The search result changed since you submitted your search request. Documents might be displayed in a different sort order.
  • search hit 4 of 12
Back to Result List

Precedent and doctrine in organisational decision-making

  • We examine how and under what conditions informal institutional constraints, such as precedent and doctrine, are likely to affect collective choice within international organisations even in the absence of powerful bureaucratic agents. With a particular focus on the United Nations Security Council, we first develop a theoretical account of why such informal constraints might affect collective decisions even of powerful and strategically behaving actors. We show that precedents provide focal points that allow adopting collective decisions in coordination situations despite diverging preferences. Reliance on previous cases creates tacitly evolving doctrine that may develop incrementally. Council decision-making is also likely to be facilitated by an institutional logic of escalation driven by institutional constraints following from the typically staged response to crisis situations. We explore the usefulness of our theoretical argument with evidence from the Council doctrine on terrorism that has evolved since 1985. The key decisionsWe examine how and under what conditions informal institutional constraints, such as precedent and doctrine, are likely to affect collective choice within international organisations even in the absence of powerful bureaucratic agents. With a particular focus on the United Nations Security Council, we first develop a theoretical account of why such informal constraints might affect collective decisions even of powerful and strategically behaving actors. We show that precedents provide focal points that allow adopting collective decisions in coordination situations despite diverging preferences. Reliance on previous cases creates tacitly evolving doctrine that may develop incrementally. Council decision-making is also likely to be facilitated by an institutional logic of escalation driven by institutional constraints following from the typically staged response to crisis situations. We explore the usefulness of our theoretical argument with evidence from the Council doctrine on terrorism that has evolved since 1985. The key decisions studied include the 1992 sanctions resolution against Libya and the 2001 Council response to the 9/11 attacks. We conclude that, even within intergovernmentally structured international organisations, member states do not operate on a clean slate, but in a highly institutionalised environment that shapes their opportunities for action.show moreshow less

Export metadata

Additional Services

Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author details:Thomas GehringORCiD, Christian DorschGND, Thomas DörflerORCiDGND
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-017-0101-5
ISSN:1581-1980
ISSN:1408-6980
Title of parent work (English):Journal of international relations and development
Subtitle (English):the power of informal institutional rules in the United Nations Security Council’s activities on terrorism
Publisher:Palgrave Macmillan
Place of publishing:Basingstoke
Publication type:Article
Language:English
Date of first publication:2017/06/19
Publication year:2019
Release date:2023/04/13
Tag:Security Council; decision-making; doctrine; international organisations; precedent; terrorism
Volume:22
Issue:1
Number of pages:29
First page:107
Last Page:135
Organizational units:Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Sozialwissenschaften / Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft
DDC classification:3 Sozialwissenschaften / 30 Sozialwissenschaften, Soziologie / 300 Sozialwissenschaften
3 Sozialwissenschaften / 32 Politikwissenschaft / 320 Politikwissenschaft
Accept ✔
This website uses technically necessary session cookies. By continuing to use the website, you agree to this. You can find our privacy policy here.