Trajectories of Transnational Governance – Comparing the Evolution of Regulatory Standard Institutions Across Fields

Over the past decades, we have observed the emergence and stabilization of a large number of transnational governance institutions, broadly defined as sets of norms, rules and standards that are directed towards steering behavior of actors in cross-border economic, social and political life. While there is now a broad literature on the proliferation of multiple and often overlapping transnational governance arrangements, controversies about its causes, forms and effects prevail. Many scholars describe this development as an increasing fragmentation that threatens the effectiveness and legitimacy of global governance (e.g. Biermann et al. 2009). On the contrary, authors who emphasize functional differentiation of governance as an emergent response to the complexity of the global economy and world polity argue that fragmentation is not per se a negative development. In their view, the key question is rather whether or not processes and mechanisms of coordination between fragmented governance schemes exist (e.g. Zürn and Faude 2009). Building on the second line of argument, this paper develops a novel processual and comparative approach to the conjoined analysis of the differentiation and coordination of transnational governance schemes. In order to assess the longer-term outcomes of fragmentation, we first need to develop a better conceptual and empirical understanding of what drives processes of differentiation and coordination within and across transnational issue fields. Hence it is necessary to move from a static to a dynamic perspective. Secondly, a comparative perspective is required to understand the similarities and differences between different governance fields. To do so, this paper will draw on pragmatist institutionalism to conceptualize transnational governance as an open-ended process of institution building. In this process, functional differentiation provides opportunities for ongoing socio-political interactions and contestation about the future development of governance schemes, including normative and institutional coordination across schemes and issue fields. These interactions and contestations, in turn, contribute to reproduction or changes in the differentiation and coordination of governance. Hence, it is suggested that trajectories of transnational governance should be reconstructed from the longitudinal study of sequences of interactions between actors and institutions within governance fields and be contrasted with each other. To illustrate the empirical usefulness of such a longitudinal approach, the paper develops a typology of transnational governance trajectories that combines the evolution of differentiation and coordination over time. Empirical research results of the author’s Research Group on ‘Institution Building Across Borders’ are used to illustrate the typology with reference to a variety of governance regulatory standard-setting schemes (Abbott and Snidal 2009) in fields of labor, forestry, accounting and open access. The results of this empirical analysis show that distinct trajectories of transnational governance with unique combinations of differentiation and coordination emerge over time and that each trajectory is shaped by a set of social mechanisms that operate over subsequent sequences. The paper concludes by discussing the broader implications of the proposed longitudinal and comparative approach for debates on effectiveness and legitimacy of transnational governance.