Polycentric Multilateralism: Reimagining the Roles of International Institutions in Space Governance and Beyond

Abstract

Using the case study of space governance, this paper envisions a polycentric approach to the governance of critical transnational challenges. Reimagining the roles of long-standing multilateral international institutions that suffer from decades-long gridlock, this study explores the capacity of polycentricity to provide efficient responses to the governance of the global commons and global affairs more generally. Nobel Laureate Elinor Ostrom (Economic Sciences, 2009) found strong empirical proof favoring polycentric governance of local commons, and suggested the conclusions not empirically tested for global commons, leaving, as Keohane observed, “unexploited opportunities” for investigators seeking to understand issues in global affairs. The research presented in this paper builds on the theoretical and empirical strength of the Ostrom Workshop at Indiana University, Bloomington, where it was conducted. It explores the validity of Elinor Ostrom’s design principle to space governance using the methods employed at the Social-ecological systems meta-analysis database (SESMAD) project. The paper tests the hypothesis that Ostrom’s findings can be sustained to global commons or global affairs more generally. Based on the research finding, this paper seeks to reimagine the role of existing international institutions as less of monocentric decision-making centers and more as connecting hubs that support and coordinate emerging polycentric networks. We call it ‘polycentric multilateralism’. This approach would reinvigorate the existing institutional system to better respond to contemporary and future challenges (e.g., space debris, space security, space resource exploitation). A polycentric structure would be better adapted to the reality of global politics, including of power shifts and power diffusion.