Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Esta publicación cientíca en formato digital es continuidad de la revista impresa
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185Depósito legal pp
197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.40 N° 73
Julio
Diciembre
2022
Recibido el 20/03/2022 Aceptado el 15/05/2022
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca ción aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co “Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al año y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri ch’s
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi té Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi té Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
José Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma rín
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
“Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che”. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 40, Nº 73 (2022), 468-482
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
Public actors of international politics:
peculiarities of interaction
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4073.25
Oleksii A. Tretiak *
Oleksandr S. Tokovenko **
Mariia A. Rexha ***
Albina A. Komlichenko ****
Abstract
The objective of the article was to identify the public
determination of the activities of international political actors.
The methodology combines a systems approach, comparative
method, structural and functional analysis, institutional approach,
postmodern methodology, logical generalization method,
communicative approach, sociocultural analysis and the scenario
forecasting method, which ensure to determine the importance of
the public elements of the international community. At present,
the model of public opinion allows us to see the main trends of public self-
expression of political actors and their relationship with social groups. That
is, the attitude of the population of certain countries to this problem became
the basis of various actions of public political actors. It is concluded that
advertising is a prerequisite framework for modern international politics
both at the theoretical-conceptual level and at the level of pragmatic activity.
Kokkuvõtteks tehti kindlaks, et kaasaegse rahvusvahelise poliitika avaliku
sektori osalejad keskenduvad oma tegevuses kollegiaalsele poliitilisele
otsustusprotsessile laia ja mitmemõõtmelise arutelu alusel, esitades kõige
laiemaid vaatenurki.
Keywords: political actors; international relations; global public
policy; international non-governmental organizations;
communicative competence.
* Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor, Head of Political Science Department of Oles Honchar Dnipro
National University, Dnipro Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2536-0611
** Doctor of Philosophy Sciences, Professor, Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and International
Relations Oles Honchar Dnipro National University Dnipro, Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.
org/0000-0003-1721-2205
***
Candidate of Political Sciences, Associate Professor of International Relations Department of Oles
Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-
1536-1357
**** Postgraduate student of Political Science Department of Oles Honchar Dnipro National University,
Dnipro Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6357-7056
469
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 468-482
Actores públicos de política internacional:
peculiaridades de interacción
Resumen
El objetivo del artículo fue identicar la determinación pública de las
actividades de los actores de la política internacional. La metodología
combina un enfoque de sistemas, método comparativo, análisis estructural
y funcional, enfoque institucional, metodología posmoderna, método
de generalización lógica, enfoque comunicativo, análisis sociocultural
y el método de pronóstico de escenarios, que aseguran determinar la
importancia de los elementos públicos de la comunidad internacional.
En la actualidad, el modelo de opinión pública permite ver las principales
tendencias de autoexpresión pública de los actores políticos y su relación
con los grupos sociales. Es decir, la actitud de la población de ciertos países
ante este problema se convirtió en la base de diversas acciones de los
actores políticos públicos. Se concluye que la publicidad es un prerrequisito
marco para la política internacional moderna tanto a nivel teórico-
conceptual como de actividad pragmática. Como conclusión se estableció
que los actores publicos en la política internacional moderna concentran
sus actividades en torno a la toma de decisiones políticas colegiales sobre la
base de una discusión amplia y multidimensional con la presentación de la
más amplia gama de puntos de vista.
Palabras clave: actores politicos; relaciones internacionales; política
pública global; organizaciones internacionales no
gubernamentales; competencia comunicativa.
Introduction
Publicity in the context of international research plays the role of a
link between the denition of state and non-state actors in international
politics. Publicity in international relations is a historically primary form of
diplomatic activity, which from the beginning had a ritual-formal character.
At the present stage, public political actors in international relations are
characterized by diversity in approaches to classication and stratication
by levels of inuence, participation in decision-making processes, political
behavior, etc.
Publicity simultaneously acts as an environment of activity, normative
basis, establishment of the game rules, conceptual image, as well as
initial conditions for international political action. In the context of
globalization and the growing importance of regional and supranational
intergovernmental organisations, public political actors will establish one
470
Oleksii A. Tretiak, Oleksandr S. Tokovenko, Mariia A. Rexha y Albina A. Komlichenko
Public actors of international politics: peculiarities of interaction
of the most heuristic subjects of modern international research. Public
political actors are a crucial group of actors and institutions that implement
the main content of international politics, open to society interactions to
solve international problems.
Currently, there is a need to identify the importance of public inuence
on the international political process from the point of openness. The
institutionalization of political discussions, the evolution of transparency in
the context of information and communication revolution, the establishment
of the particularities of public political actors in modern international
relations and international politics overcome the contradiction between
formal-institutional and behavioral-activist approaches of assessing the
eectiveness of international policy.
The objective of the article is to identify the public determination of
the activities of actors in international politics. The aim of the article is to
establish criteria for demarcation between public and non-public actors in
international politics.
1. Methodology of the research
The article uses professional methods of modern political science. In
particular, the study uses methods of complex analysis. The methodology
combines a systems approach, which reveals the functioning of the global
system of public politics in an environment of global social and economic
problems.
The comparative method is aimed at reecting the qualities of the types
of public political actors in international relations, establishing the specics
of global and interstate interactions. Structural and functional analysis is
aimed at identifying the special functions of contemporary public political
interaction actors in the international arena, as well as their relationship in
achieving the goals of governments and states, in increasing activity of non-
state public political actors condition.
The institutional approach is used to analyze the importance of public
politics institutions at the global level and identify trends in the interaction
of domestic and international policy. Postmodern methodology is aimed
at reconstructing the preconditions for making public political decisions
and realizing the interests of diverse political actors in changing conditions.
The method of logical generalization provides the formation of a holistic
picture of the transformation of international public policy through the
participation of new types of public actors.
The communicative approach ensures the establishment of the public
political actors interactions` peculiarities as a communicative phenomenon.
471
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 468-482
The social sciences` methods include socio-cultural analysis and the
scenario-forecasting method. They help to determine the signicance of
public elements of international political interactions based on hypothetical
predictions of international political development events.
2. Results and discussion
The institutional environment of publicity of modern international
politics consists of many elements that shape the meaning of political
activity in international relations. Mechanisms for establishing political
alternatives during negotiations, as well as the formation of the agenda
and resources for the implementation of decisions are determined on the
basis of the correlation between the activities of decision makers and public
opinion.
The latter is one of the main dimensions of openness and compliance
of international politics with the ideas and requirements of the population.
As U. Osée, B. Bijoux, S. Didier and E. François, point out, for a long-time
public opinion was perceived as irresponsible, changing, ill-informed
and emotional, and public opinion was deemed unt to participate in the
management of public aairs and foreign policy.
It was only from the years 1950, under the inuence of some currents
in American political sociology, that public opinion has been gradually
identied and sometimes legitimized as a factor entering the process of
political decision making (Osée et al., 2019).
A complex and multi-level system of expressing a public political position
forces experts and scholars to turn to empirical practices of assessing the
state of public opinion on the basis of subjective statements of individuals.
However, the model of public opinion allows us to see the main trends of
public self-expression of political actors and their relationship with social
groups.
Global public opinion determines for public political actors a set
of acceptable alternatives for making demands in the framework of
international politics and consistently achieving optimal solutions.
Contemporary African scholars correctly argue that public opinion is called
the judgment of citizens on a topical issue (political, economic, social, etc.).
In order to know public opinion, surveys are organized, a technique that
involves interrogating a part of the population to nd out the opinion of
the whole population. But the results of a poll have no legitimacy, because
the popular will can only be expressed by the vote. The vote is, in the end,
the expression of the choice of the citizens on the great debates of the
community. The media are an essential means of expressing the diversity
472
Oleksii A. Tretiak, Oleksandr S. Tokovenko, Mariia A. Rexha y Albina A. Komlichenko
Public actors of international politics: peculiarities of interaction
of viewpoints, which allow everyone to form their opinion (Osée et al.,
2019). The mediators in the relationship between global public opinion and
global political actors are national elected institutions and the international
media.
Creating a free and impartial public that serves as an environment for
evaluating draft decisions in international politics requires considerable
eort. Therefore, to talk about the existence of independent public opinion,
which determines the activities of public international actors we can
introduced only in relation to countries with stable democracies. R. Grant,
and R. Keohane identied seven types of accountability mechanisms and
consider their applicability to states, NGOs, multilateral organizations,
multinational corporations, and transgovernmental networks. By
disaggregating the problem in this way, they searched for methods to
identify opportunities for improving protections against abuses of power at
the global level (Grant and Keohane, 2005).
At the same time, the transformation of public opinion of a certain
society into a basis for the activities of public international actors requires
a signicant evolution of the political culture of mass voters and national
elites.
The transformation of the world political agenda on the basis of global
public opinion is taking place in a more direct way than it has been in
previous periods of human development. Using the example of the global
problem of struggle against climate change, we can see that the attitude
of the population of certain countries to this problem became the basis
for various actions of public political actors. In addition to openness and
awareness of specic global issues, it is important to be able to motivate
citizens to take certain actions that will indicate their position on a particular
international issue.
Regardless of perspective, it is important to be aware of the multiplicity of
actors and processes that make up the global system. Reminding ourselves
of the complexity of international relations equips us with the ability to
recognise any overgeneralisations as they are being presented to us by the
media, by political leaders, activists, pressure groups and through our social
networks, making us more informed, nuanced and rounded in our thinking,
reasonably denoted Austrian researcher C. Gebhard (Gebhard, 2016). On
the other hand, it is important to be able to give impetus and direction to
specic public actors at the international level.
The importance of public opinion for the activities of public political
actors at the international level cannot be adequately assessed without
presenting the full range of existing political actors. Modern actors in the
international political arena are not limited in status, formal subordination
or territorial aliation. They use all means to implement their interests.. In
473
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 468-482
this regard Kadir Jun Ayhan points that the taxonomy can be categorized
into these perspectives: state-centric, neo-statist, nontraditional, society-
centric, and accommodative (Ayhan, 2019). Therefore, it is important to
establish the determination of the relationship between specic actors and
subject aspects of the global public sphere
The public sphere of international relations is expanding not only through
public communications and interactions between public broadcasters. It is
becoming a network that brings together public actors at dierent levels of
international policy-making. As Yadira Ixchel Martínez Pantoja say:
Participation of state and non-state actors engaged in shaping the political
environment of a host country to advance common interests, with dierent levels
of leadership. A model comprised of state and nonstate actors implementing
reactive, proactive and relationship-building strategies and instruments is
proposed. In Mexico, regulations for genetically modied (GM) foods have
moved from a restrictive to a liberal approach, and this change may be explained
by analysing US public diplomacy eorts to promote ideas related to GM foods”
(Yadira and Martínez, 2018: 245).
The procedural dimension of the public sphere of international relations
is of interest due to the possibility of detailing within the framework of a
descriptive approach to those political interactions in international politics
that have traditionally been outside public coverage.
Activation of non-state (non-governmental) public political actors as
decision-makers in international policy at the present stage is a process of
functional replacement of state actors in important sectors of international
cooperation. The importance of non-governmental organizations as an
empirical articulation of the increasing of the variety of public political
actors allows to ensure the sustainability of the international public sphere
through the emergence of new initiatives of self-government and lack of
vertical subordination and hierarchical links between these new public
actors.
In this regard Tanja Bruhl and Volker Rittberger claime that global
governance is equated with multilevel governance, meaning that
governance takes place not only at the national and the international level
(such as in international governance) but also at the subnational, regional,
and local levels. Whereas, in international governance, the addressees and
the makers of norms and rules are states and other intergovernmental
institutions, non-state actors (in addition to states and intergovernmental
institutions) are both the addressees and the makers of norms and rules
in global governance (Bruhl and Rittberger, 2002). Therefore, it is time to
expand the number of subjects of public discussions and develop procedural
requirements.
474
Oleksii A. Tretiak, Oleksandr S. Tokovenko, Mariia A. Rexha y Albina A. Komlichenko
Public actors of international politics: peculiarities of interaction
In contrast to group policy or interest group policy processes, the
international public sphere is conceptually more represented as a sphere
of cooperation than a sphere of competition. At the same time, the
commitment to their own needs and internal organizational requirements
makes public actors participants in the competition for public attention
and attempts to gain an advantage in the processes of resource allocation
during communication for state power between public actors.
The transformation of interest policy into the public sphere is one of
the important conceptual dimensions for understanding the direction of
evolution of modern international politics. I. Yadira and P. Martínez (2019)
point, because of their inuence on state actors, economic and technological
resources, strategies, and instruments of engagement, non-state actors
have become resourceful stakeholders of public diplomacy. Multinational
corporations, industry groups and NGOs are able to inuence policymakers
and diplomats and to engage in dialogue with governments and publics.
Moreover, non-state actors are key partners for the implementation
of public diplomacy programs. However, some of these non-state actors
promote their own ideals and pursue their own interests, especially
multinational corporations that want to advance their own agenda, relax
regulations, change policies and shape attitudes among policymakers,
whereas NGOs try to gain more supporters for their causes and donors,
strengthen regulations and change attitudes among publics (Yadira and
Martínez, 2019). Therefore the essence of the features of specic public
political actors requires a description of the specic mission of each group
of political actors at the international level.
The problem of mutual change of groups of public actors of international
relations should be considered both from the point of view of structural
functionalism, and from the point of view of autonomy of behavior of concrete
subjects. At present the functionality of state public actors is inuenced, on
the one hand, by public requirements for eciency and eectiveness, and
on the other hand - is under pressure from the technological revolution
and trends to simplify complex management problems and standartize
management situations.
As M. Barnett and K. Sikkink suppose, the study of global governance
reects these changes in the study of world politics. Whereas this was once
limited to how states with pre-existing interests create norms, rules, laws,
and institutions to regulate their relations, there have been a number of
critical additions in the recent past. First, there is a greater interest in the
social construction of what is to be governed that is, how a problem becomes
dened and gets placed on the agenda.
Moreover, there is a growing consideration of how international and
domestic structures, working through conceptions of self and logics of
475
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 468-482
appropriateness, shape governance structures (Barnett and Sikkink, 2008).
Accordingly, state political actors in the international arena are increasingly
becoming technical units that do not make strategic decisions, but only
carry out their design.
Public criticism of the activities of individual public actors, who are
members of various state units, reveals the drawbacks of the authoritarian
approach to international relations. The concealment of the goals and
objectives of specic actors at a certain stage leads to the rejection of the
world order by a certain group of public actors. In accordance with UN
System Task Team:
The post-2015 agenda must re-examine the current modalities of international
cooperation and develop the appropriate global governance institutions to ensure
transparency, accountability, representativeness and commitment. New forms of
cooperation and partnerships will need to consolidate the gains of the past and
advance appropriate approaches to meet the challenges ahead. Renewed eorts to
strengthen South-South cooperation and enhance regional arrangements deserve
attention (Analysis and overview, 2015: 4).
In this regard, the global public sphere should become a space of
responsibility and accountability of public political actors who represent
the various components of the global political structure from nation-states
to global corporations.
It is the public manifestation of non-traditional subjects of international
politics at the present stage that acquires the status of a factor of stratication
of public actors of international politics. The change in the functional
workload and role of state actors will be articulated by independent experts
and the international scientic community. As UN experts argue:
The majority of non-state actors have a valuable contribution to make in
nding a collective solution to addressing global collective action problems, such
as international security, climate change, continuous food insecurity, global health,
and eects of rapid urbanization and migration. Global poverty and inequality are
now viewed as an issue of common interest requiring joint action (Analysis and
overview, 2015: 5).
The fact that some state public political actors do not notice this or refuse
to change their role only deepens the situation of multidimensionality and
complexity of the public sphere of international politics
The problem of leading positions in the international public sphere
is considered in terms of the status and functionality of institutions of
management and representation. At the present stage governance at the
global level is a process not so much of administration as of coordinating
and securing the interests of the beneciaries of specic public policies. S.
Breslin and E. Nesadurai recognised that non-state or private actors can
be closely linked to the state, for instance, in the form of government-
476
Oleksii A. Tretiak, Oleksandr S. Tokovenko, Mariia A. Rexha y Albina A. Komlichenko
Public actors of international politics: peculiarities of interaction
linked corporations or government-created or government-sponsored
NGOs, we nonetheless nd it useful to maintain a distinction between state
and non-state actors for analytical purposes and to avoid presuming an
a priori conation of interests between state actors and non-state actors
closely allied to the state. Our interest in these schemes stems from these
more novel governing roles undertaken by non-state actors, prompting us
to ask whether we can nd similar trends in Southeast Asia (Breslin and
Nesadurai, 2018).
Thus, public political actors provide a link between the business
paradigm and the paradigm of traditional bureaucratic management.
The transformation of the international public sphere into a set of
channels of communication between state and non-state actors is a
promising project that will remove the traditional obstacles to the regulation
of competence elds. It will also make possible to invent more eective
means of communicating information and to provide a more complete
consideration of alternatives in international decision-making.
The concept of global governance makes it possible to transform public
political activity at the international level as a mean of correcting the
interdepartmental struggle and restrictions in the areas of application of
certain management tools.
S. Breslin and E. Nesadurai emphasized that transnational governance
may be found in bilateral spaces between two states, in transnational
regional or global spaces, but they can also be located within states as
instantiations of governance initiated elsewhere. In fact, a hallmark of
transnational private governance is its uidity across levels as governing
agents at one level attempt to regulate the behaviour of subject actors at
dierent sites (Breslin and Nesadurai, 2018). The international public
sphere becomes relevant in the conditions of extraterritoriality.
The ability to ensure real progress in the public expression of positions
and speaking up on certain areas of international policy is becoming an
important factor in international development. At the same time, the
subjectivity of public political broadcasters at the international level should
be related not only to state sovereignty, but also to economic factors.
Economic public actors at the present stage are not the most dynamic
and quantitatively predominant participants in international transactions.
S. Breslin and E. Nesadurai very relevantly assume, that despite the very
strong commitment to state sovereignty and non-interference in this
region, various forms of transnational governance are emerging and/or
consolidating where private actors (business rms, NGOs, foundations,
experts) engage in or contribute directly to the development of norms,
standards, rules and practices that steer the behaviour of other actors
towards some principled (or functional) end (Breslin and Nesadurai, 2018).
477
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 468-482
Hence, state-centrism loses its signicance and needs to be replaced.
The introduction of new public actors into scientic circulation requires
their testing at all levels: it is a matter of determining the meaning of their
activities, describing the structure and specics of behavior, etc. Within the
international public sphere (which also includes Internet communication) is
an important factor of self-realization for non-governmental and individual
political actors.
The process of transforming a particular citizen’s personality as a
public broadcaster of the Internet into a subject of international politics
is determined by its importance for international aairs and inuence
on international public opinion, evaluation of political events, experts’
activities, etc. These days, it is dicult to predict the quantitative growth
and importance of public actors at the international level.
However, we can talk about the formation of a special environment that
they form. Michele Betsill correctly indicates:
While realists dismiss claims about the signicance of these actors in world
politics, scholars of international environmental politics (IEP) have long recognized
their importance, particularly in processes of global governance, and have shaped
discussions in the wider discipline of international relations. This largely reects
the fact that non-state actors have had a stronger presence in the environmental
issue area than in many other areas of concern to international relations scholars,
such as security, trade, and health (Betsill, 2014: 185).
This environment makes it possible to rethink international events and
processes.
On the example of specic public political actors, we can see that the
realization of selsh interests is a large-scale feature, which will be recorded
in the activities of traditional institutions. Opportunities to represent
professional interests at the global level demonstrate the potential of public
policy actors who can provide a new level of consideration of traditional
issues.
The examples of social and labor relations and industrial democracy
show the possibility not only of articulating the interests of employees, but
also the prospects of forming an agenda to address these issues. T. Otsuka
justly points that:
The question of the UN Re-structuring is also being dealt with. However, the
true state of the UN aairs cannot be fully understood by studying its objective,
structure and function only; because various factors such as the world situation
at the time of the UN establishment, international political dynamics, economic
interests, dierent ways of handling world-wide humanitarian issues etc. deeply
aect the existing international organizations (Otsuka, 2017: 105).
478
Oleksii A. Tretiak, Oleksandr S. Tokovenko, Mariia A. Rexha y Albina A. Komlichenko
Public actors of international politics: peculiarities of interaction
Accordingly, the UN itself has been changing its approach to interaction
with state and non-state public political actors for a long time.
The transformation of public political actors into a dominant group
of international relations` factors at the present stage is reected on the
basis of empirical xation and statement by the research community. It
must be taken into account that in modern Ukraine and abroad conditions
are created for the initiative promotion of new public political actors, the
disclosure of the social signicance of their activities.
Peculiarities of behavior are studied on the basis of those methodological
principles that correspond to the paradigmatic guidelines of systems theory
and linear development. Yann Richard states that «actorness is based on a
set of criteria that we will present and interpret spatially.
Scholars of international relations have never used such an approach; too
few consider geographical space an important parameter. In the rst half of
this article, we will review international relations publications on actorness
and focus on their relevance for the EU. Then we will present a geographical
interpretation of certain criteria for actorness (opportunity, coherence or
cohesion, and eectiveness). In the second half of the article, we will apply
the geographical interpretation of actorness to an assessment of the EU’s
place in international relations in various domains by empirically testing
certain of these criteria (Richard, 2013).
At the same time, there are opportunities for substantive understanding
of the specics of public actors on the basis of spatial determination of
political events, a new distribution of economic assets, socio-psychological
background, etc.
Modernization of state actors in international relations at the present
stage is in the direction of implementing the functions of the widest possible
representation of public opinion, communication competence, scientic
approach to the organization of activities. With a signicant resource base,
state and governmental public policy actors have an advantage in reaching a
promising eld of expertise, applying new technologies, identifying leading
and secondary international issues that should be put on the international
agenda.
As Rebecca Gumbrell-McCormick pointed out, intergovernmental
organizations, while acting on behalf of nation-states, do not enjoy
analogous powers or legitimacy. The UN system is recognized by and
represents the largest number of nation-states on a permanent basis and
is granted the legitimate right to use force under very limited conditions
(Gumbrell-McCormick, 2008).
The structure of global governance since XX century is also generally
focused on modernized leadership among public actors (Cox, 1981). In such
479
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 468-482
conditions, the international public sphere must preserve the potential of
inclusiveness, dispersion, representativeness and opportunities for self-
realization of individuals and new social groups (Anderson, 2005).
Awareness of the limited potential of traditional institutionalized
public actors in international politics is embodied in such transformations
of international political relations as the hybridization of state-public
cooperation at the international level. This process consists in jointly
solving the problems of global development, taking into account regional
specics, the amount of resources and the essence of the problems that
need to be solved and articulated by the international community. The
example of social and labor relations can be used as a basis for expanding
public public-state cooperation at the international level.
Rebecca Gumbrell-McCormick rightly claims that international
industrial relations actors – trade unions, NGOs, employers and their
organizations operate primarily at the national level, but they have by now
built up a set of institutions at the international level that has remained
intact throughout most of the past century. These actors, along with those
at the national level, possess a limited common set of norms, on the basis of
the ILO core conventions, and these appear to be shared by wide sectors of
public opinion (Gumbrell-McCormick, 2008).
This is why such segment requires not only administrative and
managerial actions, but also the use of the creative potential of public
associations, environmental and social movements (Schroeder and Lovell,
2012).
Thus, the diversity of public actors in international politics acquires
the character of opportunities and challenges for the development of
the international system. Modern state political actors are forming the
fundamental structure of traditional international relations. At the same
time, the international public sphere creates space for the implementation
of alternative public political actors that can give a new impetus to solve
complex international problems and provide a creative approach to
modernizing global governance (Kelman, 1970). The use of positive
opportunities depends on the initiative of public, individual, economic
actors of international interest, which must show their public claims to
signicance.
Conclusions
Therefore, publicity is a framework precondition for modern
international politics both at the conceptual-theoretical and pragmatic-
activity level. The theoretical interpretation of the international public
480
Oleksii A. Tretiak, Oleksandr S. Tokovenko, Mariia A. Rexha y Albina A. Komlichenko
Public actors of international politics: peculiarities of interaction
sphere as an environment of free and rational ethically conditioned
interpersonal discussions establishes the dimension of public broadcasters
and argumentators of international politics.
It actualizes the communicative aspect of publicity of political actors
at the international level. It also allows us to consider public actors not
only diplomats, but also public broadcasters and commentators on social
networks and web hosting.
The sphere of public governance slightly narrows the conceptual
denition of the actors of the international political process. Researchers
focus mainly on government actors and their partners in civil society and
political parties.
Thus, public political actors in modern international politics concentrate
their activities around collegial political decision-making on the basis of
expanded and multidimensional discussion with the presentation of the
widest possible range of points of view. Global public policy is formed as a
result of the activities of public political actors of all levels not only in the
spatial but also in the temporal dimension (Skodvin and Andresen, 2003).
The ideas and demands of publicity of international political and
economic exchanges become the basis for the movements of alterglobalism,
criticism of the world order, the requirements of the formation of a policy
of balance and sustainable development. Publicity in political activity
at the international level determines the eectiveness of its activity,
makes transparent the basis for goal-setting political decisions, promotes
cooperation on a policy acceptable for everybody.
Publicity also contributes to the stratication of public actors in
international politics. This leads to a conclusion about the nature of
publicity for each type of international actors, states (governments),
non-governmental organizations, national and international level, local
communities and business associations. Each of these public actors gets a
new perspective of representation and realization of interests.
Bibliographic References
ANALYSIS AND OVERVIEW OF NEW ACTORS AND FORMATS FOR
THE GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FOR DEVELOPMENT POST. 2015.
Available online. In: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/
untaskteam_undf/thinkpieces/20_thinkpiece_analysis_newactors.pdf
/. Consultation date: 15/10/2021.
ANDERSON, Lisa. 2005. Pursuing Truth, Exercising Power: Social Science and
Public Policy in the Twenty-First Century. Columbia University Press.
New York, USA.
481
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 468-482
AYHAN, Kadir Jun. 2019. “The Boundaries of Public Diplomacy and
Nonstate Actors: A Taxonomy of Perspectives” In: International Studies
Perspectives. Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 63–83.
BARNETT, Michael; SIKKINK, Kathryn. 2008. From International Relations
to Global Society. The Oxford Handbook of Political Science.
Edited by Robert E. Goodin. Available online. In: DOI: 10.1093/
oxfordhb/9780199604456.013.0035/. Consultation date: 15/10/2021.
BETSILL, Michele 2014. “Transnational Actors in International Environmental
Politics” In: Betsill M.M., Hochstetler K., Stevis D. (eds) Advances in
International Environmental Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK.
BRESLIN, Shaun; NESADURAI, Helen E. S. 2018. “Who Governs and How?
Non-State Actors and Transnational Governance in Southeast Asia”. In:
Journal Journal of Contemporary Asia. Vol. 48. No. 2, pp. 187-203.
BRUHL, Tanja; RITTBERGER, Volker. 2002. From international to global
governance: Actors, collective decision-making, and the United Nations in
the world of the twentyrst century. Available online. In: https://archive.
unu.edu/unupress/sample-chapters/GlobalGov.pdf/ Consultation date:
15/10/2021.
COX, Robert. 1981. “Social forces, states and world orders: beyond international
relations theory” In: Millennium: Journal of International Studies.
No.10, pp. 126-55.
GEBHARD, Carmen. 2016. “One World, Many Actors: Levels of Analysis
in International Relations”. Available online. In: https://www.e-
ir.info/2016/12/28/one-world-many-actors.Consultation date:
15/10/2021.
GRANT, Ruth; KEOHANE, Robert. 2005. “Accountability and abuses of power
in world politics” In: American Political Science Review. No. 99, pp. 29-
43.
GUMBRELL-MCCORMICK, Rebecca. 2008. “International Actors and
International Regulation” In: The Sage Handbook of Industrial Relations
Sage Publications Ltd. Available online. In: http://wwwdata.unibg.it/
dati/bacheca/955/77208.pdf. Consultation date: 10/10/2021.
KELMAN, Herbert. 1970. “Leadership: The Psychology of Political Men” In:
Journal of International Aairs. Vol. 24, No. 1, pp.1-17.
OSÉE, Utangisila Bena; BIJOUX, Bijimine Tshipamba; DIDIER, Shako
Biasuba; FRANÇOIS, Elembe Oyangondo. 2019. “Individuals and
International Public Opinion as an Actor in International Relations” In:
Open Journal of Social Sciences. No.7, pp. 478-490.
482
Oleksii A. Tretiak, Oleksandr S. Tokovenko, Mariia A. Rexha y Albina A. Komlichenko
Public actors of international politics: peculiarities of interaction
OTSUKA, Takao. 2017. “The United Nations as an Actor in the International
Relations Consideration from the viewpoints of the United Nations
Industrial Development Organization” In: The bulletin of Kaichi
International University. Vol. 16, pp. 105-122.
RICHARD, Yann. 2013. “The European Union as an Actor in International
Relations a Geographical Assessment of European Actorness” In:
L’Espace géographique. Vol. 42, No.1, pp. 15-30.
SCHROEDER, Heike; LOVELL, Heather. 2012. “The Role of Non-nation-state
Actors and Side Events in the International Climate Negotiations” In:
Climate Policy. Vol. 12, No.1, pp. 23-37.
SKODVIN, Tora; ANDRESEN, Steinar. 2003. “Nonstate Inuence in
the International Whaling Commission 1970–1990” In: Global
Environmental Politics. Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 61-86.
YADIRA, Ixchel; MARTÍNEZ, Pantoja. 2018 “Conceptualizing a New Public
Diplomacy Model: ‘Intermestic’ Strategies and Instruments to Promote
Change in Mexico’s GM Food Policy” In: August the Hague Journal of
Diplomacy. Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 245-271.
www.luz.edu.ve
www.serbi.luz.edu.ve
www.produccioncienticaluz.org
Esta revista fue editada en formato digital y publicada
en julio de 2022, por el Fondo Editorial Serbiluz,
Universidad del Zulia. Maracaibo-Venezuela
Vol.40 Nº 73
