BEHIND CLOSED DOORS: INFORMAL GOVERNANCE AND AGENDA-SETTING IN THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL

Abstract

The UN Security Council (UNSC) is a crucial international decision-making body that deals with a range of conflicts requiring consideration. However, its formal issue consideration has remained stagnant, with only a few new conflicts being added to the list. This project aims to investigate the conditions under which the Council members opt for informal governance settings instead of formal ones to address global crises and argues that the official UNSC agenda is not solely shaped by the preferences of powerful states but is influenced by the Council's operational methods. To explore this, the project combines two strands of scholarship on informal governance in international organizations and introduces a rational choice framework to analyze the factors influencing governance choices. The study employs a multi-method approach, including a multinomial regression model and a case study analysis of the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar from 2017 to 2022. The findings suggest that member states select the most suitable meeting type based on Council homogeneity, information availability, and issue urgency while considering their preference for formal consideration. The Council's yearly changing membership and fluctuations in information availability prompt states to strategically shift issue consideration between formal and informal, public and private settings. Contrary to criticisms, the Council does not overlook specific crises but often discusses urgent matters informally. Should member states' preference for formal issue consideration align with issue urgency that the Council shifts to formal meetings at the horseshoe table. This project sheds new light on the functioning of the UNSC and contributes novel insight into how member states' meeting choices early in the policy-making process significantly influence agenda-setting and decision-making outcomes.