A major aspect of global interdependencies during the last two decades has been the intensified interactions between international organizations (IOs) and civil society organizations (CSOs). In this paper, we propose a new way of analysing the potential of CSO inclusion to democratise global governance. The aim is to explore the possibility for CSOs to function as a form of counter-democratic force. This approach contrasts with earlier research that has tended to focus on participation, voice or representation when evaluating IO-CSO interaction from a democratisation perspective. Using Pierre Rosanvallon's term, we argue that counter-democratic actors organise distrust against power-holders, pressuring them to strengthen accountability. Counter-democracy is manifested in the institutions, agents and functions that are committed to overseeing ruling institutions, expressing mistrust and channelling dissent. Importantly, counter-democracy is not contrary to democracy, but a vital and perennial aspect of it. Our argument is that Rosanvallon's concept of counter-democracy can help us understand how the monitoring activities of CSOs may restrain the power of IOs and make them more responsible which in turn can be related to democratic qualities of global governance. However, we maintain that not all activities of transnational CSOs have counter-democratic qualities. To examine if and how a specific CSO might serve as a democratising force in global governance, we suggest that the actors and their activities should be scrutinised according to an analytical framework centred on the concepts of power-resources, ideational foundations and activities. Empirically, we investigate three carefully selected cases of CSOs that perform monitoring activities in a global governance context: the Corporate Europe Observatory, the NGO forum on the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and NGO Monitor.

中文翻译：

---

公民社会使全球治理民主化？“反民主”的潜力和局限

过去 20 年全球相互依存的一个主要方面是国际组织 (IO) 和民间社会组织 (CSO) 之间加强的互动。在本文中，我们提出了一种分析公民社会组织包容性对全球治理民主化潜力的新方法。目的是探索公民社会组织作为一种反民主力量发挥作用的可能性。这种方法与早期的研究形成鲜明对比，后者在从民主化的角度评估 IO-CSO 互动时倾向于关注参与、声音或代表。使用皮埃尔·罗桑瓦隆 (Pierre Rosanvallon) 的术语，我们认为反民主行为者组织了对掌权者的不信任，迫使他们加强问责制。反民主体现在制度上，致力于监督统治机构、表达不信任和传达异议的代理人和职能。重要的是，反民主并不与民主背道而驰，而是民主的一个重要且长期存在的方面。我们的论点是，Rosanvallon 的反民主概念可以帮助我们理解公民社会组织的监督活动如何限制 IO 的权力并使其更具责任感，这反过来又可能与全球治理的民主品质有关。然而，我们认为并非跨国公民社会组织的所有活动都具有反民主性质。为了检验一个特定的公民社会组织是否以及如何作为全球治理中的民主化力量，我们建议应该根据以权力资源概念为中心的分析框架来审查参与者及其活动，思想基础和活动。根据经验，我们调查了三个精心挑选的在全球治理背景下执行监测活动的公民社会组织案例：欧洲企业观察站、亚洲开发银行 (ADB) 的非政府组织论坛和非政府组织监测机构。