IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ctwqxx/v34y2013i6p963-984.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Squeezed or revitalised? Middle powers, the G20 and the evolution of global governance

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Cooper

Abstract

If global affairs are, indeed, moving towards a multipolar system, in which power coalesces around a small number of dominant poles (USA/EU/brics in the global South), then middle powers may well find themselves relegated to a subordinate role. Yet, at odds with this expectation, the role of particular traditional and non-traditional middle powers has become revitalised. This is in large part because of the nature of the global order after unipolarity under US dominance. Unlike past moments of transition, the current reconfiguration has not been made explicit by violent disruption. Moreover, unlike past concerts of powers, select middle powers have gained access to the G20, the hub site of transition in global governance. Membership in the G20 facilitates agency in terms of issue-specific forms of policy leadership, although the mode of operation by middle powers in utilising this space differs from country to country, as illustrated by the cases of Canada and South Korea.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Cooper, 2013. "Squeezed or revitalised? Middle powers, the G20 and the evolution of global governance," Third World Quarterly, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(6), pages 963-984.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ctwqxx:v:34:y:2013:i:6:p:963-984
    DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2013.802508
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01436597.2013.802508
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01436597.2013.802508?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Klingebiel, Stephan, 2017. "Rising powers and the provision of transnational public goods: conceptual considerations and features of South Africa as a case study," IDOS Discussion Papers 3/2017, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    2. Chris Alden & Garth le Pere, 2024. "Southern multilateralism from IBSA to NDB: Synergies, continuities and regional options," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(2), pages 389-397, May.
    3. Umut Aydin, 2021. "Rule‐takers, rule‐makers, or rule‐promoters? Turkey and Mexico's role as rising middle powers in global economic governance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 544-560, July.
    4. Moohyung Cho & Tim Büthe, 2021. "From rule‐taker to rule‐promoting regulatory state: South Korea in the nearly‐global competition regime," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 513-543, July.
    5. Byungwon Woo, 2021. "Empirical categorization of middle powers and how different middle powers are treated in international organizations: The case of India and South Korea," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 24(2), pages 149-165, June.
    6. Javier Vadell, 2019. "La iniciativa BRICS y China: entre la emergencia y la irrelevancia [A iniciativa BRICS e a China: entre a emergência e a irrelevância]," Nova Economia, Economics Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Brazil), vol. 29(2), pages 401-428, May-Augus.
    7. Pål Røren, 2020. "On the Social Status of the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 706-722, May.
    8. Mark Beeson & Jolanta Hewitt, 2022. "Does Multilateralism still Matter? ASEAN and the Arctic Council in Comparative Perspective," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(2), pages 208-218, May.

    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:taf:ctwqxx:v:34:y:2013:i:6:p:963-984. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/ctwq .

    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.