Higher education in Asian countries and the role of international ...

253
In the 1980s the differences between realism and liberalism were sharpened as neo-realists and
neoliberals debated the relative merits of their contrasting analytical programs and during the
same period a new debate between constructivism and rationalism has become more prominent
(Katzenstein, Keohane, & Krasner, 1998). The end of the cold war removed many barriers and
brought new the prospects for IOs to expand their roles, functions, and in global governance
became brighter (Diehl, 2005). This also signaled a new era of open economy and enhanced
globalization. These new developments led to transformation of existing theories and birth of
new theories as well. After the cold war, theories and practitioners of constructivism laid more
stress on sociological perspective, shared norms and values (Katzenstein, Keohane, & Krasner,
1998). Existing theories related to international organizations provide diverse approaches to
study and understand the principles and purpose of international organizations. Each theory has
its own importance, pace and place so better understanding on IOs demands not to stick with any
one theory. Hacck and Mathiason have found that abundant theories have been developed in an
attempt to study the international organization but these theories are often not tested against the
realities (Haack & Mathiason, 2010).
Intergovernmental organizations functioning around the world do not have the same
organizational structure, rather it depends upon the reason or purpose of their existence, nature of
work, level of action, geographical area covered, type of service provided etc. So International
organization can be been classified on the basis its nature, function, structure and field of action:
Legal, cooperative, non-governmental, intergovernmental, national, international, social,
economic, political, terrorist, religious, not for profit, humanitarian, umbrella or agency. Many
IGOs perform only limited functions, such as guidelines, coordination, research and information
gathering and dissemination. In such cases organizations are feeble actors and have a limited role
to play so they should not be held responsible for whether the larger problem is solved (Gutner
and Thompson 2010). As the goals vary from organization to organization which are often
intangible in form thus development of adequate measures of organizational effectiveness has
been very difficult (Marcus and Cafagna 1965).
Modern concept of IGOs-state interaction is a complex process, which is based upon different
types of mutual cooperation at different levels. Similarly creating an environment of trust and
cooperation among international actors is a complicated equation because of the diversity in
national interests and priorities of the states. Hence it is difficult to create and apply a single