Re-thinking Global Governance as Fuzzy: Multi-Scalar Boundaries of Responsibility in the Arctic

Abstract

ABSTRACT The article reconsiders global governance as fuzzy and situated across multiple scales rather than multi-level. It revisits Global Governance research, whose introspective focus on opening “black boxes” has marginalized “in-between” approaches. The article highlights the value of “in-between” approaches for mid-range theorizing on global normative order using the Arctic as an example. It shows how sovereignty and “projects of belonging” unfold across diverse fora in designating “responsibility.” In legal, cultural, and epistemic contexts, boundary work by national and non-state actors demarcates jurisdiction and shields claims of responsibility to prevent others from gaining rights or access to the region. Through examples, the article demonstrates that normative boundary practices do not form a homogenous project of belonging. Instead, these practices blur the lines of where “all things Arctic” are negotiated, who holds legitimate voice to influence governance, and complicate long-term decision-making.