Researcher
Cristiana Maglia
Contactinfo and files
Summary
Cristiana Maglia is a senior research fellow at NUPI. She is currently the post-doctoral researcher of the project Ad hoc crisis response and international organizations (ADHOCISM), funded by the Research Council of Norway. At NUPI, she also worked in the LORAX and Market for Anarchy projects.
She holds a PhD in Political Science (2020) from the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Brazil. Her areas of expertise include global governance, international organizations, comparative politics and Brazilian political institutions. Her work has been published in journals such as International Affairs, Global Networks and Global Studies Quarterly.
Expertise
Education
2020 PhD, Political Science, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
2018-2019 Visiting Doctoral Student, Latin American Centre, University of Oxford
2016 Master's degree in Political Science, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
2014 Bachelor's degree in International Relations, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Work Experience
2020- Senior Research Fellow, NUPI
2016-2019 Teaching Assistant, Department of Political Science, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
2014-2016 Research Associate - Centre for International Studies on Government (CEGOV), Brazil
Aktivitet
Filter
Clear all filtersEmerging powers, the G20, and reform of multilateral institutions
Emerging powers are becoming increasingly important in the global economy, are being courted for support by both the US and China and make up a powerful bloc within informal governance institutions such as the G20. They also voice increasingly vocal calls for reform of the UN, the World Bank and the IMF. This report analyzes how Brazil, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and South Africa see key reform issues and how they prioritize among different foreign policy objectives in the context of the agenda of the G20.
G20 and emerging powers: What does the development mean for Norway?
Emerging powers are becoming increasingly important in international politics. What does this mean for organizations like the G20? And how can and should Norway respond to this development? NUPI is pleased to invite you to an open event with the participation of Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide at Sentralen in Oslo.
Prestige and punishment: Status symbols and the danger of white elephants
This article identifies and unpacks the intrinsic potential for backlash in the pursuit of status symbols. While status loss has been associated with domestic pushback and reduced legitimacy for ruling governments, the literature on status is yet to examine how status-seeking can backfire even when a state can successfully claim to have acquired a status symbol. We contend that status backlashes are an inherent risk of status-seeking due to the multivocality of costly status symbols. Our heuristic framework for studying status backlashes proposes examining modes of critique that construe status symbols as irrational or unjustified costly endeavours, undermining their legitimating capacity and potentially even transforming them into a marker of stigma. Empirically, we identify three modes of critique present in reactions to Brazil’s hosting of the World Cup in 2014 and the Olympics in 2016. There, despite recognizing the symbolic value of hosting these mega-events, Brazilian audiences also criticized the government for the opportunity costs, vested interests and subservience that it entailed. Undertaking two shadow case studies – on the backlash against the United Kingdom’s renewal of its Trident nuclear weapons system and Norway’s engagement in military interventions between 1999 and 2012 – we document how these modes of critique associated with status symbols can travel across contexts.
China and Evolving Multilateral Craftmanship in the Age of Digitalization (CHIMULTI)
Which international organizations develop responsibilities for digital technology (digitech) governance and how do major powers work to craft influence in these organizations? This is the overarching ...
Ecosystems and Ordering: Exploring the Extent and Diversity of Ecosystem Governance
This article argues that, to grasp how global ordering will be impacted by planetary-level changes, we need to systematically attend to the question of the extent to which and how ecosystems are being governed. Our inquiry builds upon—but extends beyond—the environmental governance measures that have garnered the most scholarly attention so far. The dataset departs from the current literature on regional environmental governance by taking ecosystems themselves as the unit of analysis and then exploring whether and how they are governed, rather than taking a starting point in environmental institutions and treaties. The ecosystems researched—large-scale marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems—have been previously identified by a globe-spanning, natural science inquiry. Our findings highlight the uneven extent of ecosystem governance—both the general geographic extent and certain “types” of ecosystems seemingly lending themselves more easily to ecosystem-based cooperation. Furthermore, our data highlight that there is a wider range of governance practices anchored in ecosystems than the typical focus on environmental institutions reveals. Of particular significance is the tendency by political actors to establish multi-issue governance anchored in the ecosystems themselves and covering several different policy fields. We argue that, in light of scholarship on ecosystem-anchored cooperation and given the substantive set of cases of such cooperation identified in the dataset, these forms of ecosystem-anchored cooperation may have particularly significant ordering effects. They merit attention in the international relations scholarship that seeks to account for the diversity of global ordering practices.
Ad hoc coalitions are increasingly charged to tackle international crises
Ad hoc coalitions in global governance: short-notice, task- and time-specific cooperation
Ad hoc coalitions (AHCs) are an indispensable but scantly conceptualized part of global governance. In recent years, several typologies and classifications of global governance arrangements have been provided, mostly differentiating them based on their organizational design features of degree of formality and membership composition. These do not capture AHCs and the role they play in global governance. In this article, we not only provide a conceptualization of AHCs, but also propose ways in which AHCs fit within the broader global governance architecture. We argue that what sets AHCs apart is not so much their (in)formality or membership, but rather their short-notice creation, their task-specific purpose and their temporarily circumscribed existence. We therefore define AHCs as autonomous arrangements with a task-specific mandate established at short notice for a limited time frame. We then develop a research agenda on the nature and future of AHCs, including their short- and long-term relationship with other multilateral arrangements in the global governance architecture. This is important, as we do yet not know how AHCs complement, compete and impact on international organizations and international crisis response.
Global networks in national governance? Changes of professional expertise in Amazon environmental governance
In 2019, wildfires in the Amazon renewed international concern about Brazilian environmental policy, led by Jair Bolsonaro. As one of the biggest repositories of the world's biodiversity, the Amazon Rainforest has been a source of concern in global environmental governance. Given this salience, one would expect that domestic governance would be highly permeated by professionals with international circulation and that transnational ties would be a central target of Bolsonaro's populist nationalistic perspective. In this article, I seek to understand whether and how professionals involved in policymaking in the Brazilian Ministry of the Environment are connected to national and international organizations, by analyzing the networks of career paths of high-ranking staff in the Rousseff, Temer and Bolsonaro administrations. The data show a consistently low percentage of ties between professionals and international organizations. However, the types of international experience and knowledge that are deemed important shifted significantly under Bolsonaro. This publication is part of the Market for Anarchy project.
Ad hoc crisis response and international organisations (ADHOCISM)
ADHOCISM asks what is the impact of ad hoc crisis responses on international organisations?...
Research group for Peace, Conflict and Development