MARKETS, GOVERNANCE AND TRANSNATIONAL RELATIONS IN
THE ERA OF GLOBALIZATION AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR
WORLD POLITICAL RESILIENCE
Introduction
Transnational flows of people, financial resources, goods, services, culture and
information have profoundly changed the world (Ritzer & Malone, 2001; Ritzer & Dean,
2019). This phenomenon is termed globalization. Globalization is a hot topic that continues to
be discussed and debated to this day. There are many debates about the idea of globalization
itself. According to David Held et al (1999), Globalization consists of the accumulation of
links in all regions of the world and in many fields of activity. Globalization is not a single
process but involves four types of change:
First, globalization expands the scope of social, political, and economic activities across
political boundaries, regions, and continents. Second, globalization intensifies
interdependence, as flows of trade, investment, finance, migration, and culture increase.
Third, globalization speeds up the world through new transportation and communication
systems that make ideas, goods, information, capital, and people move faster. Fourth,
globalization makes distant events have a deeper impact on our lives. Even most local
developments may have enormous global consequences. The boundaries between domestic
issues and global affairs can become increasingly blurred.
Globalization describes a process of transition towards an integrated global society. In
another sense, it can be said that globalization promotes the cohesion or incorporation of the
world society as a whole. The idea of globalization refers to the process of social change,
which in turn has the possibility of influencing global political developments (Carlsnaes, et
al., 2013: 486). Based on the above explanation, the author aims to answer the questions:
How does globalization affect global political interaction? In order to answer this question, in
the following sections, the author will discuss and provide insights into the limitations and
limitations of globalization perspectives on globalization to enter into the discussion of a
global governance that is explained through several case study examples. In conducting the
overall discussion and analysis, a qualitative approach with analytical exploratory writing is
used, and will be explained after this section. The main argument in this article is that
globalization gives rise to new forms of interaction of global politics, such as transnational
relations, which cannot be separated from the framework of constructivist theoretical
perspectives. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and
civil society can influence a state in making policy decisions.
In this article, the author will use a qualitative approach conducted with analytical
exploratory writing. The qualitative approach is used because of its broad scope in social
research writing and is intended to explain, analyze, and provide a description and
understanding of the reality of dynamic social phenomena (Bryman, 2012; Neuman, 2014).
According to Cresswell (2013), a qualitative research begins with assumptions and
interpretive frameworks that inform the research questions of a study that discusses the
meaning of individuals or groups that refer to social phenomena.
The qualitative method is used in writing this article also because the discussion carried
out in this article is part of a social science study that has cross-cutting in several studies such
as international relations studies, resilience studies, political studies and also economics. In
addition, In an era where fast-changing information dominates a globalized world, traditions
and perceptions of emerging local and global contexts and realities need to be examined in
qualitative social science research.
Discussion
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
v Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
Global Trade and Markets
In the early 20th century, almost all nation states around the world began to open their
borders in an effort to become more globally competitive in the international market. This
phenomenon was the starting point for the emergence of multinational corporations. To date,
multinational corporations have grown and expanded in tremendous numbers. This led to a
free trade market economy in the twentieth century that spread to extraordinary proportions
around the world. Today, almost all countries around the world trade on an international
scale. Trade is a key mechanism for the movement of goods and the improvement of services,
worldwide, and is central to technology transfer. It can be said that today trade is an
inseparable part of the national production structure in all modern countries.
Trade can connect distant markets. A network of trading relationships operates to create
the conditions for the functioning of the global market. As institutionalized regional trade
rules evolve, they tend to reinforce the trend towards free trade. David Held (1999), argues
that Globalization of trade involves more than just the exchange of goods and services
between separate economies as it implies the emergence of a worldwide market for the goods
and services being traded.
According to Held (1999) global markets exist because there is a significant degree of
exchange of goods or services organized at the inter-regional level, where when trade barriers,
either in the form of transportation costs or protection decrease, and foreign producers from
one region can compete with domestic producers in another country.
Held proposed an indicator of globalization by using the extent of world trade to refer to
the regular flow of intercontinental trade. Data for trade between geographic blocks provides
a means to assess whether there is a tendency to view it as regionalization or globalization.
Regionalization refers to the evolution of markets for traded goods involving geographically
close economies, and the degree of intensity of such trade is much greater than for trade with
other countries.
Globalization of the world economy has affected and will continue to affect almost
every aspect of domestic and international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive
international financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations tie national
economies more closely together, thus making globalization an important and controversial
feature of the world economy. Although some prominent economists believe that unregulated
international finance poses a serious threat to the global economy, the globalization of
international financial flows is a major and controversial feature of the world economy world
economy, almost all economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization
promises an increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation; they argue that
there can be barriers to prevent the free flow of goods, services, and capital.
The development of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial
markets and the growth of international banks and other financial institutions have created a
global financial system. The current worldwide trade in currencies and government bonds
means that exchange rates and interest rates are two important variables in the formulation of
national macroeconomic policies that are determined in the context of global financial
markets. According to David Held (1999:190) global finance includes credit flows such as
loans, bonds, investments, and currency exchange rates.
Cross-border financial flows have been occurring for centuries. There are many ways to
measure the extensity and intensity of international finance and it is useful here to distinguish
between financial openness, financial involvement and financial integration. Held (1999:189)
states that the openness of national financial markets refers to the degree of legal restrictions
on international financial transactions, the degree of financial involvement refers to the degree
of involvement of a country's national finances in global financial activity, and financial
integration is used in the economic sense of the extent to which prices of, and returns on,
assets are equalized between different national financial markets.
By examining the geographical reach of the world's financial markets, we can assess the
breadth of international finance. Explore The magnitude of global financial flows provides
insight into historical patterns of the intensity of financial globalization. Financial
globalization can have a profound impact on the conduct of national economic policy but that
impact may vary over time, as the impact of global financial flows is also significantly
influenced by national economic conditions (1999:190).
Critics of globalization, on the other hand, foresee a very different world; they fear that
increased trade, foreign investment, and financial flows produce powerful negative
consequences for society. Many of them envisioned the triumph of a ruthless capitalist system
characterized by exploitation, domination, and growing inequalities within and between
domestic societies. Through the books they wrote they voiced and offered a portrait of a bleak
world of cultural homogenization, rampant commercialism, and even the destruction of
Western civilization. Public opinion polls show that at least half of Americans believe that
globalization lowers domestic wages, causes unemployment, and has other harmful effects.
Europeans are even more skeptical of world economic integration than people are.
Various Perspectives on Globalization
Many statements by proponents and opponents of globalization are inaccurate and
exaggerated. While economic globalization is indeed very important, the world is not nearly
as fully integrated as many believe, nor is globalization irreversible or inevitable.
Globalization rests on a political foundation that can fail if major powers fail to strengthen
their economic and political ties. Moreover, the integration of the world economy has been
very uneven, limited to certain sectors of the economy, and not as widespread as many
believe. As noted by some authors, the post-war international economy has only restored
globalization to roughly the same level it was in 1913. The Economist points out that France
and the UK are no more open to trade in 1999 than they were in 1913, and neither is Japan.
On the other side of the world, even the increasingly integrated American and Canadian
markets remain significantly constrained by the border between the two countries. While
technology is leading to an inevitable increase in globalization, a country's national policies
play a role in the globalization process.
Paul Krugman notes that the world economy in the late 1990s was less integrated in a
number of important respects than it had been before the First World War. Under the gold
standard and the influential doctrine of laissez-faire, for example, the decade leading up to
World War I was an era when markets truly prevailed and governments had little power over
economic affairs. In terms of national and international economic relations, trade, investment
and financial flows in the late 1800s were greater than those in the late 1900s. During the
twentieth century there was a huge increase in the speed and magnitude of financial flows
across national boundaries; however, the economic impact of globalization was largely
confined to the Triad (United States, Europe West, and Japan) and the emerging markets of
East Asia. And although the industrialized economies have become much more open, imports
and inward investment remain small compared to the size of their respective domestic
economies. Economic integration among the Triad countries in goods, services and financial
flows is more limited than many would suggest. Domestic boundaries remain an important
barrier to international economic flows.
At the opening of the twenty-first century, Gilpin (2000) states that many important
aspects of globalization are not new developments, and it must be recognized that most of the
world's population is not involved in globalization. Gilpin (2000) also states that, despite its
importance, economic globalization is limited and is unlikely to have all the negative or
positive effects that it entails.
In advanced industrial economies, three distinct perspectives have emerged in the
growing debate about globalization and its consequences. Economists, most business and
political leaders, and other proponents of globalization share a "free market" perspective that
opposes strict regulation of the world economy. On the other hand, many individuals and
interest groups such as labor unions, businesses facing import competition, and nationalist
economists argue from a "populist" perspective. They strongly oppose globalization by
proposing restrictions on free trade and the activities of investors and multinational
corporations. There are streams that overlap with the populist perspective, but more of a
leftist politics, namely the "communitarians" - environmentalists, human rights advocates and
others who believe that globalization is creating an environmentally polluted, hierarchical and
exploitative world order. Groups with a communitarian perspective call for a world order that
is egalitarian and environmentally friendly.
In the context of globalization, changes in the relationship between states, international
organizations and non-state actors have called into question the usual theories of international
relations. These changes are partly due to the increasing interaction between states by people
who do not represent states. Interactions that cross national boundaries when at least one actor
is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or intergovernmental
organization are referred to as transnational relations. In the current era transnational relations
are interactions that permeate world politics in almost every issue area. Thousands of
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs)-from International Amnesty and
Greenpeace to the International Political Science Association-are involved in transnational
relations.- lobbying international regimes and interstate organizations to achieve their goals in
the global political constellation.
In the economic context, Robert Gilpin (2000) argues that the globalization of the world
economy has affected and will continue to affect almost every aspect of domestic and
international affairs. The growth of international trade, massive international financial flows,
and the activities of multinational corporations are tying up the world economy. National
economies are more closely linked to each other, making globalization an important and
controversial feature of the world economy. Although some leading economists believe that
unregulated international finance poses a serious threat to the world economy, almost all
economists and other free-market advocates believe that globalization promises an
increasingly prosperous world and international cooperation.
Dynamics Toward Global Governance
The term global governance in an increasingly globalized world emerged as an
international relations issue in the early 1990s. Academics and policymakers often discuss
global governance but do so with a passive voice. They treat governance as a structure or
process. Sugiono (2004) argues that as an idea that originated from the phenomenon of
globalization, global governance can be interpreted as an economistic concept. Global
governance can also be understood as "the sum of organizations, policy instruments,
financing mechanisms, rules, procedures and norms" or "collective efforts to identify,
understand and address worldwide problems that are beyond the capacity of states". In today's
era of globalization, more broadly speaking, the global policy arena is filled with a diverse
array of actors - not just states, but also international organizations, corporations, professional
associations, advocacy groups, and the like - that seek to "govern" activity in their issue areas
of concern. These actors do not merely occupy global structures. They are active agents who
want to new structures and rules (or different rules) to solve problems, change outcomes, and
transform international life (Finnemore et al, 2010:1). According to Held and McGrew (2002)
the landscape of the international system is, in fact, populated by a growing number of
organizations, offices and institutions engaged in what is called global governance.
Finkelstein defines global governance as governing; doing in the international sphere
what governments do in the national sphere (Finkelstein, 1995). In this case, global
governance has a broader meaning than Government, where state actors become secondary
and global actors arise to resolve International Government or Non-International Government
issues. so it can be interpreted that global governance refers to the way in which global affairs
are managed. Since there is no global government, global governance involves various actors
including states, as well as regional and international organizations. Thus global governance
discusses the UN, WTO, IMF, ILO, BIS, G20, Geneva conventions and other international
conventions, the European Union, and others. Sugiono (2005) states that the development of
contemporary global governance has implications for the state as the main actor. States are no
longer the only main actors in the context of global governance.
Changes in the structure of the international world
Globalization, or the shift in the spatial extent of the action of social movements and
organizations towards inter-spatial scales regional, intercontinental, or global, has blurred the
correspondence between social movement action and the territory enclosed by national
borders (Held and McGrew in Finnemore et al, 2010:4). Globalization is commonly
associated with the global economy, but the understanding of globalization has gone beyond
economic issues. Environmental issues, especially issues such as global warming, are a
concern for human sustainability in the world. Prasad and Prasad define globalization as a
multidimensional phenomenon that includes not only economic components but also cultural,
ideological, political and other similar aspects (Prasad and Prasad, 2006). According to
Finnemore (2010) the notion of human rights has also become a platform for social relations
between all human beings around the world and has served as an impetus for military
interventions. Even security, today, has become identified with humanity, as analysts,
activists and states develop and implement conceptions of "human security" (Paris in
Finnemore et al, 2010:6). As a result, globalization is discussed not only from an economic
perspective, but also other perspectives such as social science, politics and international
relations. Globalization has therefore been the subject of endless debates in various
disciplines.
The classic state-centered view of the international system does not capture the changes
described above. While functionalist assumptions only provide limited understanding to
understand the dynamics of actual global governance or governance that occurs in the world
today. The author argues that the above shows that neither the "statist" or "classical" nor the
"functional" approach is adequate to understand global governance today.
The term "global governance" describes the range of policy-making activities that result
in coordinated action in the absence of a single world government (Finnemore et al, 2010:14).
Global governance does not form naturally or smoothly into an equilibrium. Governance is
the result of political processes and is shaped by power, access, mobilization, leadership and
other political variables. These political variables are important for determining what is
noticed as a global problem as well as which solutions are chosen to address it (Finnemore et
al, 2010:7) Finnemore et al (2010:31) use a conceptual framework based on the relationship
of governing and managed authorities and their relationship with each other. By
systematically investigating the authority of these actors, a better understanding of where
these stewards come from, how and why they can influence policy, and how they can fail or
be challenged is gained. By looking at the relationships between governors, a complex web of
(inter)dependencies is exposed, not only between the governors and the governed, but also
between the governors themselves. Therefore, the authors argue that, to understand global
governance, it is necessary to look at the transformation of the state domestically and the
changing international structures where both can be the dominant modes in which governance
is practiced global built today.
Since the end of the Cold War era, international relations scholars have questioned the
approaches commonly used in the study of international relations. This is due to the
increasing interaction between states by people or institutions that do not represent states in
international interactions, especially in the context of globalization as it is today. The
interaction was defined by Thomas Risse-Kappen in 1995 in his book Bringing Transnational
Relations Back in: Non-state Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions as
transnational relations. Transnational relations are interactions that cross national boundaries
when at least one actor is a non-state agent, not operating on behalf of a government or
intergovernmental organization (Risse-Kappen, 1995:3).
Transnational Relationships
To understand and be able to see more about global governance, according to the
author, it is necessary to review the literature that explains transnational relations. Risse-
Kappen (1995:6) argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political system's
access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998:4) state that, even
liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state action
internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-state
actors are consequential.
Peter J. Katzenstein and Yutaka Tsujinaka (in Risse Kappen, 1995) take America's
transnational relations to be The United States and Japan in the context of trade and security
issues as a case study, and explains how transnational relations are important in contemporary
world politics. Domestic structures create the impetus that shapes the political behavior of
governmental and non-governmental actors in the international world (1995:109).
Multinational companies (MNCs) are important transnational agents in the
contemporary global political economy (Clark and Chan in Risse Kappen, 1995:112). Cal
Clark and Steve Chan conclude that a country's political culture and state-society relations
have a determining influence on the extent to which MNCs can have access. Both political
culture and state-society relations are important aspects of domestic structure (1995:144).
Clark and Chan's presentation supports Risse-Kappen's hypothesis on the relationship
between state power and transnational access. In general, the framework presented by Crark
and Chan explains that multinationals have more limited access in state-dominated systems.
This view applies to the comparison of India and South Korea, on the one hand, with Hong
Kong and the Philippines, on the other. However, if powerful states are willing to allow
access on a voluntary basis, Risse-Kappen predicts that the impact of transnational actors can
be substantial. This context, illustrates the situation in Singapore where MNCs play a much
larger role than elsewhere in Asia (1995:145).
Furthermore, Thomas Princen (in Risse-Kappen, 1995) discusses the important role and
process of Environmental Transnational Coalitions (ETCs) in domestic and international
conservation and environmental advocacy. A growing consensus is emerging within the
international conservation community that recognizes that solutions to global environmental
problems such as species loss must be tailored to conditions at the local ecosystem and
community level and linked to local and global economic management (1995:252).
In Indonesia today, non-state actors are also active in encouraging other actors to take a
policy. Bestari (2018) in her research has discussed the advocacy of domestic workers' rights
as formal workers in Indonesia. Advocacy by Indonesian non-governmental organizations on
the rights of domestic workers entered a transnational dimension when Human Rights Watch
researchers conducted ethnographic research on the conditions of domestic workers in
Indonesia. In line with Human Rights Watch, a number of international non-governmental
organizations began to voice criticism of Indonesian legal practices to the Indonesian
government (Bestari, 2018). In addition, Virgyet al (2020) discusses Greenpeace Indonesia
which pressures Wilmar International as the perpetrator of deforestation in Indonesia.
Greenpeace Indonesia succeeded in encouraging Wilmar International to change its behavior
and commit to implementing the No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation (NDPE) policy,
through the formation of a transnational advocacy network that made it have enough power in
an effort to pressure Wilmar International. In the study, we can see the interaction between
actors non-state organizations with each other and with regional organizations on an
international scale such as the European Union. Greenpeace Indonesia in its interactions uses
four strategies from Keck and Sikkink (1998), namely: Information Politics, Symbolic
Politics, Leverage Politics, Accountability Politics as a form of political move with other
international actors.
This definition shows the close relationship between transnationalism and globalization,
which basically also refers to the rapid expansion of cross-border transactions and networks in
all areas of life. At the same time, the concept suggests that the boundaries between nation-
states have become blurred. According to Winanti (2002), the sovereignty of a nation-state
can no longer be defined solely on the basis of its control over certain territorial boundaries,
but needs to be viewed in terms that are more functional to complex transnational networks.
Transnational communities are one aspect of transnationalism. Transnational
communities are groups whose identity does not prioritize attachment to a particular region.
The notion of transnational communities emphasizes human agency, viewing such groups as
the result of cross-border activities that connect individuals, families and local groups.
Together with globalization, the sharp rise of transnational communities weakens the
means to control regionally constructed differences. Transnational communities represent a
powerful challenge to traditional ideas of the nation-state (Castles, 2000). The idea of a
person having only one nation-state or at most migrating from one country to another (either
temporarily or permanently) has been displaced by increased mobility; the growth of
temporary migration with recurring cycles; and cheap and easy travel. In the context of
globalization, transnationalism can extend previous face-to-face communities based on
kinship, neighborhood or workplace to remote virtual communities, through communication
over great distances.
Transnational communities do not only refer to migrants, as various cross-border groups
with common interests in culture, sports, politics or other areas also consider themselves to be
communities. However, in practical terms, groups that emerge from migration are the most
significant type, and most studies of transnational communities refer to them. This can clearly
be seen migrants have always lived in more than one neighborhood, maintaining relationships
with real or imaginary communities in the country of origin. What has shifted is the context of
globalization and economic uncertainty that facilitates the development of social relations that
transcend national borders. Increased mobility and developments in communication have
contributed to such relationships, and have created transnational spaces of economic, cultural
and political participation.
In studies of transnational relations, there are many discussions that do not only talk
about multinational companies. Held (1991) states that international politics today is shaped
by a variety of actors as states interact in world politics with individuals, civil society,
international organizations and international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs).
Interactions between these entities are often structured in the form of networks (Castells,
1996; Keck and Sikkink, 1998). Transnational relations in its study also discusses the term
transnational advocacy network. The term transnational advocacy network according to Ani
Soetjipto in her book "Transnationalism: The Role of Non-State Actors in International
Relations" (2018: 27) involves organizing that is cross-national and involves organized and
unorganized mass forces in fighting for various issues and has various ideologies and
strategies of struggle. Transnational advocacy networks refer to self-advocacy groups that
work voluntarily and across national borders to achieve the interests they perceive to be
important represent broader public interests (2018: 36). Meanwhile, networks according to
Keck and Sikkink are various forms of organization that are voluntary, reciprocal, and have
horizontal patterns in exchange and communication (Keck & Sikking, 1998: 8).
A transnational perspective in research means shifting the unit of analysis from
individual countries to global systems. The object of sociological inquiry, and its fundamental
contribution, in transnational studies is the study of "transnational social structures". Such a
shift means placing non-state forms of governance in the field of international relations that
are existing and emerging. Nye and Keohane (1971) argue that transnationalism affects
diverse areas of international governance including interstate politics, values, US foreign
policy, and international organizations. Non-state sources of governance can develop from
existing and emerging social movements and civil society organizations.
Transnational perspectives provide a deeper understanding into a number of globally
contingent social, economic, and political processes including social movements, governance
and politics, terrorism, political violence, and organized crime among others. One of the most
successful areas of study is transnational migration. Research in this area addresses issues
such as salient interactions with receiving society institutions, state migration policies, the
role of discrimination in limiting access to receiving society civil society institutions, access
to computers in home and receiving societies, and costs and other hardships affecting migrant
groups (Kivisto, 2001). A growing research agenda concerns the emergence of civil society,
state and non-state organizations, developed in response to transnational immigration issues.
Identities continue to be challenged by fluid legal and social characterizations of migrants
created and tailored by local, national and international organizations.
To explain the phenomenon of transnationalism in international relations, it is necessary
to see that constructivism has an influence in international relations. Theories about norms in
international relations are often are defined as standards of appropriate behavior for actors.
Norms can have an important and autonomous role in being able to argue for an international
political system, whatever that system may be. (2018:31). The same shared belief in a norm,
value, principle or idea binds transnational networks in their advocacy to influence
international politics (Keck & Sikking in Soetjipto, 2018: 37).
Relationship Effects and Success
Transnational
According to Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995), transnational relations do not appear to
have the same effect in every case. Keohane and Nye (1972) in their article, Transnational
Relations and World Politics: An Introduction offers 5 effects that transnational interactions
or relationships can bring: 1) Transnational interactions can encourage changes in attitudes
that may have consequences for a country's policies, 2) Promotion of international pluralism
by the connection of a domestic interest group in transnational structures, 3) Increased
constraints on states through the emergence of "dependence" and "interdependence", 4)
Increasing the ability of certain governments to influence others, Keohane and Nye state that
governments often try to manipulate transnational interactions in an effort to achieve political
results, such as by using tourists as spies or planting sympathetic ethnic or religious groups in
other countries. These, according to Keohane and Nye, are examples of "informal
penetration", and 5) The emergence of autonomous actors with private foreign policies and
may not be in line with state policy.
Risse-Kappen (1995) builds on and integrates two theoretical approaches developed
independently of each other and rarely brought together in international relations research to
understand transnational relations, namely the concepts of domestic structures and
international institutions. Both structures are structures that deal with governance structures.
Risse-Kappen (1995:6) argues that the impact of transnational actors and coalitions on state
policies is likely to vary according to differences in domestic structure, i.e., the normative and
organizational arrangements that constitute the "state," the structure of society, and link the
two in government and the degree of international institutionalization, i.e., the extent to which
specific issues in an area are governed by bilateral treaties, multilateral regimes, and/or
international organizations.
Risse-Kappen argues that domestic structures have a major impact on a political
system's access to and influence from outside the system. Keck and Sikking (1998) add that,
even liberal theories of international relations recognize that domestic interests shape state
action internationally, and that states are embedded in an interdependent world in which non-
state actors are consequential. Risse-Kappen (1995:21) takes into account three pillar aspects
of domestic structure. The first aspect consists of the centralized or fragmented nature of the
state's political institutions. The second aspect is the structure of society, in the sense that
strong societies are characterized by fewer social divisions, are more sensitive to the needs of
the society, and are more likely to be able to respond to the needs of the society to politics and
are more easily mobilized. The third aspect is the policy network between the state and
society, such as political parties as powerful intermediary institutions, whose presence can
facilitate change. To what extent do intermediary organizations such as political parties
aggregate people's demands and channel them into the political process? Does the political
culture emphasize consensual decision-making or rather distributive negotiation and
disagreement within the policy network? Consensual policies will then be characterized by
strong intermediary organizations operating in a compromise-oriented decision-making
culture, while polarized governments will emphasize distributive bargaining, which often
leads to blockades in decision-making (1995:22). International institutions are also key to the
policy impact of transnational actors; they not only facilitate the formation of
transgovernmental coalitions but transnational actors working in international institutions gain
easier access to member state governments. (1995 :31)
Conclusion
Globalization is a transition process towards an integrated global society. In another
sense, it can be said that globalization encourages the cohesion or incorporation of a world
society as a whole. Globalization can be seen through various perspectives. In the context of
markets, globalization is characterized by the emergence of a market integration that shows
the significance of the exchange of goods or services organized at the intermediate level and
the lowering of trade barriers, whether in the form of transportation costs or other protections,
and foreign producers from one region can compete with domestic producers in other
countries.
Globalization is commonly associated with the global economy, but the understanding
of globalization has gone beyond economic issues. Globalization also involves issues such as
the environment, global warming, and even human rights, which involve not only states as
actors, but also non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Interactions involving at least one actor that is not a non-state agent, not operating on behalf
of a government or intergovernmental organization are referred to as transnational relations.
The author sees that in viewing the effects of transnational relations or interactions, Keohane
and Nye still place the government or state as the most important element even though it can
encourage changes to a country's policies. To analyze the success factors of transnational
relations, Risse-Kappen also uses the government as an instrument. Risse-Kappen builds a
theoretical approach through domestic structures and international institutions to see the
success factors of transnational relations that deal independently of each other with the
structure of the government system. Through these two theoretical approaches, Risse-Kappen
offers a picture that under similar international conditions, differences in domestic structures
determine variations in the policy impact of transnational actors.
In addition, the author sees that globalization has influenced and has shaped global
political interactions a new one. It can be seen that non-state actors such as non-governmental
organizations and civil society can influence a country in making policy decisions.
