap: the World Bank and the poverty of reform. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Weaver, C. (2010). The politics of performance evaluation: independent evaluation at the International Monetary Fund. The Review of International Organizations, 5(3), 365–85.Google Scholar
Weaver, C., & Leiteritz, R. J. (2005). ‘Our poverty is a world full of dreams’: reforming the World Bank. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 11(3), 369–88.Google Scholar
Webber, M., Sperling, J., & Smith, M. (2012). NATO’s post-Cold War trajectory: decline or regeneration. Basingstoke: Springer.Google Scholar
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Weible, C. M. (2005). Beliefs and perceived influence in a natural resource conflict: an advocacy coalition approach to policy networks. Political Research Quarterly, 58(3), 461–75.Google Scholar
Weinlich, S. (2014). Emerging powers at the UN: ducking for cover? Third World Quarterly, 35(10), 1829–44.Google Scholar
Weisband, E. (2000). Discursive multilateralism: global benchmarks, shame, and learning in the ILO labor standards monitoring regime. International Studies Quarterly, 44(4), 643–66.Google Scholar
Weiss, T. G. (1982). International Bureaucracy: the myth and reality of the international civil service. International Affairs, 58(2), 287306.Google Scholar
Weiss, T. G., & Pasic, A. (1997). Reinventing UNHCR: enterprising humanitarians in the former Yugoslavia, 1991–1995. Global Governance, 3(1), 4157.Google Scholar
Weller, P., & Yi-Chong, X. (eds.). (2015). The politics of International Organizations: views from insiders. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
WHO. (1980). The global eradication of smallpox. final report of the global commission for the certification of smallpox eradication (Vol. 4). Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. Q. (1989). Bureaucracy: what government agencies do and why they do it. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. (1919). The League of Nations. 3 Session 65 Congress. Senate Document No. 389: 1215.Google Scholar
WMO. (2011). Scientific assessment of ozone depletion: 2010 (Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project No. 52). World Meteorological Organization. Retrieved from www.wmo.int/pages/prog/arep/gaw/ozone_2010/documents/Ozone-Assessment-2010-complete.pdfGoogle Scholar
Woolf, L. S. (1916). International government: two reports. London, Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Xu, Y.-C., & Weller, P. (2004). The governance of World Trade – international civil servants and GATT/WTO. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Xu, Y.-C., & Weller, P. (2008). ‘To be, but not to be seen’: exploring the impact of international civil servants. Public Administration, 86(1), 3551.Google Scholar
Yamey, G. (2002). The WHO in 2002: have the latest reforms reversed WHO’s decline? British Medical Journal, 325(7372), 1107–12.Google Scholar
Yeager, S. J. (2007). Classic methods in public administration research. In Hildreth, W. B., Miller, G. J., & Rabin, J. (eds.), Handbook of public administration (pp. 683794). New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Yi-Chong, X., & Weller, P. (2004). The governance of world trade: international civil servants and the GATT/WTO. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Yi-chong, X., & Weller, P. (2018). The working world of International Organizations: authority, capacity, legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. R. (2002). The institutional dimensions of environmental change: fit, interplay, and scale. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Zacher, M., & Keefe, T. J. (2008). The Politics of global health governance: united by contagion. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Zahariadis, Nikolaos (2003). Ambiguity and choice in public policy: political decision making in modern democracies. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Zbaracki, M. J., & Bergen, M. (2010). When truces collapse: a longitudinal study of price-adjustment routines. Organization Science, 21(5), 955–72.Google Scholar
Zürn, M., Binder, M., & Ecker-Ehrhardt, M. (2012). International authority and its politicization. International Theory, 4(01), 69106.Google Scholar
Zürn, M., & Checkel, J. T. (2005). Getting socialized to build bridges: constructivism and rationalism, Europe and the nation-state. International Organization, 59(04), 1045–79.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Louisa Bayerlein, European University Institute, Christoph Knill, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Yves Steinebach, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
  • Book: A Matter of Style?
  • Online publication: 04 July 2020
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108864671.010
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Louisa Bayerlein, European University Institute, Christoph Knill, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Yves Steinebach, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
  • Book: A Matter of Style?
  • Online publication: 04 July 2020
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108864671.010
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Louisa Bayerlein, European University Institute, Christoph Knill, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Yves Steinebach, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
  • Book: A Matter of Style?
  • Online publication: 04 July 2020
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108864671.010
Available formats
×