IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v75y2021i2p333-358_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Janus Face of the Liberal International Information Order: When Global Institutions Are Self-Undermining

Author

Listed:
  • Farrell, Henry
  • Newman, Abraham L.

Abstract

Scholars and policymakers long believed that norms of global information openness and private-sector governance helped to sustain and promote liberalism. These norms are being increasingly contested within liberal democracies. In this article, we argue that a key source of debate over the Liberal International Information Order (LIIO), a sub-order of the Liberal International Order (LIO), is generated internally by “self-undermining feedback effects,” that is, mechanisms through which institutional arrangements undermine their own political conditions of survival over time. Empirically, we demonstrate how global governance of the Internet, transnational disinformation campaigns, and domestic information governance interact to sow the seeds of this contention. In particular, illiberal states converted norms of openness into a vector of attack, unsettling political bargains in liberal states concerning the LIIO. More generally, we set out a broader research agenda to show how the international relations discipline might better understand institutional change as well as the informational aspects of the current crisis in the LIO.

Suggested Citation

  • Farrell, Henry & Newman, Abraham L., 2021. "The Janus Face of the Liberal International Information Order: When Global Institutions Are Self-Undermining," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(2), pages 333-358, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:75:y:2021:i:2:p:333-358_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818320000302/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sunn Bush, Sarah & Cottiero, Christina & Prather, Lauren, 2024. "Zombies Ahead: Explaining the Rise of Low-Quality Election Monitoring," Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, Working Paper Series qt2fc2d3pr, Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California.
    2. Sergei Guriev & Daniel Treisman, 2019. "Informational Autocrats," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(4), pages 100-127, Fall.
    3. Manuela Moschella & Luca Pinto, 2022. "The multi‐agencies dilemma of delegation: Why do policymakers choose one or multiple agencies for financial regulation?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 1250-1264, October.
    4. Kalyanpur, Nikhil, 2023. "An illiberal economic order: commitment mechanisms become tools of authoritarian coercion," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118837, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Hulvey, Rachel A, 2022. "Cyber Sovereignty: How China is Changing the Rules of Internet Freedom," Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, Working Paper Series qt7sg3716k, Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California.
    6. Hafner-Burton, Emilie M & Schneider, Christina J, 2023. "The International Liberal Foundations of Democratic Backsliding," Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, Working Paper Series qt0965w1jb, Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:75:y:2021:i:2:p:333-358_6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.