- School of Political Science and International Studies, University of Queensland, St Lucia QLD 4067, Australia
- Anti money laundering and Terrorist Financing, Multilevel governance, Regulatory Governance, Regulation And Governance, Global governance (Law), Global Governance, and 17 moreNon-Traditional Security, Corruption, Anti-Money Laundering, Criminal Organizations, Anti-money laundering, Offshore finance, Political Geography, Sociology of Risk, Critical Security Studies, Regionalism, New Regionalism Approach, Asia-Pacific, Political Economy, Statebuilding, Global Health Governance, Global Health, Global Health Policy, Pandemic Influenza Preparedness, and Security Governanceedit
- My research interests are diverse, traversing the fields of security, development and aid, governance, political geog... moreMy research interests are diverse, traversing the fields of security, development and aid, governance, political geography and international relations. I am particularly interested in understanding the evolving nature of statehood and political agency under conditions of globalisation. I have written extensively on issues of state building, non-traditional security, risk and risk management, regional governance and Australian development and security policy.edit
International peace- and state-building interventions have become ubiquitous in international politics since the 1990s, aiming to tackle the security problems stemming from the instability afflicting many developing states. Their frequent... more
International peace- and state-building interventions have become ubiquitous in international politics since the 1990s, aiming to tackle the security problems stemming from the instability afflicting many developing states. Their frequent failures have prompted a shift towards analysing how the interaction between interveners and recipients shapes outcomes. This book critically assesses the rapidly growing literature in international relations and development studies on international intervention and local politics. It advances an innovative approach, placing the politics of scale at the core of the conflicts and compromises shaping the outcomes of international intervention. Different scales - local, national, international - privilege different interests, unevenly allocating power, resources and political opportunity structures. Interveners and recipients thus pursue scalar strategies and socio-political alliances that reinforce their power and marginalise rivals. This approach is harnessed towards examining three prominent case studies of international intervention - Aceh, Cambodia and Solomon Islands - with a focus on public administration reform.
Research Interests:
his all-new fourth edition of The Political Economy of Southeast Asia constitutes a state-of-the-art, comprehensive analysis of the political, economic, social and ecological development of one of the world’s most dynamic regions. With... more
his all-new fourth edition of The Political Economy of Southeast Asia constitutes a state-of-the-art, comprehensive analysis of the political, economic, social and ecological development of one of the world’s most dynamic regions. With contributions from world-leading experts, the volume is unified by a single theoretical approach: the Murdoch School of political economy, which foregrounds struggles over power and resources and the evolving global context of hyperglobalisation. Themes considered include gender, populism, the transformation of the state, regional governance, aid and the environment. The volume will be of interest to scholars and students across multiple disciplines, including political economy, development studies, international relations and area studies. The findings of contributors will also be of value to civil society, policymakers and anyone interested in Southeast Asia and its development.
Research Interests:
""In the post-Cold War years failed states have become a major security concern for policymakers. Prevalent scholarly approaches evaluate state building interventions in terms of whether they produce 'more' or 'less' state. In contrast,... more
""In the post-Cold War years failed states have become a major security concern for policymakers. Prevalent scholarly approaches evaluate state building interventions in terms of whether they produce 'more' or 'less' state. In contrast, Shahar Hameiri argues that state building interventions are creating a new form of transnationally regulated statehood. Using case-studies from the Asia-Pacific, he analyzes the politics of state building and the implications for contemporary statehood and the global order. This book examines the effects of state building on the distribution, production and reproduction of political power: Who rules and how? What conflicts are engendered or exacerbated by state building, and how are they managed? What coalitions support the production or reproduction of power relationships associated with these interventions? It establishes that whether or not such interventions meet their objectives, they have led to the emergence of anti-pluralist forms of political rule within and between states.
Reviews of Regulating Statehood:
Joseph Coelho, International Social Science Review, 87, no. 1-2 (2012), p.57:
'Regulating Statehood is an intellectually provocative book that challenges many of the major assumptions that underlie the scholarship on international state-building. It is an important and refreshing contribution to this growing field of study. Hameiri provides a powerful intellectual framework for understanding the problems and limitations of international efforts to transform and regulate states that are perceived as threats to global and regional security. While some of the content may be difficult for readers who are unfamiliar with the field, this book is a must read for graduate students and scholars interested in the topic.'
Kristoffer Liden, Journal of Peace Research, 48, no. 5 (2011), p. 685:
'By relating emerging literatures on international state-building, peacebuilding and global governance to established literatures on the state, risk, development and international relations, this little masterpiece makes a difference to all of these theoretical arenas. Combining empirical oversight with an impressive overview of contemporary debates on international intervention, Hameiri makes sense of what has so far been character- ized as irrational shortcomings.'
Xavier Mathieu, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 24, no. 3 (2011), p. 544:
'Hameiri’s book constitutes an original and challenging explanation of contemporary state-building interventions (SBIs). Thanks to an innovative framework, he demonstrates that these interventions are aimed at transforming the intervened state through the transnationalization of some of its functions. Hence, Hameiri provides a fresh understanding of SBIs and their role in the current global order.'
Lee Jones, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 5, no. 2 (2011), p. 237-8:
'Shahar Hameiri’s brilliant first book, Regulating Statehood, presents a rather more ruthless, forward-facing analysis of contemporary statebuilding, explicitly rejecting Chandler’s ‘nostalgia’ for earlier forms of sovereign statehood (p. 209). Hameiri also eschews the usual attempt to evaluate SBIs in terms of whether they are successful in building states, arguing that this can only involve benchmarking outcomes against a fictional, ideal-typical view of what states should look like (ch. 1). Instead, he asks a far more pertinent question: what forms of statehood are contemporary SBIs actually producing? His compelling answer is: transnatio- nalised, regulatory statehood...Regulating Statehood is a path-breaking, important and intellectually stimulating book'.
Reviews of Regulating Statehood:
Joseph Coelho, International Social Science Review, 87, no. 1-2 (2012), p.57:
'Regulating Statehood is an intellectually provocative book that challenges many of the major assumptions that underlie the scholarship on international state-building. It is an important and refreshing contribution to this growing field of study. Hameiri provides a powerful intellectual framework for understanding the problems and limitations of international efforts to transform and regulate states that are perceived as threats to global and regional security. While some of the content may be difficult for readers who are unfamiliar with the field, this book is a must read for graduate students and scholars interested in the topic.'
Kristoffer Liden, Journal of Peace Research, 48, no. 5 (2011), p. 685:
'By relating emerging literatures on international state-building, peacebuilding and global governance to established literatures on the state, risk, development and international relations, this little masterpiece makes a difference to all of these theoretical arenas. Combining empirical oversight with an impressive overview of contemporary debates on international intervention, Hameiri makes sense of what has so far been character- ized as irrational shortcomings.'
Xavier Mathieu, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 24, no. 3 (2011), p. 544:
'Hameiri’s book constitutes an original and challenging explanation of contemporary state-building interventions (SBIs). Thanks to an innovative framework, he demonstrates that these interventions are aimed at transforming the intervened state through the transnationalization of some of its functions. Hence, Hameiri provides a fresh understanding of SBIs and their role in the current global order.'
Lee Jones, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 5, no. 2 (2011), p. 237-8:
'Shahar Hameiri’s brilliant first book, Regulating Statehood, presents a rather more ruthless, forward-facing analysis of contemporary statebuilding, explicitly rejecting Chandler’s ‘nostalgia’ for earlier forms of sovereign statehood (p. 209). Hameiri also eschews the usual attempt to evaluate SBIs in terms of whether they are successful in building states, arguing that this can only involve benchmarking outcomes against a fictional, ideal-typical view of what states should look like (ch. 1). Instead, he asks a far more pertinent question: what forms of statehood are contemporary SBIs actually producing? His compelling answer is: transnatio- nalised, regulatory statehood...Regulating Statehood is a path-breaking, important and intellectually stimulating book'.
Research Interests: International Security, Migration, International Political Economy, Poverty Reduction Strategies, Human Security, and 6 moreRisk Management, International Economic Relations, Critical international political economy, State-building in the Failed States, Statebuilding, and Governance and State Capacity
The COVID-19 pandemic has elicited a wide range of national responses with an even wider range of outcomes in terms of infections and mortalities. Australia is a rare success story, keeping deaths comparatively low, and infections too,... more
The COVID-19 pandemic has elicited a wide range of national responses with an even wider range of outcomes in terms of infections and mortalities. Australia is a rare success story, keeping deaths comparatively low, and infections too, until the Omicron wave. What explains Australia's success? Typical explanations emphasise leaders' choices. We agree, but argue that leaders' choices, and whether these are implemented effectively, is shaped by the legacy of state transformation. Decades of neoliberal reforms have hollowed out state capacity, and confused lines of control and accountability, leaving Australia unprepared for the pandemic. Leaders thus abandoned plans and turned to ad hoc, simple to implement emergency measures-border closures and lockdowns. These averted large-scale outbreaks and deaths, but with diminishing returns as the Delta variant took hold. Conversely, Australia's regulatory state has struggled to deliver more sophisticated policy responses, even when leaders were apparently committed, including an effective quarantine system, crucial for border controls, and vaccination program, essential for exiting the quagmire of lockdowns and closed borders, leading to a partial return to top-down governing. The Australian experience shows that to avoid a public health catastrophe or more damaging lockdowns in the next pandemic, states must re-learn to govern.
Research Interests:
The international security literature has recently observed the growing ‘‘securitization’’ of issues outside the traditional concern with interstate military conflict. However, this literature offers only limited explanations of this... more
The international security literature has recently observed the growing ‘‘securitization’’ of issues outside the traditional concern with interstate military conflict. However, this literature offers only limited explanations of this tendency and largely neglects to explain how the new security issues are actually governed in practice, despite apparent ‘‘securitization’’ leading to divergent outcomes across time and space. We argue that the rise of non-traditional security should be conceptualized not simply as the discursive identification of new threats but as part of a deep-seated historical transformation in the scale of state institutions and activities, notably the rise of regulatory forms of statehood and the relativization of scales of governance. The most salient feature of the politics of non-traditional security lies in key actors’ efforts to rescale the governance of particular issues from the national level to a variety of new spatial and territorial arenas and, in so doing, transform state apparatuses. The governance that actually emerges in practice can be understood as an outcome of conflicts between these actors and those resisting their rescaling attempts. The argument is illustrated with a case study of environmental security governance in Southeast Asia.
Research Interests: Political Geography and Geopolitics, International Relations, Political Economy, International Relations Theory, International Security, and 13 moreSecurity, Security Studies, International Political Economy, Southeast Asia, State Theory, Environmental Sustainability, Environmental Pollution, ASEAN, Scale, Non-Traditional Security, Social Conflict, Sociology of the State, and Forest fires and haze in Indonesia
This article critiques New Interdependence Approach (NIA) explanations of global regulation, positing instead a State Transformation Approach (STA). Rightly critical of state-centric frameworks on the politics of globalisation, the NIA... more
This article critiques New Interdependence Approach (NIA) explanations of global
regulation, positing instead a State Transformation Approach (STA). Rightly critical
of state-centric frameworks on the politics of globalisation, the NIA seeks to explain
the emergence and distributional outcomes of global regulatory regimes, arguing
that they stem from struggles sparked by overlapping rules that cut across national
boundaries and which reshape domestic and international institutions. While the
NIA presents a useful description of this process, and its efforts to overcome methodological
nationalism are welcome, its explanatory power is limited by its roots in
historical institutionalism, which fails to specify adequately the context that shapes
political struggles, producing unsystematic, ad hoc accounts. Conversely, the STA
explicitly locates struggles over global regulatory regimes within the wider context
of evolving global capitalism and associated shifts in the nature of statehood, providing
a more grounded and determinate explanation of outcomes. The argument
is illustrated empirically throughout with reference to the global anti-money laundering
regime. This study’s findings raise question marks regarding historical institutionalism’s
potential to advance International Political Economy.
regulation, positing instead a State Transformation Approach (STA). Rightly critical
of state-centric frameworks on the politics of globalisation, the NIA seeks to explain
the emergence and distributional outcomes of global regulatory regimes, arguing
that they stem from struggles sparked by overlapping rules that cut across national
boundaries and which reshape domestic and international institutions. While the
NIA presents a useful description of this process, and its efforts to overcome methodological
nationalism are welcome, its explanatory power is limited by its roots in
historical institutionalism, which fails to specify adequately the context that shapes
political struggles, producing unsystematic, ad hoc accounts. Conversely, the STA
explicitly locates struggles over global regulatory regimes within the wider context
of evolving global capitalism and associated shifts in the nature of statehood, providing
a more grounded and determinate explanation of outcomes. The argument
is illustrated empirically throughout with reference to the global anti-money laundering
regime. This study’s findings raise question marks regarding historical institutionalism’s
potential to advance International Political Economy.
Research Interests:
Debates over the implications of China’s rise for global governance have reached an impasse, since evidence exists to support both ‘revisionist’ and ‘status-quo’ intentions. This means that neither is strictly falsifiable and hence the... more
Debates over the implications of China’s rise for global governance have
reached an impasse, since evidence exists to support both ‘revisionist’ and
‘status-quo’ intentions. This means that neither is strictly falsifiable and hence
the debate, as currently structured, is irresolvable. However, contradictions
are explicable if we recognise that China is not a unitary state. Since the
beginning of the reform era, its international engagements have been shaped
by the uneven transformation – fragmentation, decentralisation and internationalisation
– of state apparatuses. Contradictory international actions thus
may reflect not top-down strategic direction, but conflicts, disagreements and
coordination problems within China’s transformed party-state. Our state transformation
approach directs us away from evaluating China’s approach to global
governance in toto – whether it is overall a revisionist or status quo
power – towards a detailed analysis of particular policy domains. This is
because in each issue-area we find different constellations of actors and interests,
and varying degrees of party-state transformation. We demonstrate the
centrality of state transformation analysis for explaining the co-existence of
revisionist and status quo behaviours through the apparently hard test case
of nuclear technologies. Even in this ‘high politics’ domain, state transformation
dynamics help explain China’s inconsistent international behaviours.
reached an impasse, since evidence exists to support both ‘revisionist’ and
‘status-quo’ intentions. This means that neither is strictly falsifiable and hence
the debate, as currently structured, is irresolvable. However, contradictions
are explicable if we recognise that China is not a unitary state. Since the
beginning of the reform era, its international engagements have been shaped
by the uneven transformation – fragmentation, decentralisation and internationalisation
– of state apparatuses. Contradictory international actions thus
may reflect not top-down strategic direction, but conflicts, disagreements and
coordination problems within China’s transformed party-state. Our state transformation
approach directs us away from evaluating China’s approach to global
governance in toto – whether it is overall a revisionist or status quo
power – towards a detailed analysis of particular policy domains. This is
because in each issue-area we find different constellations of actors and interests,
and varying degrees of party-state transformation. We demonstrate the
centrality of state transformation analysis for explaining the co-existence of
revisionist and status quo behaviours through the apparently hard test case
of nuclear technologies. Even in this ‘high politics’ domain, state transformation
dynamics help explain China’s inconsistent international behaviours.
Research Interests:
The volume that we introduce breaks with the prevalent tendency in International Relations (IR) scholarship to treat rising powers (such as China, Russia, India and Brazil) as unitary actors in international politics. Although a neat... more
The volume that we introduce breaks with the prevalent tendency in
International Relations (IR) scholarship to treat rising powers (such as
China, Russia, India and Brazil) as unitary actors in international politics.
Although a neat demarcation of the domestic and international
domains, on which the notion of unitary agency is premised, has always
been a myth, these states’ uneven integration into the global political
economy has eroded this perspective’s empirical purchase considerably.
Instead, this collection advances the concept of ‘state transformation’
as a useful lens through which to examine rising power states’ foreign
policymaking and implementation. State transformation refers to the
pluralisation of cross-border state agency via contested and uneven
processes of fragmentation, decentralisation and internationalisation
of state apparatuses. The volume demonstrates the significance of state
transformation processes for explaining some of these states’ most
important foreign policy agendas, and outlines the implications for the
wider field in IR.
International Relations (IR) scholarship to treat rising powers (such as
China, Russia, India and Brazil) as unitary actors in international politics.
Although a neat demarcation of the domestic and international
domains, on which the notion of unitary agency is premised, has always
been a myth, these states’ uneven integration into the global political
economy has eroded this perspective’s empirical purchase considerably.
Instead, this collection advances the concept of ‘state transformation’
as a useful lens through which to examine rising power states’ foreign
policymaking and implementation. State transformation refers to the
pluralisation of cross-border state agency via contested and uneven
processes of fragmentation, decentralisation and internationalisation
of state apparatuses. The volume demonstrates the significance of state
transformation processes for explaining some of these states’ most
important foreign policy agendas, and outlines the implications for the
wider field in IR.
Research Interests:
Surprisingly, perhaps, China’s flagship Belt and Road Initiative expresses a familiar mix of the security–development nexus and liberal interdependence thesis: Chinese leaders expect economic development and integration will stabilise and... more
Surprisingly, perhaps, China’s flagship Belt and Road Initiative
expresses a familiar mix of the security–development nexus and
liberal interdependence thesis: Chinese leaders expect economic
development and integration will stabilise and secure neighbouring states and improve inter-state relations. However, drawing on
the record of China’s intensive economic interaction with
Myanmar, we argue that the opposite outcome may occur, for
two reasons. First, capitalist development is inherently conflictprone. Second, moreover, China’s cross-border economic relations
today are shaped by state transformation – the fragmentation,
decentralisation and internationalisation of party-state apparatuses. Accordingly, economic relations often emerge not from
coherent national strategies, but from the uncoordinated, even
contradictory, activities of various state and non-state agencies
at multiple scales, which may exacerbate capitalist development’s
conflictual aspects and undermine official policy goals. In the SinoMyanmar case, the lead Chinese actors creating and managing
cross-border economic engagements are sub-national agencies
and enterprises based in, or operating through, Yunnan province.
The rapacious form of development they have pursued has exacerbated insecurity, helped to reignite ethnic conflict in Myanmar’s
borderlands, and plunged bilateral relations into crisis.
Consequently, the Chinese government has had to change its
policy and intervene in Myanmar’s domestic affairs to promote
peace negotiations.
expresses a familiar mix of the security–development nexus and
liberal interdependence thesis: Chinese leaders expect economic
development and integration will stabilise and secure neighbouring states and improve inter-state relations. However, drawing on
the record of China’s intensive economic interaction with
Myanmar, we argue that the opposite outcome may occur, for
two reasons. First, capitalist development is inherently conflictprone. Second, moreover, China’s cross-border economic relations
today are shaped by state transformation – the fragmentation,
decentralisation and internationalisation of party-state apparatuses. Accordingly, economic relations often emerge not from
coherent national strategies, but from the uncoordinated, even
contradictory, activities of various state and non-state agencies
at multiple scales, which may exacerbate capitalist development’s
conflictual aspects and undermine official policy goals. In the SinoMyanmar case, the lead Chinese actors creating and managing
cross-border economic engagements are sub-national agencies
and enterprises based in, or operating through, Yunnan province.
The rapacious form of development they have pursued has exacerbated insecurity, helped to reignite ethnic conflict in Myanmar’s
borderlands, and plunged bilateral relations into crisis.
Consequently, the Chinese government has had to change its
policy and intervene in Myanmar’s domestic affairs to promote
peace negotiations.
Research Interests:
A rapidly growing, self-identified scholarly subfield on "Security Governance" has recently emerged. Its signal contribution has been to explicate the expansion of security governance beyond traditional defense multilateralism to include... more
A rapidly growing, self-identified scholarly subfield on "Security Governance" has recently emerged. Its signal contribution has been to explicate the expansion of security governance beyond traditional defense multilateralism to include diverse actors, networked transnationally across multiple scales. However, this literature is predominantly descriptive and evaluative. Lacking an explanatory theory, it struggles to explain security governance outcomes convincingly. This article advances this body of literature by presenting an explanatory theoretical framework, which sees security governance as being produced through struggles over the appropriate scale of governance and the transformation of state apparatuses, shaped by specific state-society and political economy contexts. This framework is used to explain outcomes in the governance of money laundering and terrorist financing in the Asia-Pacific region and in Africa. Contrary to the expectations of Security Governance scholars that states in these regions generally fail to engage in security governance, the case studies illustrate that significant governance innovation has in fact occurred. This innovation is not the result of supranational multilateralization, but of the transformation and partial internationalization of domestic institutions-to an extent determined by local socio-political struggles over governance rescaling. Our framework thus accounts for real world outcomes; explains, rather than merely describes, the functional efficacy of security governance regimes; and enables normative assessment by identifying the winners and losers that emerge out of governance innovation.
Research Interests:
Much international development assistance has been delivered in the form of statebuilding interventions over the past 20 years, especially in post-conflict or fragile states. The apparent failure of many international statebuilding... more
Much international development assistance has been delivered in the form of
statebuilding interventions over the past 20 years, especially in post-conflict or fragile
states. The apparent failure of many international statebuilding interventions has
prompted a ‘political economy’ turn in development studies. This article critically
assesses the key approaches that have emerged to address the interrelations between
interveners and recipients, and advances an approach that places the politics of scale
at the core of the conflicts shaping the outcomes of international intervention.
Different scales privilege different interests, unevenly allocating power, resources and
political opportunity structures. Interveners and recipients thus pursue scalar
strategies and establish socio-political alliances that reinforce their power and
marginalise rivals. This approach is harnessed towards examining the uneven results
of the Aceh Government Transformation Programme, financed by the World Bankmanaged
Multi Donor Trust Fund following the 2005 peace agreement and
implemented by the UNDP and the Aceh provincial government.
statebuilding interventions over the past 20 years, especially in post-conflict or fragile
states. The apparent failure of many international statebuilding interventions has
prompted a ‘political economy’ turn in development studies. This article critically
assesses the key approaches that have emerged to address the interrelations between
interveners and recipients, and advances an approach that places the politics of scale
at the core of the conflicts shaping the outcomes of international intervention.
Different scales privilege different interests, unevenly allocating power, resources and
political opportunity structures. Interveners and recipients thus pursue scalar
strategies and establish socio-political alliances that reinforce their power and
marginalise rivals. This approach is harnessed towards examining the uneven results
of the Aceh Government Transformation Programme, financed by the World Bankmanaged
Multi Donor Trust Fund following the 2005 peace agreement and
implemented by the UNDP and the Aceh provincial government.
Research Interests:
The evident failures of international peacebuilding and statebuilding interventions (PSBIs) have recently prompted a focus on the interaction between interventions and target societies and states. Especially popular has been the... more
The evident failures of international peacebuilding and statebuilding interventions (PSBIs) have recently prompted a focus on the interaction between interventions and target societies and states. Especially popular has been the ‘hybridity’ approach, which understands forms of peace and governance emerging through the mixing of local and international agendas and institutions. This article argues that hybridity is a highly problematic optic. Despite contrary claims, hybridity scholarship falsely dichotomizes ‘local’ and ‘international’ ideal-typical assemblages, and incorrectly presents outcomes as stemming from conflict and accommodation between them. Scholarship in political geography and state theory provides better tools for explaining PSBIs’ outcomes as reflecting socio-political contestation over power and resources. We theorize PSBIs as involving a politics of scale, where different social forces promote and resist alternative scales and modes of governance, depending on their interests and agendas. Contestation between these forces, which may be located at different scales and involved in complex, tactical, multi-scalar alliances, explains the uneven outcomes of international intervention. We demonstrate this using a case study of East Timor, focusing on decentralization and land policy.
Research Interests:
The evident failures of international peacebuilding and statebuilding interventions (PSBIs) have recently prompted a focus on the interaction between interventions and target societies and states. Especially popular has been the... more
The evident failures of international peacebuilding and statebuilding interventions (PSBIs) have recently prompted a focus on the interaction between interventions and target societies and states. Especially popular has been the 'hybridity' approach, which understands forms of peace and governance emerging through the mixing of local and international agendas and institutions. This article argues that hybridity is a highly problematic optic. Despite contrary claims, hybridity scholarship falsely dichotomizes 'local' and 'in-ternational' ideal-typical assemblages, and incorrectly presents outcomes as stemming from conflict and accommodation between them. Scholarship in political geography and state theory provides better tools for explaining PSBIs' outcomes as reflecting socio-political contestation over power and resources. We theorize PSBIs as involving a politics of scale, where different social forces promote and resist alternative scales and modes of governance, depending on their interests and agendas. Contestation between these forces, which may be located at different scales and involved in complex, tactical, multi-scalar alliances, explains the uneven outcomes of international intervention. We demonstrate this using a case study of East Timor, focusing on decentralization and land policy.
Research Interests:
Many argue today that global governance is ‘in crisis’. This reflects an undue emphasis on the fate of multilateral institutions: if they are deadlocked, global governance does not appear to be progressing. This is misplaced. Today,... more
Many argue today that global governance is ‘in crisis’. This reflects an undue emphasis on the fate of multilateral
institutions: if they are deadlocked, global governance does not appear to be progressing. This is misplaced. Today,
global governance is increasingly being pursued not by erecting supranational institutions empowered to govern issue
areas directly, but by transforming states’ internal governance to enact international disciplines domestically. In many
policy domains, efforts are underway to reshape state institutions, laws and governance processes in accordance with
global priorities, regulatory standards and action plans. However, because these moves privilege certain interests and
ideologies over others, this is a heavily contested process. The politics of global governance thus occurs not just at the
global level, but at the local level too. The argument in this article is illustrated using examples from maritime security
and anti-money laundering governance.
institutions: if they are deadlocked, global governance does not appear to be progressing. This is misplaced. Today,
global governance is increasingly being pursued not by erecting supranational institutions empowered to govern issue
areas directly, but by transforming states’ internal governance to enact international disciplines domestically. In many
policy domains, efforts are underway to reshape state institutions, laws and governance processes in accordance with
global priorities, regulatory standards and action plans. However, because these moves privilege certain interests and
ideologies over others, this is a heavily contested process. The politics of global governance thus occurs not just at the
global level, but at the local level too. The argument in this article is illustrated using examples from maritime security
and anti-money laundering governance.
Research Interests:
This article draws attention to the transformation of statehood under globalisation as a crucial dynamic shaping the emergence and conduct of ‘rising powers’. That states are becoming increasingly fragmented, decentralised and... more
This article draws attention to the transformation of statehood under globalisation as a crucial dynamic shaping the emergence and conduct of ‘rising powers’. That states are becoming increasingly fragmented, decentralised and internationalised is noted by some international political economy and global governance scholars, but is neglected in International Relations treatments of rising powers. This article critiques this neglect, demonstrating the importance of state transformation in understanding emerging powers’ foreign and security policies, and their attempts to manage their increasingly transnational interests by promoting state transformation elsewhere, particularly in their near-abroad. It demonstrates the argument using the case of China, typically understood as a classical ‘Westphalian’ state. In reality, the Chinese state’s substantial disaggregation profoundly shapes its external conduct in overseas development assistance and conflict zones like the South China Sea, and in its promotion of extraterritorial governance arrangements in spaces like the Greater Mekong Subregion.
Research Interests: Political Geography and Geopolitics, International Relations, International Relations Theory, Security Studies, Critical Security Studies, and 6 moreInternational Political Economy, State Theory, China, Critical international political economy, Political Geography, and Emerging powers of Global South: Rising BRICS Countries
The international security literature has recently observed the growing “securitization” of issues outside the traditional concern with interstate military conflict. However, this literature offers only limited explanations of this... more
The international security literature has recently observed the growing “securitization” of issues outside the traditional concern with interstate military conflict. However, this literature offers only limited explanations of this tendency, and largely neglects to explain how the new security issues are actually governed in practice, despite apparent “securitization” leading to divergent outcomes across time and space. We argue that the rise of non-traditional security should be conceptualized not simply as the discursive identification of new threats but as part of a deep-seated historical transformation in the scale of state institutions and activities, notably the rise of regulatory forms of statehood and the relativization of scales of governance. The most salient feature of the politics of non-traditional security lies in key actors’ efforts to rescale the governance of particular issues from the national level to a variety of new spatial and territorial arenas and, in so doing, transform state apparatuses. The governance that actually emerges in practice can be understood as an outcome of conflicts between these actors and those resisting their rescaling attempts. The argument is illustrated with a case study of environmental security governance in Southeast Asia.
Research Interests:
Given the common association of non-traditional security (NTS) problems with globalisation, surprisingly little attention has been paid to how the political economy context of given NTS issues shapes how they are securitised and managed... more
Given the common association of non-traditional security (NTS) problems
with globalisation, surprisingly little attention has been paid to how the political economy
context of given NTS issues shapes how they are securitised and managed in practice. We
argue that security and its governance are always highly contested because different
modes of security governance invariably privilege particular interests and normative
agendas in state and society, which relate directly to the political economy. Drawing on
critical political geography, we argue that, because NTS issues are perceived as at least
potentially transnational, their securitisation often involves strategic attempts by actors
and coalitions to ‘rescale’ their governance beyond the national political and institutional
arenas, into new, expert-dominated modes of governance. Such efforts are often resisted
by other coalitions, for which this rescaling is deleterious. As evidenced by a case study of
avian influenza in Indonesia, particular governance outcomes depend upon the nature of
the coalitions assembled for and against rescaling in specific situations, while these coalitions’
makeup and relative strength is shaped by the political economy of the industries
that rescaling would affect, viewed against the broader backdrop of state-society relations.
with globalisation, surprisingly little attention has been paid to how the political economy
context of given NTS issues shapes how they are securitised and managed in practice. We
argue that security and its governance are always highly contested because different
modes of security governance invariably privilege particular interests and normative
agendas in state and society, which relate directly to the political economy. Drawing on
critical political geography, we argue that, because NTS issues are perceived as at least
potentially transnational, their securitisation often involves strategic attempts by actors
and coalitions to ‘rescale’ their governance beyond the national political and institutional
arenas, into new, expert-dominated modes of governance. Such efforts are often resisted
by other coalitions, for which this rescaling is deleterious. As evidenced by a case study of
avian influenza in Indonesia, particular governance outcomes depend upon the nature of
the coalitions assembled for and against rescaling in specific situations, while these coalitions’
makeup and relative strength is shaped by the political economy of the industries
that rescaling would affect, viewed against the broader backdrop of state-society relations.
Research Interests: International Relations, Political Economy, International Relations Theory, Globalization, Regulation And Governance, and 12 moreInternational Security, Governance, Critical Security Studies, International Political Economy, Indonesia, Globalisation and Development, State Theory, Globalization and Governance, Political Geography, Global Health Governance, International Security Studies, and Global health security
In recent decades, the security agenda for states and international organisations has expanded to include a range of ‘non-traditional’, transnational security issues. Globalisation is often seen as a key driver for the emergence or... more
In recent decades, the security agenda for states and international organisations
has expanded to include a range of ‘non-traditional’, transnational security issues.
Globalisation is often seen as a key driver for the emergence or intensification of these
problems, but, surprisingly, little sustained scholarly effort has been made to examine the
link between responses to the new security agenda and the changing political economy.
This special issue, which this article introduces, aims to overcome this significant gap. In
particular, it focuses on three key themes: the broad relationship between security and
political economy; what is being secured in the name of security and how this has changed;
and how things are being secured – what modes of governance have emerged to manage
security problems. In all of these areas, the contributions point to the crucial role of the state
in translating shifting state–economy relations to new security definitions and practices.
has expanded to include a range of ‘non-traditional’, transnational security issues.
Globalisation is often seen as a key driver for the emergence or intensification of these
problems, but, surprisingly, little sustained scholarly effort has been made to examine the
link between responses to the new security agenda and the changing political economy.
This special issue, which this article introduces, aims to overcome this significant gap. In
particular, it focuses on three key themes: the broad relationship between security and
political economy; what is being secured in the name of security and how this has changed;
and how things are being secured – what modes of governance have emerged to manage
security problems. In all of these areas, the contributions point to the crucial role of the state
in translating shifting state–economy relations to new security definitions and practices.
Research Interests:
In recent years, a perception has emerged among many policymakers and commentators that the deepening of the People’s Republic of China engagement in the Pacific Islands Region, predominantly through its expanding foreign aid programme,... more
In recent years, a perception has emerged among many policymakers and commentators that the deepening of the People’s Republic of China engagement in the Pacific Islands Region, predominantly through its expanding foreign aid programme, threatens to undermine the existing regional order, in which Australia is dominant. In this article, it is argued that China’s apparent ‘charm offensive’ in the Pacific is mainly driven by commercial, not political, imperatives and is far more fragmented and incoherent than is often assumed. Hence, its (real) political effects hinge, not on any Chinese strategic designs for regional domination, or even a more limited resource security agenda, but on the intent and capacity of Pacific governments to harness deepening aid, investment and trade relations with China towards their own foreign and domestic policy objectives, which include limiting Australian interference in the internal governance processes of Pacific states. This argument is demonstrated by the case of Fiji after the December 2006 military coup.
Research Interests: International Security, Australia, China, Foreign Aid, China Going Global, and 10 moreSouth Pacific Politics, Pacific Islands Forum, Australian Politics, Contemporary China, China's foreign policy, Australian foreign policy, International Aid and Development, The Rise of China, Emerging powers of Global South: Rising BRICS Countries, and China's foreign and defense policies
The special issue this article opens engages with an apparent conundrum that has often puzzled observers of East Asian politics—why, despite the region's considerable economic integration, multilateral economic governance institutions... more
The special issue this article opens engages with an apparent conundrum that has often puzzled observers of East Asian politics—why, despite the region's considerable economic integration, multilateral economic governance institutions remain largely underdeveloped. The authors argue that this ‘regionalism problématique’ has led to the neglect of prior and more important questions pertaining to how patterns of economic governance, beyond the national scale, are emerging in East Asia and why. In this special issue, the contributors shift analytic focus onto social and political struggles over the scale and instruments of economic governance in East Asia. The contributions identify and explain the emergence of a wide variety of regional modes of economic governance often neglected by the scholarship or erroneously viewed as stepping stones towards ‘deeper’ multilateralism.
Research Interests: International Relations, Southeast Asian Studies, Regulation And Governance, Global Governance, Governance, and 7 moreEast Asia, International Political Economy, East Asian Studies, Regionalism, Critical International Relations Theory, Regional Integration, Global Governance, and Global Economic Governance
With the intensification of the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF’s) worldwide campaign to promote anti-money-laundering regulation since the late 1990s, all Asian states except North Korea have signed up to its rules and have... more
With the intensification of the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF’s)
worldwide campaign to promote anti-money-laundering regulation since the late 1990s, all Asian states except North Korea have signed up to its rules and have established a regional institution—the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering—to promote and oversee the implementation of FATF’s 40 Recommendations in the region. This article analyses the FATF regime, making two key claims. First, anti-money-laundering governance in Asia reflects a broader shift to regulatory regionalism, particularly in economic matters, in that its implementation and functioning depend upon the rescaling of ostensibly domestic agencies to function within a regional governance regime. Second, although this form of regulatory regionalism is established in order to bypass the perceived constraints of national sovereignty and political will, it nevertheless inevitably becomes entangled within the socio-political conflicts that shape the exercise of state power more broadly. Consequently, understanding the outcomes of regulatory regionalism involves identifying how these conflicts shape how far and in what manner global regulations are adopted and implemented within specific territories. This argument is demonstrated by a case study of Myanmar.
worldwide campaign to promote anti-money-laundering regulation since the late 1990s, all Asian states except North Korea have signed up to its rules and have established a regional institution—the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering—to promote and oversee the implementation of FATF’s 40 Recommendations in the region. This article analyses the FATF regime, making two key claims. First, anti-money-laundering governance in Asia reflects a broader shift to regulatory regionalism, particularly in economic matters, in that its implementation and functioning depend upon the rescaling of ostensibly domestic agencies to function within a regional governance regime. Second, although this form of regulatory regionalism is established in order to bypass the perceived constraints of national sovereignty and political will, it nevertheless inevitably becomes entangled within the socio-political conflicts that shape the exercise of state power more broadly. Consequently, understanding the outcomes of regulatory regionalism involves identifying how these conflicts shape how far and in what manner global regulations are adopted and implemented within specific territories. This argument is demonstrated by a case study of Myanmar.
Research Interests: International Relations, International Relations Theory, Regulation And Governance, Critical Security Studies, East Asian Politics, and 10 moreState Theory, Regionalism, Anti-money laundering, Southeast Asian Politics, Burma Studies, Regional Integration, Myanmar, Critical Regionalism, Non-Traditional Security, and Anti money laundering and Terrorist Financing
The perception that liberal peacebuilding is in ideological decline has prompted some observers to argue that a reduction in the willingness of the world’s major governments and international organisations to engage in statebuilding... more
The perception that liberal peacebuilding is in ideological decline has
prompted some observers to argue that a reduction in the willingness of the world’s major
governments and international organisations to engage in statebuilding will follow. It is
argued that such arguments are misconceived because they locate statebuilding in the
narrow context of peace operations. The nature of, and impetus for, contemporary statebuilding
is only explicable when viewed against the backdrop of long-term historical
processes emanating from the intervening states, leading to the emergence of regulatory
forms of statehood and associated risk management rationalities. Statebuilding
interventions further facilitate state transformation within both intervened and intervening
states. The future of statebuilding is therefore the future of statehood. As the conditions
that have given rise to statebuilding remain in place, it is likely to outlast the apparent
decline of liberal peacebuilding.
prompted some observers to argue that a reduction in the willingness of the world’s major
governments and international organisations to engage in statebuilding will follow. It is
argued that such arguments are misconceived because they locate statebuilding in the
narrow context of peace operations. The nature of, and impetus for, contemporary statebuilding
is only explicable when viewed against the backdrop of long-term historical
processes emanating from the intervening states, leading to the emergence of regulatory
forms of statehood and associated risk management rationalities. Statebuilding
interventions further facilitate state transformation within both intervened and intervening
states. The future of statebuilding is therefore the future of statehood. As the conditions
that have given rise to statebuilding remain in place, it is likely to outlast the apparent
decline of liberal peacebuilding.
Research Interests: International Relations, Critical Security Studies, Sociology of Risk, State Building, International Politics, and 9 moreRisk Management, Failed States, Post-Conflict State Building, Liberal Peacebuilding, State-building in the Failed States, Peacebuilding, Statebuilding, Liberal peace, and International Statebuilding
In December 2006, Indonesian Health Minister, Siti Fadilah Supari, shocked the world when announcing her government would no longer be sharing samples of the H5N1 avian flu virus, collected from Indonesian patients, with the World... more
In December 2006, Indonesian Health Minister, Siti Fadilah Supari,
shocked the world when announcing her government would no longer be sharing
samples of the H5N1 avian flu virus, collected from Indonesian patients, with the
World Health Organization, at a time when global fears of a deadly influenza
pandemic were running high. For observers of Southeast Asian politics, the
decision reinforced the view of the region as made up of states determined to
protect their national sovereignty, at almost all costs. This established view of the
region, however, generally neglects the variable and selective manner in which
sovereignty has been invoked by Southeast Asian governments, or parts thereof,
and fails to identify the conditions shaping the deployment of sovereignty. In this
paper, it is argued that Siti’s action was designed to harness claims of sovereignty to
a domestic political struggle. It was a response to the growing fragmentation and, in
some cases, denationalisation of the governance apparatus dealing with public
health in Indonesia, along with the ‘securitisation’ of H5N1 internationally. The
examination of the virus-sharing dispute demonstrates that in Southeast Asia
sovereignty is not so much the ends of government action, but the means utilised by
government actors for advancing particular political goals.
shocked the world when announcing her government would no longer be sharing
samples of the H5N1 avian flu virus, collected from Indonesian patients, with the
World Health Organization, at a time when global fears of a deadly influenza
pandemic were running high. For observers of Southeast Asian politics, the
decision reinforced the view of the region as made up of states determined to
protect their national sovereignty, at almost all costs. This established view of the
region, however, generally neglects the variable and selective manner in which
sovereignty has been invoked by Southeast Asian governments, or parts thereof,
and fails to identify the conditions shaping the deployment of sovereignty. In this
paper, it is argued that Siti’s action was designed to harness claims of sovereignty to
a domestic political struggle. It was a response to the growing fragmentation and, in
some cases, denationalisation of the governance apparatus dealing with public
health in Indonesia, along with the ‘securitisation’ of H5N1 internationally. The
examination of the virus-sharing dispute demonstrates that in Southeast Asia
sovereignty is not so much the ends of government action, but the means utilised by
government actors for advancing particular political goals.
Research Interests: Global Governance, Sovereignty, International Security, Governance, Security Studies, and 16 moreSoutheast Asia, Indonesia, State Building, Foreign Aid, Southeast Asian Politics, Decentralisation processes and development issues, ASEAN, State-building in the Failed States, State-Building, Avian Influenza, Global Health Governance, Non-Traditional Security, International Aid and Development, State sovereignty, World Health Organization, and Global health security
The international security literature has recently observed the growing “securitization” of issues outside the traditional concern with interstate military conflict. However, this literature offers only limited explanations of this... more
The international security literature has recently observed the growing “securitization” of issues outside the traditional concern with interstate military conflict. However, this literature offers only limited explanations of this tendency and largely neglects to explain how the new security issues are actually governed in practice, despite apparent “securitization” leading to divergent outcomes across time and space. We argue that the rise of non-traditional security should be conceptualized not simply as the discursive identification of new threats but as part of a deep-seated historical transformation in the scale of state institutions and activities, notably the rise of regulatory forms of statehood and the relativization of scales of governance. The most salient feature of the politics of non-traditional security lies in key actors’ efforts to rescale the governance of particular issues from the national level to a variety of new spatial and territorial arenas and, in so doing, transform state apparatuses. The governance that actually emerges in practice can be understood as an outcome of conflicts between these actors and those resisting their rescaling attempts. The argument is illustrated with a case study of environmental security governance in Southeast Asia.
Research Interests:
In recent years, various forms of inter/transnational state-building have become in- creasingly common as a way of managing the perceived risk posed by dysfunctional governance in so-called fragile states to Western security. In Solomon... more
In recent years, various forms of inter/transnational state-building have become in- creasingly common as a way of managing the perceived risk posed by dysfunctional governance in so-called fragile states to Western security. In Solomon Islands, the Australian government has led a robust and expansive regional intervention, designed to build the capacity of the Solomon Islands government and bureaucracy to provide more effective governance. Dominant approaches to state-building link state failure with a failure of development and typically involve considerable efforts to promote economic development through the establishing of institutional structures seen to be supportive of liberal markets. Though economic activity has expanded considerably in So- lomon Islands following the initial 2003 intervention, much of this has occurred in the unsustain- able logging industry, whose expansion is reliant upon primitive accumulation. Therefore, to the extent that the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands’ (RAMSI) state-building pro- grammes have supported market-led growth, they have unwittingly acted to mitigate the risk to primitive accumulation. However, the logging boom occurring on RAMSI’s watch is likely to lead to future social and political instability, either as a result of resource-depletion or due to bottom-up forms of social conflict around the destruction of local habitats.
Research Interests: Development Studies, International Development, Critical Security Studies, Sociology of Risk, Risk, and 10 moreGlobalisation and Development, Humanitarian Intervention, Risk Management, Politics And Sociology Of Risk, Failed States, State-building in the Failed States, Primitive Accumulation, Solomon Islands, Statebuilding, and Illegal Logging
The study of regionalism is often characterised as too fragmented, plagued by disagreements over such fundamental matters as its ontological and epistemological premises, which also hinder efforts at substantive comparison of... more
The study of regionalism is often characterised as too fragmented, plagued by disagreements over such fundamental matters as its ontological and epistemological premises, which also hinder efforts at substantive comparison of regionalisation processes. In this article it is argued that to overcome these problems, what is required is a more rigorous incorporation of such studies within relevant work in state theory and political geography. The key insight herein is that regionalism should not be studied separately from the state as these are interrelated phenomena. State-making and regionalisation are both manifestations of contested political projects aimed at shaping the territorial, institutional, and/or functional scope of political rule. Furthermore, the article also distils the lines of a mechanismic methodology for comparative regionalism. Its main advantage is in overcoming the implicit benchmarking of regional development we find in other approaches. The framework's utility is then demonstrated through a comparison of regional governance in Asia and Europe.
Research Interests:
Recent work has identified new hierarchical relationships within international society. However, few scholars have provided a satisfactory account of what informs their formation, reproduction or constitutional effects for international... more
Recent work has identified new hierarchical relationships within international society. However, few scholars have provided a satisfactory account of what informs their formation, reproduction or constitutional effects for international society. We argue that underpinning the emergence of a more hierarchical international society is a new social logic of risk, which constructs illiberal and/or fragile states as potentially dangerous sites of instability and disorder that pose particular security risks for Western states. We proceed to argue that such risk-based hierarchies are transformative of both inter-state and intra- state relations, by stripping equal political agency from ‘risky’ actors within and without the state. We demonstrate these claims by drawing on examples of international state building in Southeast Asia and the Southwest Pacific.
Research Interests:
The perceived emergence in recent years of potentially cataclysmic transnational risks has been a growing concern for policymakers and practitioners, as well as an area of considerable scholarly interest. Existing sociological approaches... more
The perceived emergence in recent years of potentially cataclysmic transnational risks has been a growing concern for policymakers and practitioners, as well as an area of considerable scholarly interest. Existing sociological approaches to the study of risk, which have become influential in a range of related social scientific fields, highlight important dimensions of this phenomenon, but are unable to adequately explain why these risk depictions have emerged at this historical juncture. Nor are they capable of providing a systematic explanation for variation in the adoption of risk depictions and related modes of governance in different functional areas and geographic regions. Drawing on the insights of political economy and critical political geography, it is argued that the current preponderance of transnational risk depictions and associated modes of governance should be understood in the context of processes of state transformation, linked to the transnationalisation of finance and production, which challenge the fit between state power and national territorial borders. From this perspective, risk and risk management are mechanisms in a contested process of rescaling, in which governance functions traditionally associated with the national state are shifted to regional or even global modes of governance. Understanding the dynamics of this territorial politics is important for learning about the current and evolving nature of political rule within and beyond the state.
Research Interests: International Relations, International Relations Theory, Regulation And Governance, Risk Governance, Governance, and 9 moreCritical Security Studies, Sociology of Risk, Risk, Risk Management, Politics And Sociology Of Risk, Critical international political economy, Political Geography, Critical security studies (International Studies), and Territorial politics
Research Interests:
In the post-Cold War era, a voluminous literature has developed to define failed states, identify the causes and parameters of failure, and devise ways for dealing with the problems associated with state fragility and failure. While there... more
In the post-Cold War era, a voluminous literature has developed to define failed
states, identify the causes and parameters of failure, and devise ways for dealing
with the problems associated with state fragility and failure. While there is some
theoretical diversity within this literature — notably between neoliberal institutionalists
and neo-Weberian institutionalists — state failure is commonly defined in
terms of state capacity. Since capacity is conceived in technical and ‘objective’
terms, the political nature of projects of state construction (and reconstruction) is
masked. Whereas the existence of social and political struggles of various types is
often recognized by the failed states literature, these conflicts are abstracted from
political and social institutions. Such an analysis then extends into programmes
that attempt to build state capacity as part of projects that seek to manage social
and political conflict. Ascertaining which interests are involved and which interests
are left out in such processes is essential for any understanding of the prospects or
otherwise of conflict resolution.
states, identify the causes and parameters of failure, and devise ways for dealing
with the problems associated with state fragility and failure. While there is some
theoretical diversity within this literature — notably between neoliberal institutionalists
and neo-Weberian institutionalists — state failure is commonly defined in
terms of state capacity. Since capacity is conceived in technical and ‘objective’
terms, the political nature of projects of state construction (and reconstruction) is
masked. Whereas the existence of social and political struggles of various types is
often recognized by the failed states literature, these conflicts are abstracted from
political and social institutions. Such an analysis then extends into programmes
that attempt to build state capacity as part of projects that seek to manage social
and political conflict. Ascertaining which interests are involved and which interests
are left out in such processes is essential for any understanding of the prospects or
otherwise of conflict resolution.
Research Interests: Critical Security Studies, Peacekeeping, Failed States, Liberal Peacebuilding, Critical security studies (International Studies), and 6 moreState-building in the Failed States, Peacebuilding, Statebuilding, Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief, Stabilization and Reconstruction, and Post Conflict Issues
Research Interests: Critical Security Studies, Asia Pacific Region, Regionalism, Peacekeeping, Failed States, and 9 moreCritical security studies (International Studies), Peacebuilding, Solomon Islands, RAMSI, Australian foreign policy, State-Buidling in Failed States, Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief, Stabilization and Reconstruction, and Post Conflict Issues
This article analyses the Australian Agency for International Development’s (AusAID) approach to overseas development assistance (ODA) through an examination of AusAID’s recent White Paper. The White Paper focuses on the nexus between... more
This article analyses the Australian Agency for International Development’s
(AusAID) approach to overseas development assistance (ODA) through an examination of
AusAID’s recent White Paper. The White Paper focuses on the nexus between poverty reduction
and security in the Asia-Pacific region. We argue that the Paper’s emphasis upon good governance
as the key to poverty reduction and security is fundamentally flawed. This stems from the
particular ideological and political conditions in which the Paper materialised. In focusing on
good governance and security the Paper neglects more fundamental poverty reduction issues,
while promoting policies that are difficult to implement and, when implemented, have highly problematic
outcomes. This article examines the Australian-led intervention in Solomon Islands and
the Australian aid programme in Indonesia as examples for the shortcomings of the approach
articulated in the White Paper. We conclude by examining alternative development policies that
move beyond the neo-liberal orthodoxy endorsed by AusAID.
(AusAID) approach to overseas development assistance (ODA) through an examination of
AusAID’s recent White Paper. The White Paper focuses on the nexus between poverty reduction
and security in the Asia-Pacific region. We argue that the Paper’s emphasis upon good governance
as the key to poverty reduction and security is fundamentally flawed. This stems from the
particular ideological and political conditions in which the Paper materialised. In focusing on
good governance and security the Paper neglects more fundamental poverty reduction issues,
while promoting policies that are difficult to implement and, when implemented, have highly problematic
outcomes. This article examines the Australian-led intervention in Solomon Islands and
the Australian aid programme in Indonesia as examples for the shortcomings of the approach
articulated in the White Paper. We conclude by examining alternative development policies that
move beyond the neo-liberal orthodoxy endorsed by AusAID.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Considerable effort in recent years has gone into rebuilding fragile states. However, the debates over the effectiveness of such state-building exercises have tended to neglect that capacity building and the associated good governance... more
Considerable effort in recent years has gone into rebuilding fragile states. However, the debates over the effectiveness of such state-building exercises have tended to neglect that capacity building and the associated good governance programmes which comprise contemporary state building are essentially about transforming the state – meaning the ways in which political power is produced and reproduced. State capacity is now often presented as the missing link required for generating positive development outcomes and security. However, rather than being an objective and technical measure, capacity building constitutes a political and ideological mechanism for operationalising projects of state transnationalisation. The need to question prevailing notions of state capacity has become apparent in light of the failure of many state-building programmes. Such programmes have proven difficult to implement, and implementation has rarely achieved the expected development turnarounds or alleviation of violent conflict in those countries. In this article it is argued that, to identify the potential trajectories of such interventions, we must understand the role state building currently plays in domestic politics, and in particular, the ways in which processes of state transformation affect the development of different and often conflicting power bases within the state. This argument is examined using examples from the Australian-led Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands
Research Interests:
In this special issue of the Australian Journal of International Affairs, 'Risk, Regulation and New Modes of Regional Governance in the Asia-Pacific', it has been argued that new modes of regional governance in the Asia-Pacific region... more
In this special issue of the Australian Journal of International Affairs, 'Risk, Regulation and New Modes of Regional Governance in the Asia-Pacific', it has been argued that new modes of regional governance in the Asia-Pacific region have become embedded within the domestic practices and institutions of states at the national and/or subnational levels of governance, thereby escaping the traditional focus of the international relations literature on regionalism and regional integration. This concluding article examines the three dimensions of state transformation associated with this emergent regulatory regionalism—shifts in the location of state power, the actors exercising state power, and the normative-ideological purpose of the exercise of state power—and identifies issues for further research emanating from the collection of articles in this special issue.
Research Interests:
The Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (ramsi), an Australian-led state-building intervention, has attracted considerable attention in policy-making and scholarly circles world-wide since its July 2003 inception. ramsi was... more
The Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (ramsi), an Australian-led state-building intervention, has attracted considerable attention in policy-making and scholarly circles world-wide since its July 2003 inception. ramsi was lauded by the Development Assistant Committee of the oecd as a model for good practice to be followed by state builders elsewhere because of its perceived success in halting violent conflict and fostering a return to economic growth. The mission has had its critics too, but much of this criticism has centred on whether it was paying sufficient attention to the Melanesian social and cultural context. Such accounts fail to recognise that ramsi should not be viewed as a technocratic exercise in state building and capacity development by outsiders, but rather as a political project that seeks to transform the social and political relations within the Solomon Islands. This contribution critically examines the nature of this political project by focusing on the ways in which political power is (re)produced. By attempting to narrow the political choices available to Solomon Islanders, ramsi's programmes have ended up limiting the prospects for a sustainable political accommodation to emerge in the Solomon Islands. The deployment of coercive force in moments of acute crisis, as a way of managing the contradictions of attempts to build a 'state' through the production and reproduction of social and political power conducive to this project, reveals that rather than being a recipe for 'good' governance, ramsi remains a form of emergency rule.
Research Interests: Historical Sociology, Critical Security Studies, Risk Management, Peacekeeping, Social History, and 11 moreLiberal Peacebuilding, Peacebuilding, Solomon Islands, State-Building, Statebuilding, Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief, Patronage, Stabilization and Reconstruction, Post Conflict Issues, Bureaucratization, and Empires and Boderlands
Research Interests:
The Australian Federal Police has in recent years become an important actor in both the implementation and design of Australian-led state building interventions in Australia’s near region of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific. The... more
The Australian Federal Police has in recent years become an important
actor in both the implementation and design of Australian-led state building interventions
in Australia’s near region of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific. The
article focuses on the recent expansion of the Australian Federal Police as a way of
understanding the emergence of a new partly (and strategically) deterritorialized,
‘regional’ frontier of the Australian state. Within this new frontier, whose fluctuating
outlines the Australian Federal Police not only polices but also to a considerable
extent shapes and reshapes, as one of the primary expert agencies on identifying
and managing transnational security risks, Australian security is portrayed as contingent
on the quality of the domestic governance of neighbouring states, thereby
creating linkages between the hitherto domestic governing apparatus of the Australian
state and those of other countries. This allows for the rearticulation of the
problems affecting intervened states and societies – indeed, their very social and political
structures – in the depoliticized terms of the breakdown of ‘law and order’ and
the absence of ‘good governance’, which not only rationalizes emergency interventions
to stabilize volatile situations, but also delegitimizes and potentially criminalizes
oppositional politics. The Australian Federal Police, however, does more than
merely provide justification for intrusive state transformation projects. Its transnational
policing activities open up a field of governance within the apparatus of intervened
states that exists in separation from international and domestic law. The
constitution of such interventions ‘within’ the state leaves intact the legal distinction
between the domestic and international spheres and therefore circumvents the
difficult issue of sovereignty. As a result, police and other executive-administrative
actors obtain discretionary ordering powers, without dislodging the sovereign governments
of intervened countries.
actor in both the implementation and design of Australian-led state building interventions
in Australia’s near region of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific. The
article focuses on the recent expansion of the Australian Federal Police as a way of
understanding the emergence of a new partly (and strategically) deterritorialized,
‘regional’ frontier of the Australian state. Within this new frontier, whose fluctuating
outlines the Australian Federal Police not only polices but also to a considerable
extent shapes and reshapes, as one of the primary expert agencies on identifying
and managing transnational security risks, Australian security is portrayed as contingent
on the quality of the domestic governance of neighbouring states, thereby
creating linkages between the hitherto domestic governing apparatus of the Australian
state and those of other countries. This allows for the rearticulation of the
problems affecting intervened states and societies – indeed, their very social and political
structures – in the depoliticized terms of the breakdown of ‘law and order’ and
the absence of ‘good governance’, which not only rationalizes emergency interventions
to stabilize volatile situations, but also delegitimizes and potentially criminalizes
oppositional politics. The Australian Federal Police, however, does more than
merely provide justification for intrusive state transformation projects. Its transnational
policing activities open up a field of governance within the apparatus of intervened
states that exists in separation from international and domestic law. The
constitution of such interventions ‘within’ the state leaves intact the legal distinction
between the domestic and international spheres and therefore circumvents the
difficult issue of sovereignty. As a result, police and other executive-administrative
actors obtain discretionary ordering powers, without dislodging the sovereign governments
of intervened countries.
Research Interests: Regulation And Governance, Critical Security Studies, Policing Studies, Peacekeeping, State-building in the Failed States, and 9 morePeacebuilding, Statebuilding, Australian foreign policy, Regulatory Regionalism, Transnational Policing, Australian Federal Police, Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief, Stabilization and Reconstruction, and Post Conflict Issues
In recent years, there has been a resurgence of regionalism and regional initiatives in the Southwest Pacific, driven primarily by the Australian government. There is little doubt that the new regionalism has largely been prompted by the... more
In recent years, there has been a resurgence of regionalism and regional initiatives in the Southwest Pacific, driven primarily by the Australian government. There is little doubt that the new regionalism has largely been prompted by the Australian government's realigned security agenda following the September 11 and Bali terrorist attacks, and broader concerns about 'non-traditional' security risks. However, what is novel about this recent drive for regionalism in the Southwest Pacific is that rather than constituting a transformation of the interstate terrain, it is primarily aimed at the transformation of the state itself. The spaces where the new regionalism is found are mainly located within states. Earlier forms of regionalism, which to some extent continue to exist, typically involved intergovernmental agreements to facilitate freer trade or establish defence alliances between states. In contrast, the new regionalism constitutes various modes of multilevel governance that work to selectively dislodge the linkages between territory and political authority and/or jurisdiction, building transnational forms of regulation and surveillance into the state. This is not simply a descriptive issue but one that has considerable implications for our analysis of the social and political implications of such regional programs, as well as the kinds of coalitions emerging to support or resist these.
Research Interests:
This article examines the emergence and politics of new modes of regional governance understood as a form of regulatory regionalism. Regulatory regionalism is defined in terms of the institutional spaces of regional regulation... more
This article examines the emergence and politics of new modes of regional governance understood as a form of
regulatory regionalism. Regulatory regionalism is defined in terms of the institutional spaces of regional regulation
functioning within ostensibly national policy and political institutions. The central insight of this essay is that the
politics of this regulatory regionalism can be conceptualised as a system of territorial politics fought out and
accommodated across the institutional space of the state. The emphasis on territorial politics highlights the fact that
strategic moves within institutional space are shaped by the political context in which the regional and ‘regionalising’
actors operate. From our perspective regulatory regionalism is a distinctive method of boundary control over
overlapping political arenas, which brings into play a system of territorial politics within the state.We test this argument
through an examination of regional governance in the Asia-Pacific region which is often thought of as being
inhospitable to such governance innovation.
regulatory regionalism. Regulatory regionalism is defined in terms of the institutional spaces of regional regulation
functioning within ostensibly national policy and political institutions. The central insight of this essay is that the
politics of this regulatory regionalism can be conceptualised as a system of territorial politics fought out and
accommodated across the institutional space of the state. The emphasis on territorial politics highlights the fact that
strategic moves within institutional space are shaped by the political context in which the regional and ‘regionalising’
actors operate. From our perspective regulatory regionalism is a distinctive method of boundary control over
overlapping political arenas, which brings into play a system of territorial politics within the state.We test this argument
through an examination of regional governance in the Asia-Pacific region which is often thought of as being
inhospitable to such governance innovation.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Southeast Asia has been at the epicentre of international efforts to contain the spread of infectious diseases, such as SARS and H5N1 avian influenza. Yet, to many observers response to these infectious diseases has been perplexing. On... more
Southeast Asia has been at the epicentre of international efforts to contain the spread of infectious diseases, such as SARS and H5N1 avian influenza. Yet, to many observers response to these infectious diseases has been perplexing. On the one hand, efforts of the World Health Organization and other important governments and intergovernmental organisations to securitise infectious diseases in the region have been remarkably successful, at least to the extent that such pronouncements have been reiterated by the main regional organisation – the Association of Southeast Asian Nations – and by regional governments. On the other hand, for the most part, securitisation has not led to concerted regional action to tackle what are undoubtedly transnational problems. Nor has it necessarily led to the elevation of such issues to the top of the political agenda within regional states. From the perspective of the Copenhagen School’s securitisation approach, such discrepancy is impossible to explain, because of the School’s neglect of governance, while other perspectives that focus on the role of experts in shaping the governance of security issues also have limited purchase in the Southeast Asian context. This paper examines the management of H5N1 in Southeast Asia as a case study of the politics associated with the securitisation of non-traditional security issues. It is argued that crucial to the complex governance terrain that has emerged to manage H5N1 in Southeast Asia are struggles between dynamic coalitions of experts, transnational and domestic business and governments, which take place simultaneously at several scales.
The literature on new security concepts and practices suggests we are seeing a shift from traditional to non-traditional security. It is argued here that the emergence of this shift within security and its governance needs to be... more
The literature on new security concepts and practices suggests we are seeing a shift from traditional to non-traditional security. It is argued here that the emergence of this shift within security and its governance needs to be conceptualised not simply as the ‘securitisation’ of new threats but in terms of a deep-seated historical transformation in the scale of state institutions and activities. The salient feature of new security issues is to be found in security’s relocation from the national level to a variety of new spatial and territorial arenas. Such shifts in the scale of the institutional and discursive production of security challenge the methodological nationalism that underpins the literatures on both traditional and non-traditional security. The rescaling of security and its governance has significant implications for the trajectory of the process of state transformation. In turn, locating the shifting nature of security in the context of state transformation allows for explaining variation in the way security is governed. The argument is illustrated with a case study of environmental security governance in Southeast Asia.
Lockdowns and border closures to manage the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic have caused the greatest global economic shock since the Great Depression. Does this also signal the end of economic globalization, the most significant trend of the... more
Lockdowns and border closures to manage the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic have caused the greatest global economic shock since the Great Depression. Does this also signal the end of economic globalization, the most significant trend of the past forty years? And if so, what kind of global political economy is emerging from the wreckage? In this article, I argue that COVID-19 is mainly intensifying pre-existing trends, set in motion by the global financial crisis of 2008 and the People’s Republic of China (PRC)’s economic rise. The disruptions to global supply chains wrought by COVID-19 have combined with rising United States–PRC rivalry, growing disaffection with the distributional impacts of global value chains, and automation to catalyze the turn away from globalized production. Meanwhile, amid the economic doom and gloom, financial markets are booming, high on the central banks’ liquidity injections to which they have been addicted since the 2008 crisis. As in the decade since the 200...
Research Interests:
The volume that we introduce breaks with the prevalent tendency in International Relations (IR) scholarship to treat rising powers (such as China, Russia, India and Brazil) as unitary actors in international politics. Although a neat... more
The volume that we introduce breaks with the prevalent tendency in International Relations (IR) scholarship to treat rising powers (such as China, Russia, India and Brazil) as unitary actors in international politics. Although a neat demarcation of the domestic and international domains, on which the notion of unitary agency is premised, has always been a myth, these states’ uneven integration into the global political economy has eroded this perspective’s empirical purchase considerably. Instead, this collection advances the concept of ‘state transformation’ as a useful lens through which to examine rising power states’ foreign policymaking and implementation. State transformation refers to the pluralisation of cross-border state agency via contested and uneven processes of fragmentation, decentralisation and internationalisation of state apparatuses. The volume demonstrates the significance of state transformation processes for explaining some of these states’ most important foreign policy agendas, and outlines the implications for the wider field in IR.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Abstract The Australian Federal Police has in recent years become an important actor in both the implementation and design of Australian-led state building interventions in Australia's near region of Southeast Asia... more
Abstract The Australian Federal Police has in recent years become an important actor in both the implementation and design of Australian-led state building interventions in Australia's near region of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific. The article focuses on the recent expansion of the Australian Federal Police as a way of understanding the emergence of a new partly (and strategically) deterritorialized,'regional'frontier of the Australian state. Within this new frontier, whose fluctuating outlines the Australian Federal Police not only ...
Research Interests: Regulation And Governance, Political Science, Critical Security Studies, Policing Studies, Peacekeeping, and 13 moreState-building in the Failed States, Peacebuilding, Statebuilding, Australian foreign policy, Regulatory Regionalism, Transnational Policing, Australian Federal Police, Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief, Public Administration and Policy, Communication and media Studies, Stabilization and Reconstruction, Post Conflict Issues, and The Pacific
Abstract In recent years, various forms of inter/transnational state-building have become increasingly common as a way of managing the perceived risk posed by dysfunctional governance in so-called fragile states to Western security. In... more
Abstract In recent years, various forms of inter/transnational state-building have become increasingly common as a way of managing the perceived risk posed by dysfunctional governance in so-called fragile states to Western security. In Solomon Islands, the Australian government has led a robust and expansive regional intervention, designed to build the capacity of the Solomon Islands government and bureaucracy to provide more effective governance. Dominant approaches to state-building link state failure with a failure of ...
Research Interests: Development Studies, International Development, Critical Security Studies, Risk, Globalisation and Development, and 15 moreHumanitarian Intervention, Economic Development, Risk Management, Politics And Sociology Of Risk, Failed States, Multidisciplinary, Primitive Accumulation, Perceived Risk, Social Conflict, Logging, Illegal Logging, Fragile state, Bottom Up, Political Instability, and Contemporary Asia
A rapidly growing, self-identified scholarly subfield on "Security Governance" has recently emerged. Its signal contribution has been to explicate the expansion of security governance beyond traditional defense multilateralism... more
A rapidly growing, self-identified scholarly subfield on "Security Governance" has recently emerged. Its signal contribution has been to explicate the expansion of security governance beyond traditional defense multilateralism to include diverse actors, networked transnationally across multiple scales. However, this literature is predominantly descriptive and evaluative. Lacking an explanatory theory, it struggles to explain security governance outcomes convincingly. This article advances this body of literature by presenting an explanatory theoretical framework, which sees security governance as being produced through struggles over the appropriate scale of governance and the transformation of state apparatuses, shaped by specific state-society and political economy contexts. This framework is used to explain outcomes in the governance of money laundering and terrorist financing in the Asia-Pacific region and in Africa. Contrary to the expectations of Security Governance ...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Critical Security Studies, State Theory, Peacekeeping, Failed States, Critical security studies (International Studies), and 6 moreState-building in the Failed States, Peacebuilding, Statebuilding, Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief, Stabilization and Reconstruction, and Post Conflict Issues
With the intensification of the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF’s) worldwide campaign to promote anti-money-laundering regulation since the late 1990s, all Asian states except North Korea have signed up to its rules and have... more
With the intensification of the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF’s) worldwide campaign to promote anti-money-laundering regulation since the late 1990s, all Asian states except North Korea have signed up to its rules and have established a regional institution—the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering—to promote and oversee the implementation of FATF’s 40 Recommendations in the region. This article analyses the FATF regime, making two key claims. First, anti-money-laundering governance in Asia
reflects a broader shift to regulatory regionalism, particularly in economic matters, in that its implementation and functioning depend upon the rescaling of ostensibly domestic agencies to function within a regional governance
regime. Second, although this form of regulatory regionalism is established in order to bypass the perceived constraints of national sovereignty and political will, it nevertheless inevitably becomes entangled within the socio-political
conflicts that shape the exercise of state power more broadly. Consequently, understanding the outcomes of regulatory regionalism involves identifying how these conflicts shape how far and in what manner global regulations are adopted and implemented within specific territories. This argument is demonstrated by a case study of Myanmar.
reflects a broader shift to regulatory regionalism, particularly in economic matters, in that its implementation and functioning depend upon the rescaling of ostensibly domestic agencies to function within a regional governance
regime. Second, although this form of regulatory regionalism is established in order to bypass the perceived constraints of national sovereignty and political will, it nevertheless inevitably becomes entangled within the socio-political
conflicts that shape the exercise of state power more broadly. Consequently, understanding the outcomes of regulatory regionalism involves identifying how these conflicts shape how far and in what manner global regulations are adopted and implemented within specific territories. This argument is demonstrated by a case study of Myanmar.
Research Interests:
This paper surveys the growing application of the ‘Murdoch School’ (MS) approach to domestic politics and political economy to address issues of international scope. The origins of the MS are in comparative politics. As such, although it... more
This paper surveys the growing application of the ‘Murdoch School’ (MS) approach to domestic politics and political economy to address issues of international scope. The origins of the MS are in comparative politics. As such, although it has always had some engagement with international dynamics – e.g. the Cold War, the Asian Financial Crisis – this has mostly entailed a limited evaluation of their impact on domestic power relations. More recently, however, scholars concerned with questions emanating from International Relations (IR) and International Political Economy have begun adapting MS approaches for their purposes. A small number of studies sought to explain how domestic relations are expressed internationally, but without theorising the international level. A relatively recent research agenda has aimed to more directly explore how international dynamics are filtered through domestic relations. For some, this has entailed only limited engagement with the intervening agents, maintaining a focus on how local power relations shape outcomes. Others have focused far more explicitly on the intervening agents, and their interrelations with domestic power structures. This has led to the realisation that interventions blur the line between domestic and international politics, which underpins the ontology of both the MS and much IR theory. A consequence has been a research agenda dedicated to the study of state internationalisation and transformation, requiring additional theoretical resources, drawn mainly from state theory and political geography, to supplement the MS’s emphasis on local power relations and IR’s study of interstate relations. Thus, the MS, for the first time, directly engages, and extends, IR theory.