1.
Making the most of your online reading lists [Internet]. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu6TKAXic2o
2.
Abbott KW, Snidal D. Why States Act through Formal International Organizations. The Journal of Conflict Resolution. Sage Publications, Inc.; 1998;42(1):3–32.
3.
Jupille JH, Mattli W, Snidal D. Institutional choice and global commerce [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2013. Available from: https://go.openathens.net/redirector/reading.ac.uk?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139855990
4.
Mearsheimer J. The False Promise of International Institutions. International security. 19(3):5–49.
5.
Koremenos B, Lipson C, Snidal D. The rational design of international institutions. International organization. 2001 Sep 22;55(4):761–799.
6.
Thompson A. Coercion through IOs: The Security Council and the Logic of Information Transmission. International Organization. Cambridge University Press; 2006;60(1):1–34.
7.
Voeten E. The Political Origins of the UN Security Council’s Ability to Legitimize the Use of Force. International Organization. Cambridge University Press; 2005;59(3):527–557.
8.
Ian Hurd. Legitimacy, Power, and the Symbolic Life of the UN Security Council. Global Governance. Lynne Rienner Publishers; 2002;8(1):35–51.
9.
Claude IL. Collective Legitimization as a Political Function of the United Nations. International Organization. University of Wisconsin Press; 1966;20(3):367–379.
10.
Thompson A. Channels of power: the UN Security Council and U.S. statecraft in Iraq [Internet]. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press; 2010. Available from: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/reading/detail.action?docID=3137979
11.
Michael N. Barnett and Martha Finnemore. The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations. International Organization. The MIT Press; 1999;53(4):699–732.
12.
Johnston AI. Treating International Institutions as Social Environments. International Studies Quarterly. Wiley; 2001;45(4):487–515.
13.
Finnemore M. National interests in international society [Internet]. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press; 1996. Available from: http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/reading/detail.action?docID=4799675
14.
Checkel JT. International Institutions and Socialization in Europe: Introduction and Framework. International Organization. Cambridge University Press; 2005;59(4):801–826.
15.
Lipson M. Peacekeeping: Organized Hypocrisy? European Journal of International Relations. 2007;13(1):5–34.
16.
Hawkins D, Lake DA, Nielson DL, Tierney MJ. Delegation under anarchy: states, international organizations, and principal-agent theory. Delegation and agency in international organizations [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 3–38. Available from: https://go.openathens.net/redirector/reading.ac.uk?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511491368
17.
Haftel YZ, Thompson A. The Independence of International Organizations: Concept and Applications. The Journal of Conflict Resolution. Sage Publications, Inc.; 2006;50(2):253–275.
18.
Gould ER. Delegating IMF conditionality: understanding variations in control and conformity. In: Hawkins DG, Lake DA, Nielson DL, Tierney MJ, editors. Delegation and agency in international organizations [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 281–311. Available from: https://go.openathens.net/redirector/reading.ac.uk?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511491368
19.
Vaubel R, Dreher A, Soylu U. Staff Growth in International Organizations: A Principal-Agent Problem? An Empirical Analysis. Public Choice. Springer; 2007;133(3):275–295.
20.
Pollack MA. Delegation, Agency, and Agenda Setting in the European Community. International Organization. The MIT Press; 1997;51(1):99–134.
21.
Gutner T, Thompson A. The politics of IO performance: A framework. The Review of International Organizations. 2010;5(3):227–248.
22.
Golub J. In the shadow of the vote? Decision making in the European Community. International Organization. The MIT Press; 1999;53(4):733–764.
23.
Gutner T. Evaluating the IMF’s Performance in the Global Financial Crisis [Internet]. 2015. Available from: http://wp.peio.me/wp-content/uploads/PEIO9/102_80_1443647577194_Gutner30Sept2015.pdf
24.
Binder M. Paths to intervention: What explains the UN’s selective response to humanitarian crises? Journal of peace research. 2015;52(6):712–726.
25.
Tallberg J, Sommerer T, Squatrito T, Lundgren M. The performance of international organizations: a policy output approach. Journal of European Public Policy. 2016 Aug 8;23(7):1077–1096.
26.
Buchanan A, Keohane RO. The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions. Ethics & International Affairs. 2006 Dec;20(4):405–437.
27.
Zaum D, editor. Legitimating international organizations [Internet]. First edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013. Available from: https://go.openathens.net/redirector/reading.ac.uk?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199672097.001.0001
28.
Seabrooke L. Legitimacy gaps in the world economy: explaining the sources of the IMF’s legitimacy crisis. International politics (Hague, Netherlands). 2007;44(2/3):250–268.
29.
Torres HR. Reforming the International Monetary Fund: Why its Legitimacy is at Stake. Journal of International Economic Law. 2007;10(3):443–460.
30.
Binder M, Heupel M. The Legitimacy of the UN Security Council: Evidence from Recent General Assembly Debates. International Studies Quarterly. 2015;59(2):238–250.
31.
Zürn M, Binder M, Ecker-Ehrhardt M. International authority and its politicization. International Theory [Internet]. 2015 Mar 15;4(1):69–106. Available from: https://go.openathens.net/redirector/reading.ac.uk?url=https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971912000012
32.
Morse JC, Keohane RO. Contested multilateralism. The Review of International Organizations. 2014 Dec;9(4):385–412.
33.
Rixen T, Zangl B. The politicization of international economic institutions in US public debates. The Review of International Organizations. 2013;8(3):363–387.
34.
Hooghe L, Marks G. A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus. British Journal of Political Science [Internet]. 2009;39(1):1–23. Available from: https://go.openathens.net/redirector/reading.ac.uk?url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/27568377
35.
Ecker-Ehrhardt M. Self-legitimation in the face of politicization: Why international organizations centralized public communication. The Review of International Organizations. 2017;13(4):519–546.
36.
Tallberg J, Sommerer T, Squatrito T, Jönsson C. Explaining the Transnational Design of International Organizations. International Organization. 2014;68(4):741–774.
37.
Mayer P. Civil Society Participations in International Security Organizations: The Cases of NATO and OSCE. In: Steffek J, Kissling C, Nanz P, editors. Civil society participation in European and global governance: a cure for the democratic deficit? [Internet]. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008. p. 116–139. Available from: http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/reading/detail.action?docID=370463
38.
Scholte JA, editor. Building global democracy?: civil society and accountable global governance [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011. Available from: https://go.openathens.net/redirector/reading.ac.uk?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921476
39.
Charnovitz S. Nongovernmental Organizations and International Law. The American Journal of International Law. American Society of International Law; 2006;100(2):348–372.
40.
Pierson P. Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. American Political Science Review. 2000 Jun;94(02):251–267.
41.
Pierson P. Politics in time: history, institutions, and social analysis [Internet]. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2004. Available from: http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/reading/detail.action?docID=768545
42.
Fioretos O. Historical Institutionalism in International Relations. International Organization [Internet]. Cambridge University Press; 2011;65(2):367–399. Available from: https://go.openathens.net/redirector/reading.ac.uk?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/23016816?pq-origsite=summon&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
43.
Hanrieder T. The path-dependent design of international organizations: Federalism in the World Health Organization. European Journal of International Relations. 2015;21(1):215–239.
