The Dual World Polity: Fragmentation and Integration in the Network of Intergovernmental Organizations

A growing body of research demonstrates powerful effects of international organizations on national policy, and the literature on international conflict is increasingly adopting a network perspective on interna- tional organizations, but we still know little about the network structure of the world polity itself. This is sur- prising in light of the theoretical implications of world polity theory, world systems theory, and the world civilizations approach to the structure of the world polity. Using data on a set of prominent intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), along with a comparison to the complete population of IGOs, this study examines the world polity as a network structured by symbolic and material conflict. Network analysis reveals a contradictory duality in the structure of the world polity: while states are densely interconnected through international organi- zations, these international organizations are only sparsely interconnected. Contrary to world polity theory, world system position and world civilization predict position in the world polity. These results show that, in neglecting the network structure of the world polity, previous research has underestimated the extent of struc- tural inequality in the world polity. Because embeddedness in the world polity has such powerful effects on state policies, international trade, and international conflict, the centralization and fragmentation of the world polity may have disintegrative implications for world politics. Keywords: globalization, world polity, world society, regionalization, network analysis. The global network of states and intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), which com- prises a central part of the world polity , is shifting the balance of sovereignty among national and global actors, and as such represents a central public concern and social issue (Goldman 2001; Hardt and Negri 2000; Held et al. 1999; Hirst and Thompson 1996; Sassen 1996; Slaughter 2004; Smith 2001; Smith, Solinger, and Topik 1999; Strange 1996). 1