Jonathan Kuyper.
Jonathan Kuyper.

Global governance negotiations increasingly face gridlock. Attempts to overcome stalemate by involving fewer states – as exemplified by the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – are also failing as these negotiations become more politicized.

A comparative analysis

Through a comparative analysis of these negotiations, this project seeks to understand if, how, and in what ways democratic legitimacy is required to address politicization and overcome gridlock in global governance? Based on the view that authority requires legitimacy, the project draws upon deliberative democracy to assess these negotiations. It engages comparative analysis to analyze three aspects of each negotiation: intellectual property, environment, and investment. The cases employ document analysis and interview techniques to unpack who is included during negotiations, what arguments are employed for and against policy decisions, whether actors are properly represented by decision-makers, and how negotiations outcomes have unfolded. This assessment is linked to the politicization of negotiations to explain how increased authority requires commensurate levels of legitimacy.

Three major innovations

The project offers three major innovations. First it employs in-depth empirical data to inform normative analysis. Second it is the first comparative analysis of TTIP and TPP. Finally the cases help inform policy decisions about how gridlock in global governance negotiations can be overcome.

More about Jonathan Kuyper.