Lenz, Tobias

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","654"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","European Journal of International Relations"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","680"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","23"],["dc.contributor.author","Lenz, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Burilkov, Alexandr"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:44:49Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:44:49Z"],["dc.date.issued","2017"],["dc.description.abstract","What drives processes of institution building within regional international organizations? We challenge those established theories of regionalism, and of institutionalized cooperation more broadly, that treat different organizations as independent phenomena whose evolution is conditioned primarily by internal causal factors. Developing the basic premise of ‘diffusion theory’ — meaning that decision-making is interdependent across organizations — we argue that institutional pioneers, and specifically the European Union, shape regional institution-building processes in a number of discernible ways. We then hypothesize two pathways — active and passive — of European Union influence, and stipulate an endogenous capacity for institutional change as a key scope condition for their operation. Drawing on a new and original data set on the institutional design of 34 regional international organizations in the period from 1950 to 2010, the article finds that: (1) both the intensity of a regional international organization’s structured interaction with the European Union (active influence) and the European Union’s own level of delegation (passive influence) are associated with higher levels of delegation within other regional international organizations; (2) passive European Union influence exerts a larger overall substantive effect than active European Union influence does; and (3) these effects are strongest among those regional international organizations that are based on founding contracts containing open-ended commitments. These findings indicate that the creation and subsequent institutional evolution of the European Union has made a difference to the evolution of institutions in regional international organizations elsewhere, thereby suggesting that existing theories of regionalism are insufficiently able to account for processes of institution building in such contexts."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1177/1354066116674261"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/14913"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/59102"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation","info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/249543/EU//MLG"],["dc.relation.issn","1460-3713"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Politikwissenschaft"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Arbeitsbereich Globales Regieren & Komparative Regionalismusforschung"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.subject.ddc","300"],["dc.title","Institutional pioneers in world politics: Regional institution building and the influence of the European Union"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","939"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","5"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Review of International Studies"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","961"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","43"],["dc.contributor.author","Lenz, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Viola, Lora Anne"],["dc.date.accessioned","2020-12-10T15:22:18Z"],["dc.date.available","2020-12-10T15:22:18Z"],["dc.date.issued","2017"],["dc.description.abstract","Why are some institutional designs perceived as more legitimate than others, and why is the same institutional design sometimes perceived as legitimacy-enhancing in one setting and not in another? In a world in which most international organisations (IOs) do not fully embody societal values and norms, such as democratic participation and equal treatment, why do legitimacy deficits in some organisations lead to pressure for institutional change while in others they are tolerated? These are important questions given that many analysts have diagnosed a ‘legitimacy crisis’ of IOs, but we argue that existing approaches are ill equipped to answer them. We show that the existing legitimacy literature has an implicit model of institutional change – the congruence model – but that this model has difficulty accounting for important patterns of change and non-change because it lacks microfoundations. We argue that attributions of legitimacy rest on perceptions and this implies the need to investigate the cognitive bases of legitimacy. We introduce a cognitive model of legitimacy and deduce a set of testable propositions to explain the conditions under which legitimacy judgments change and, in turn, produce pressures for institutional change in IOs."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1017/S0260210517000201"],["dc.identifier.eissn","1469-9044"],["dc.identifier.issn","0260-2105"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/16595"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/73346"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-354"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation.issn","0260-2105"],["dc.relation.issn","1469-9044"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Politikwissenschaft"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Arbeitsbereich Globales Regieren & Komparative Regionalismusforschung"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"],["dc.title","Legitimacy and institutional change in international organisations: a cognitive approach"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","211"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Cooperation and Conflict"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","228"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","48"],["dc.contributor.author","Lenz, Tobias"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:40:15Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:40:15Z"],["dc.date.issued","2013"],["dc.description.abstract","The ideational impact captured by Manners’s notion of normative power Europe (NPE) appears most distinct and potentially most consequential in the realm of regionalism. However, empirical research on the topic has been hampered by the focus on EU actorness and methodological difficulties. Drawing on diffusion theory, this article develops conceptual, theoretical and methodological foundations for conceiving NPE as ideational diffusion. It argues that Europe’s ideational influence on regionalism can be fruitfully understood as the largely indirect process by which the EU experience travels to other regions through socialization and emulation. Yet, as structural conditions vary across regions, EU ideational diffusion rarely leads to similar or even comparable institutional practices and outcomes. A choice-orientated approach is proposed for examining these claims empirically, which focuses on specifying the underlying counterfactual: political decisions in regionalism would have been different in the absence of the EU. The article concludes by outlining the analytical and normative promise of the proposed recasting of Manners’s original concept."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1177/0010836713485539"],["dc.identifier.fs","600986"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/10789"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/58124"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation.issn","1460-3691"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","EU normative power and regionalism: Ideational diffusion and its limits"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","no"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","1094"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","4"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","International Studies Quarterly"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","1107"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","63"],["dc.contributor.author","Lenz, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Burilkov, Alexandr"],["dc.contributor.author","Viola, Lora Anne"],["dc.date.accessioned","2020-03-04T11:05:58Z"],["dc.date.available","2020-03-04T11:05:58Z"],["dc.date.issued","2019"],["dc.description.abstract","How and under what conditions does legitimacy affect processes of international institutional change? This article specifies and evaluates three causal mechanisms by which variation in legitimacy induces institutional change in international organizations (IOs) and argues that an important, yet hitherto neglected, source of legitimacy-based change is cognitive in nature. Using survival analysis, we evaluate these mechanisms with a novel dataset on the establishment of parliamentary institutions in thirty-six regional organizations between 1950 and 2010. We find that the empowerment of supranational secretariats, engagement with the European Union, and parliamentarization in an organization's neighborhood increase the likelihood of regional parliamentarization. This suggests that legitimacy judgments that draw on cognitive referents provide an important source of international institutional change. We illustrate the underlying cognitive emulation mechanism with a case study of parliamentarization in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1093/isq/sqz051"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/17198"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/63096"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation.issn","0020-8833"],["dc.relation.issn","1468-2478"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Politikwissenschaft"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Arbeitsbereich Globales Regieren & Komparative Regionalismusforschung"],["dc.rights","CC BY-NC 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0"],["dc.title","Legitimacy and the Cognitive Sources of International Institutional Change: The Case of Regional Parliamentarization"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","no"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]