Call for Discussion Papers: Global (Dis)Order

Under this workstream, we are looking for discussion papers focused on any of the following areas.

Problematising order:

• There is a singularity bias in thinking about order rather than seeing international order as containing multiple orders. Discussion papers might analyse order as multi-layered and multi-scalar, considering dimensions of domain, place and time. This could include analysis on blind spots and dominant, silent assumptions in global order debates.
• There is also an equilibrium bias in thinking about order, in other words, seeing the process of change through a narrative of crisis and stability. Discussion papers could usefully address the roles of contestation, dynamism, turbulence, volatility and systemic change in shaping expressions and understandings of order.
• The ideas of order and disorder are often treated as stark binaries, with the former framed as good/just and the latter as bad/unjust. Discussion papers might challenge such binaries, considering a spectrum of orders and disorders and their normative implications. They might also address expressions of and linkages between formal and informal elements of global (dis)order.

Histories and stories of (dis)order:

• Understandings of (dis)order are mutable. Discussion papers could analyse how the histories and stories of (dis)order are and have been constructed in the past, as well as how these narratives have been challenged and revised.
• Historians often write of particular “ordering moments”, such as 1919, 1945 or 1990. Discussion papers might analyse such narratives, examining how such periods, including our own current moment, have been experienced from a variety of perspectives.
• Understandings of orders tend to lean to the global and regional level and to obscure local and bottom-up experiences. Discussion papers could interrogate the historical legacies and visions of order that have competed and are competing with prevalent norms and thinking today and in the past, as well as how this competition could play out in the future.

Perspectives and actions on (dis)order:

• The equilibrium and singularity biases of order can mask the range of differing perspectives on order regionally, nationally and globally. Discussion papers might analyse a range of state-level, regional, informal, non-state and non-human perspectives on global (dis)order and the implications for these for (re)ordering and disordering. They could also examine strategies of resistance to orders. as well as colonial and other historical legacies of inequality and violence.
• We also wish to explore the links between justice, equity and order. Discussion papers might interrogate different principles and narratives of justice and order used by different actors in different locations. We would also welcome discussion papers that address perceived selectivity within the definition and pursuit of international order.
• Perspectives on global order and disorder have an important intergenerational dimension. Discussion papers might focus on generational differences in perspectives on critical questions of global (dis)order, as well as the intergenerational implications of contemporary challenges and debates.

Under this workstream, we are looking for discussion papers focused on any of the following areas.

Shifts in the global economy:

• There are shifts taking place in the global economy with changes towards more fragmented trading (e.g. industrial policy, critical materials), financial (e.g. FDI flows, currencies used to invoice trade / price commodities, future of reserve currencies) and technological systems (e.g. investment controls, research security). Discussion papers would be welcomed that rigorously analyse potential stresses, shocks and disruptions in a fragmenting global economy and consider possible economic strategies and policy options to navigate economic and trade fragmentation.
• Discussion papers might also consider one or more of a series of major forward-looking economic forces (e.g. debt in developing and developed economies, migration, demography, climate change, technology, innovation systems, inequality within and between countries, institutional fragmentation) and assess how these major forces will affect global (dis)order and global economic arrangements, as well as how such scenarios can be prepared for.
• Given the long-term horizon of this Programme, discussion papers could forecast where the global economy is headed in 30 years’ time and what such an analytical lens would entail for global, regional and /or national policy.

Systemic challenges:

• A fragmenting world economy poses challenges for the international economic architecture. Discussion papers might consider the current capabilities of institutions of global economic governance and how it might be used or reformed to minimise shocks and improve economic trajectories.
• However, we would also welcome discussion papers that interrogate how potential dysfunctionality at a systemic level could exacerbate disruption and the implications of potential scenarios for the global economy.
• Global economic shifts are leading to various responses at different levels of international policymaking. Discussion papers could analyse national and regional responses and consider how strategies might be developed to cope with and mitigate the shocks that a fragmenting global economy will generate.
• The interplay and friction between major economies will be a significant factor in global economic fragmentation. Discussion papers might examine and provide options and recommendations for how major economies could manage fragmentation/disintegration and minimise potential disruption.

Under this workstream, we are looking for discussion papers focused on any of the below areas. For the context of this call, the transnational and planetary challenges are understood to be those that exist beyond traditional state government and established international institutions and that have a strong technical and/or scientific element to them. They are:

• Earth system governance, including problems posed by climate change, biodiversity loss, oceans degradation, environmental pollution, and planetary tipping points;
• Digital and other transformative technologies, including the challenges presented by artificial intelligence (AI), cyber, synthetic biology, nanotech, and other breakthroughs;
• Global health, particularly the rising threat posed by pandemic disease and the linkages among human, animal, and environmental health (“One Health”);
• Outer space governance, encompassing the dilemmas posed by accumulating orbital debris, space traffic congestion, property and sovereignty claims, and arms races.

For any discussion paper in one of the below areas, we expect applicants to focus on the role of a key actor group or groups, including non-state actors, among them private corporations, civil society organizations, philanthropies, subnational political authorities, and transnational action networks, as well as sovereign state governments and international organisations.

Understanding current dynamics:

• Transnational and planetary challenges are often considered in isolation and discussion papers might therefore explore how (dis)order is developing and being expressed across the challenges identified above. This could include consideration of the main driving forces behind these dynamics, and how transnational and planetary challenges are related to broader global political, economic, and security trends — and vice-versa – as well as whether dynamics of (dis)order within the separate challenges (e.g., climate change and health) are linked to one another.
• Given our focus on key actor groups, discussion papers could consider how the shifting dynamics between private and public authorities affect the nature of transnational and planetary challenges—and the ability to respond to them. This could include how perceptions of transnational and planetary challenges vary across regions, actors, and stakeholders, and what would it mean for these challenges to be ‘ordered’ and what ordering frictions are being generated by these challenges. For example, is some degree of ‘disorder’ to be welcomed, for instance, as a precondition for valuable innovation, as opposed to oppressive rigidity?

Envisioning future possibilities:

• Given the long-term horizon of this Programme, discussion papers might use this to imagine a more effective, inclusive, equitable, resilient, and sustainable approach to the collective governance of planetary and transnational challenges. This could explore what practical steps might be taken to overcome existing differences and help put humanity on a better path, as well as the unexpected and unintended effects that ordering institutions or activities might generate. It could also consider what should and can be done with institutions that are no longer fit for purpose and how the privileges and obligations of sovereignty could be adjusted to new realities and imperatives.
• We would welcome discussion papers that analyse the main impediments to realising future vision(s) of cooperation, and that set out the implications and scenarios were cooperation to fail. This could include what sorts of institutional innovations could promote more effective, inclusive, equitable, resilient, and sustainable governance of transnational and planetary challenges, and what multilateral, multistakeholder, multi-scalar, regional, intergenerational, international legal or other arrangements might be needed.
• We have bounded the transnational and planetary challenges in this call as those with a strong technical and/or scientific element. Discussion papers might consider how scientific and technical knowledge should contribute to current and future political and policy debates. This could include discussion of what degree scientific understanding is a public good, how can we promote equal access and benefit-sharing, as well as the responsible use of scientific breakthroughs.

Under this workstream, we are looking for discussion papers focused on any of the below areas. We are especially interested in papers that take a granular, bottom-up approach, using specific instances and case studies as an analytical lens to shed light on broader regional, systemic and global challenges, and the geopolitical implications related to violence and security, and which links bottom-up and top-down dynamics. We are concerned with what new forms and manifestations of violence and (in)security in certain places tell us about and shape regional or international systems, and vice versa.

Change in violence and security:

• We welcome discussion papers that consider what is new in the relationship between violence and security, on the one hand, and regional and global orders and disorders, on the other including consideration of current and future geopolitics. This could include analysis of militarisation, non-state actors, transnational movements in conflict spaces, and the role of global and regional powers and coalitions / alliances such as the USA, China, the EU, Russia, Iran, South, Africa, Brazil, India, NATO, BRICS+, G7, G20, the African Union.
• The changing nature and forms of violence and security provide an entry point to historical and comparative analysis, as well as to considerations of possible future scenarios. Discussion papers could examine elements of continuity and novelty in contemporary dynamics and geopolitics of violence and insecurity. Topics of interest include the challenges of conflict (inter and intra state) termination and sustainable peacebuilding, regional spillovers from violence, spillovers from decoloniality, the impact of new technologies on warfare, the future of nuclear proliferation and trends in international legal accountability for and in war.
• In line with the bottom-up approach, we welcome discussion papers from diverse local voices which bring different perceptions of violence to bear, including those of women and of (racial, ethnic, religious, sexual/gender) minorities. Discussion papers might interrogate the historical legacies of violence and insecurity and how those impact contemporary perceptions of violence and exercises of power, or consider the historical antecedents for other periods of international political competition.

Prevention and mitigation:

• The rise in intrastate and interstate violence increases the need for conflict prevention and mitigation. Discussion papers might explore successful/failed conflict prevention and mitigation interventions and approaches, focussing on lessons for future policy.
• The drivers of violence and insecurity continue to evolve. Discussion papers could consider current and future drivers, such as inequalities, climate change, water and food insecurity, environmental degradation, demography, migration and unemployment, and consider how investments and policies can be made now and in the coming years to redress oppressive or unequal forms of social ordering and develop inclusive societal resilience to mitigate against these drivers. We would also welcome discussion papers that consider the role of mis- and disinformation in violence and insecurity and how effective responses can be developed to the challenges it poses.
• We are also interested in papers that explore violence and conflicts as shocks to the global order and analyse policy options to build resilience and to effectively manage such shocks.

The security architecture:

• A significant architecture of institutions, laws and norms for the prevention and mitigation of violent conflict has been built up over many decades. However, this architecture is under increasing pressure. Discussion papers might analyse through specific bottom-up case studies the value of the existing institutional architecture and what it is (in)capable of achieving, including generating norms and solving problems of violence and insecurity. We would welcome papers that analyse the relevance and efficacy of formal multilateral organisations, regional and sub-regional organisations, formal alliances such as NATO, and informal bodies such as the G7, G20, and BRICS in the context of specific bottom-up case studies. We would also welcome papers addressing how regional or global mechanisms are succeeding or not in countering forces such as organised crime and terrorism through specific examples and case studies.
• There is an extensive international legal architecture aiming to limit and govern global violence, including the UN Charter, multiple multilateral conventions, principles of customary international law, international courts and tribunals, and emerging norms related to the reduction of gender-based violence, among other components. All of these mechanisms, however, are under strain, and subject to selective application. We would welcome discussion papers that consider why legal orders in these areas have struggled, utilising specific case studies, and what might be done to bolster, supplement, replace or transform them through the lens of specific contextual examples. This could include how forms of international legal protection could be regalvanised and regenerated.
• Finally, we would welcome discussion papers that consider the implications of fragmenting international legal orders and where peace-making is increasingly difficult and less comprehensive. In such contexts, what legal guardrails can be promoted to keep malign activity in check and to ensure accountability for perpetrators and transformative reparative justice for victims?