@incollection{LieseHeinzel2022,
  author    = {Liese, Andrea and Heinzel, Mirko Noa},
  title     = {Reputation and influence},
  series = {International public administrations in global public policy},
  booktitle = {International public administrations in global public policy},
  editor    = {Knill, Christoph and Steinebach, Yves},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {London},
  isbn      = {978-1-032-34673-1},
  doi       = {10.4324/9781003323297-5},
  pages     = {52 -- 81},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {International public administrations (IPAs) are collective bodies within international organizations (IOs) made up of international civil servants that support the intergovernmental bodies and member states. Over the last decade, research on these bodies has "gained substantial momentum". Comparative assessments of IPAs reputation among stakeholders are rare. The literature on the sociological legitimacy of IOs is most advanced in this respect. A comparative agenda on IPAs reputation for expertise or neutrality is still in its infancy. Research has shown that different stakeholders view the same IPA quite differently. Reputation is a crucial concept in political science and IR research and has been widely used to predict states' future behavior, notably regarding cooperation and conflict. IPAs seem to vary substantially in their reputation for expertise among critical interlocutors. In financial policy, several prominent IPAs are seen as experts, including the European Central Bank and the IMF.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Heinzel2022,
  author    = {Heinzel, Mirko Noa},
  title     = {Mediating power?},
  series = {The British journal of politics \& international relations : BJPIR},
  volume    = {24},
  journal   = {The British journal of politics \& international relations : BJPIR},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Sage},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {1467-856X},
  doi       = {10.1177/1369148121992761},
  pages     = {153 -- 170},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {The selection of the executive heads of international organisations represents a key decision in the politics of international organisations. However, we know little about what dynamics influence this selection. The article focuses on the nationality of selected executive heads. It argues that institutional design impacts the factors that influence leadership selection by shaping the costs and benefits of attaining the position for member states' nationals. The argument is tested with novel data on the nationality of individuals in charge of 69 international organisation bureaucracies between 1970 and 2017. Two findings stand out: first, powerful countries are more able to secure positions in international organisations in which executive heads are voted in by majority voting. Second, less consistent evidence implies that powerful countries secure more positions when bureaucracies are authoritative. The findings have implications for debates on international cooperation by illustrating how power and institutions interact in the selection of international organisation executive heads.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{DoerflerHeinzel2022,
  author    = {D{\"o}rfler, Thomas and Heinzel, Mirko Noa},
  title     = {Greening global governance},
  series = {The review of international organizations},
  volume    = {18},
  journal   = {The review of international organizations},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Boston},
  issn      = {1559-7431},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11558-022-09462-4},
  pages     = {117 -- 143},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {The last decades have seen a remarkable expansion in the number of International Organizations (IOs) that have mainstreamed environmental issues into their policy scope—in many cases due to the pressure of civil society. We hypothesize that International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs), whose headquarters are in proximity to the headquarters of IOs, are more likely to affect IOs' expansion into the environmental domain. We test this explanation by utilizing a novel dataset on the strength of environmental global civil society in proximity to the headquarters of 76 IOs between 1950 and 2017. Three findings stand out. First, the more environmental INGOs have their secretariat in proximity to the headquarter of an IO, the more likely the IO mainstreams environmental policy. Second, proximate INGOs' contribution increases when they can rely on domestically focused NGOs in member states. Third, a pathway case reveals that proximate INGOs played an essential role in inside lobbying, outside lobbying and information provision during the campaign to mainstream environmental issues at the World Bank. However, their efforts relied to a substantial extent on the work of local NGOs on the ground.},
  language  = {en}
}