Q1. What do you mean by actors in international system? Do you think that the state is the only actor in the international system? Justify your answer.

Q2. Discuss the crisis of territorial state in the face of globalization.

Q3. What do you mean by non-state actors? Examine the role of nonstate actors in international relations.

Q4. Evaluate the challenges faced by state actors in maintaining security and stability in a multipolar world order.

Q5. Analyze the impact of globalization on state actors. Has globalization eroded state sovereignty? Justify your answer.

Q6. Discuss the interplay between state and non-state actors in addressing global challenges like climate change, terrorism, and pandemics.

Q7. Examine the challenges to sovereignty of the state in the contemporary world. (UPSC-2015)

Q8. Assess the role of non-state actors in the international system. How do they influence state behavior and global governance? (UPSC-2019)

Q9. Discuss the significance of non-state actors in the global political economy. How do they challenge state sovereignty? (UPSC-2021)

Picture of Janvi Singhi
Janvi Singhi

Political Science (IGNOU)

LinkedIn
Select Langauge

Hey champs! you’re in the right place. I know how overwhelming exams can feel—books piling up, last-minute panic, and everything seems messy. I’ve been there too, coming from the same college and background as you, so I completely understand how stressful this time can be.

That’s why I joined Examopedia—to help solve the common problems students face and provide content that’s clear, reliable, and easy to understand. Here, you’ll find notes, examples, scholars, and free flashcards which are updated & revised to make your prep smoother and less stressful.

You’re not alone in this journey, and your feedback helps us improve every day at Examopedia.

Forever grateful ♥
Janvi Singhi


Give Your Feedback!!

Topic – State and Non-State Actors (Q&A)

Subject – Political Science

(International Relations)

In International Relations (IR), the term ‘actors’ refers to entities that have the ability to influence international politics, formulate policies, and interact with other entities in the global arena. Actors are essential for understanding global governance, international conflict, cooperation, and the distribution of power. They possess certain attributes such as agency, interests, resources, and legitimacy, which enable them to participate actively in the international system. The concept of actors allows scholars to categorize and analyze political behavior at the international level.

Traditionally, the state has been regarded as the primary actor in the international system. A state is a sovereign political entity with defined territory, permanent population, government, and recognition by other states. The Treaty of Westphalia (1648) is often considered the historical foundation for the modern state system, marking the beginning of state sovereignty and the principle of non-intervention. States possess the legal authority, military power, economic resources, and diplomatic capacity to pursue their national interests independently.

The Role of the State in International Relations

The state, as a central actor, plays multiple roles in the international system. It is responsible for security, diplomacy, economic policy, and lawmaking. States maintain armed forces for self-defense and project power in regional or global politics. Diplomatically, states engage in bilateral and multilateral relations, participate in international organizations, and negotiate treaties. Economically, states regulate trade, manage resources, and engage in foreign investment and aid. The legitimacy of states stems from their sovereign authority recognized both internally by citizens and externally by other states.

Despite the state’s centrality, the contemporary international system is no longer exclusively state-centric. The post-World War II era, globalization, and technological advancements have given rise to non-state actors that influence global politics in unprecedented ways. These actors may operate independently or in conjunction with states, challenging traditional notions of sovereignty and authority.

Non-State Actors in the International System

Non-state actors are entities that participate in international relations without possessing full sovereign authority. They can be international organizations (IOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), multinational corporations (MNCs), terrorist groups, transnational advocacy networks, and even influential individuals. Unlike states, these actors lack territorial sovereignty, but they wield significant influence through norm-setting, economic power, information dissemination, or coercive means.

International Organizations such as the United Nations (UN), World Trade Organization (WTO), and International Monetary Fund (IMF) are non-state actors that facilitate cooperation, regulate economic and security issues, and mediate disputes between states. Their role is particularly evident in peacekeeping operations, conflict resolution, development assistance, and setting global norms.

Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) like Amnesty International and Greenpeace influence global policy by advocating for human rights, environmental protection, and social justice. They mobilize public opinion, provide expertise, and monitor state compliance with international norms. NGOs exemplify the increasing role of civil society actors in international governance.

Multinational Corporations (MNCs) such as Apple, ExxonMobil, and Tata Group impact international relations through economic investments, employment, technological transfer, and lobbying for favorable policies. Their operations often cross national borders, giving them leverage over state policies and economic strategies.

Terrorist organizations and violent non-state actors like Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Boko Haram pose significant challenges to global security. They operate transnationally, bypass state control, and use asymmetric tactics to influence political outcomes, thereby complicating the traditional state-centric security paradigm.

Comparison of State and Non-State Actors

Feature State Actors Non-State Actors
Sovereignty Full territorial sovereignty No formal sovereignty
Legitimacy Recognized internationally Recognition varies; often normative or informal
Power Base Military, economic, political Economic, social, technological, ideological
Policy Formulation Can enact and enforce laws Can influence laws, norms, and policies indirectly
Examples India, USA, China UN, IMF, Greenpeace, Apple, Al-Qaeda

This table illustrates that while states exercise coercive power and formal authority, non-state actors influence international outcomes through soft power, networks, and economic resources.

The State is Not the Only Actor

The assertion that the state is the only actor in the international system is no longer valid in the contemporary era. Scholars of neo-liberal institutionalism, constructivism, and transnationalism argue that non-state actors play crucial roles in shaping global governance. For instance, climate change negotiations involve both states and non-state actors like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and NGOs, reflecting a shared responsibility model. Similarly, global health crises like the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the pivotal role of WHO, pharmaceutical companies, and civil society actors in international coordination.

Theoretical Perspectives on Actors in IR

Realist theory emphasizes state-centrism, arguing that security, power, and survival remain the exclusive concerns of states. Realists view non-state actors as secondary or marginal. In contrast, liberal and institutionalist theories recognize the importance of non-state actors in promoting cooperation, peace, and global welfare. Constructivist scholars argue that ideas, norms, and identities propagated by non-state actors shape state behavior, demonstrating that power in IR is not merely material but also ideational.

Globalization and Interdependence

The process of globalization has strengthened the role of non-state actors. Increased economic interdependence, information flows, and transnational networks have allowed these actors to bypass state control and influence policy-making at both national and international levels. Issues such as terrorism, cyber threats, environmental degradation, human rights, and pandemics require collaborative solutions involving both state and non-state actors, highlighting a complex, multi-actor international system.

Challenges Posed by Non-State Actors

While non-state actors bring benefits, they also challenge traditional state authority. Violent groups threaten territorial integrity, multinational corporations can undermine economic sovereignty, and global NGOs may pressure states to adopt international norms that conflict with domestic priorities. States, therefore, must adapt governance mechanisms and cooperate with non-state actors while safeguarding sovereignty and national interest.

Conclusion

In conclusion, actors in the international system are entities capable of influencing global politics, including states, international organizations, NGOs, MNCs, terrorist groups, and transnational networks. While the state remains the primary and most powerful actor, it is no longer the sole actor. Non-state actors significantly influence security, economics, human rights, and global governance. The contemporary international system is increasingly multi-actor, complex, and interdependent, requiring cooperation, regulation, and negotiation among diverse actors. Understanding the dynamics between state and non-state actors is essential for comprehending modern international relations and addressing global challenges effectively.

In the contemporary international system, the traditional state-centric model has evolved significantly. While sovereign states continue to be primary actors, the influence of non-state actors (NSAs)—including multinational corporations (MNCs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), terrorist groups, and transnational advocacy networks—has expanded. According to Keohane and Nye (1971), these actors operate within a framework of complex interdependence, shaping state behavior and global governance through economic, political, and social channels. Their growing importance reflects the pluralization of authority in global politics, challenging the traditional monopoly of states in international decision-making.

NSAs perform diverse roles that directly and indirectly affect state actions. NGOs and advocacy networks such as Amnesty International and Greenpeace promote human rights, environmental protection, and humanitarian causes, exerting normative pressure on states through campaigns, reports, and lobbying. MNCs like Apple and Google influence states via investment decisions, employment creation, and technology transfer, often shaping economic policies in ways that reflect global corporate interests. Terrorist and insurgent groups such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda challenge state sovereignty and compel governments to strengthen security frameworks and participate in multilateral counter-terrorism mechanisms. Similarly, IGOs like the UN, IMF, and WTO facilitate cooperation on issues like trade, development, and peace, setting rules that states must navigate, while transnational movements such as Fridays for Future or the #MeToo campaign shape social norms and pressure states to adopt relevant policies.

The influence of NSAs on state behavior is multifaceted. They exert normative pressure, compelling states to adjust policies to maintain legitimacy; for instance, Amnesty International’s reporting on human rights abuses has led states to reform laws or face reputational damage. Economically, MNCs wield considerable leverage, shaping national strategies through investments and market access. Security challenges posed by non-state armed actors force states to revise defense policies, enhance intelligence cooperation, and participate in international counter-terrorism efforts. Moreover, NSAs contribute to policy innovation, with transnational epistemic communities providing evidence-based solutions on issues like climate change, financial regulation, and public health, influencing both domestic and global governance agendas.

NSA Type Influence Mechanism Example Impact on State Behavior
NGOs Advocacy, norm-setting Amnesty International Adoption of human rights policies
MNCs Investment, lobbying Apple, Google Economic policy adjustments, trade negotiations
Terrorist Groups Coercion, violence ISIS Counter-terrorism laws, international cooperation
TANs Lobbying, campaigns IPCC, Climate NGOs Climate commitments, treaties
Media Information, public pressure CNN, BBC Humanitarian intervention, foreign policy shifts

Scholars such as Robert Keohane highlight that states increasingly rely on NSAs for expertise, resources, and legitimacy, while John Ruggie emphasizes the concept of “governance without government,” where NSAs address issues that transcend national borders. However, NSAs are not free from criticism. Their accountability is often weak, and their priorities may reflect self-interest rather than the broader public good, leading to policy distortions. Terrorist groups, in particular, exploit gaps in global governance, exposing states’ vulnerabilities to non-traditional threats. This dual nature of NSAs underscores the complexity of contemporary global politics.

The relevance of NSAs has become more pronounced in the 21st century. Challenges such as climate change, pandemics, and transnational terrorism highlight the necessity of multi-actor cooperation. States increasingly collaborate with NSAs to leverage technical expertise, mobilize resources, and achieve international commitments. This shift signifies that global governance is no longer the sole domain of states but is co-shaped by diverse actors operating across borders.

In conclusion, non-state actors are indispensable players in the modern international system. By shaping state behavior through normative influence, economic leverage, security challenges, and policy innovation, they complement and sometimes contest state authority. Understanding contemporary international relations requires recognizing the dynamic interplay between states and NSAs, as both co-creators of global order, while simultaneously addressing the accountability and regulatory challenges posed by powerful non-state entities.

International Relations Membership Required

You must be a International Relations member to access this content.

Join Now

Already a member? Log in here

You cannot copy content of this page

error: Content is protected !!
Scroll to Top