2. Power

We begin by evaluating whether international organizations have the power required to address transboundary problems. If multilateral institutions are going to help solve global challenges, they need capabilities—legal mandates to take on issues, institutional processes to develop policies, material resources to fund operations, and moral standings to shape solutions.

Yet whether international organizations have adequate power is a topic of debate. In times of international crisis, multilateral institutions are often described as impotent organizations without the necessary capacities to make a difference. In the wake of Russia’s war against Ukraine, for instance, many commentators bemoaned the weakness of the UN, which seemed to lack the means to solve the conflict. Similarly, during the COVID-19 pandemic, many observers lamented the powerlessness of the WHO, which appeared to miss the capabilities to deal with the crisis. However, at other times, international organizations are instead criticized for being too powerful. Consider, for example, the recurring claims that the EU has grown into a dominant superstate or that the IMF dictates the destiny of countries that are subject to its financial conditions.

This chapter evaluates the power of international organizations with a focus on four complementary forms of authority. We begin by examininglegal power, that is, the extent to which multilateral institutions have been given formal mandates to develop policy in a particular area. We then analyzeinstitutional power, that is, the degree to which these bodies have policy-making processes that enable them to exercise their mandates. In a third section, we assessmaterial power, that is, how far international organizations have concrete means to execute their tasks in terms of funds and staff. Finally, we discussideational power, that is, whether these institutions possess the expert knowledge and moral authority to influence states and other actors.

International organizations that greatly possess all four types of power resources are well equipped to address global challenges. In such cases, they have sufficient jurisdiction to develop policy in a particular area, adequate policy-making processes to adopt and implement new rules, enough financial and staff resources to execute their tasks, and the necessary policy expertise and moral authority to shape global policies and state actions. Yet, more commonly, multilateral institutions face deficits in one or several of these areas, thus reducing their ability to deliver on expectations. As we shall see in Chapter 3, the power means possessed by international organizations is one of the most important determinants of their effectiveness.

To evaluate the power of international organizations we draw on various sources of empirical evidence. Regarding all four dimensions of power, several comprehensive datasets are available and we can systematically describe and compare the capabilities of international organizations across different issue areas and over longer time periods. We supplement this overview of general patterns and trends with in-depth illustrations of the capabilities of specific multilateral institutions.

Our main findings are three-fold. First, multilateral institutions have come to enjoy increasing levels of power over time in response to demands for collective problem solving. This development was particularly prominent after the end of the Cold War, when international organizations saw a significant strengthening of their legal and institutional means of power, in particular. Second, the era of multilateral empowerment appears to have come to an end, or at least to have stalled. Since around 2010, international organizations have tended to see few additional reinforcements of their capabilities. While ideational power is still on the rise, this development likely reflects the tendency of multilateral institutions to