Researcher
Ole Jacob Sending
Contactinfo and files
Summary
Ole Jacob Sending is Research Professor in the Research group for global order and diplomacy at NUPI.
Sending does research on global governance, with a particular focus on the role of international and non-governmental organizations in peacebuilding, humanitarian relief, and development. His publications have appeared, inter alia, in International Studies Quarterly, European Journal of International Relations, and International Theory.
Expertise
Education
2004 Dr. Polit., Department of Administration and Organization Theory, University of Bergen
1998 Master of Science, Political Science. Department of Political Science, SUNY, Albany, New York
1997 Cand. Mag., University of Bergen, Norway. (Economics, Political Science, Sociology)
Work Experience
2023- Research Professor, NUPI
2012-2023 Research Director, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI)
2008-2009 Visiting Scholar, Fulbright Scholarship, Dept. of Sociology, UC Berkeley
2008- Senior Researcher, NUPI
2008-2014 Adjunct Senior Researcher, Chr. Michelsen Institute, Bergen
2006-2008 Senior Adviser, Policy Analysis Unit, Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norway
2003- Senior Researcher, NUPI
2002 Visiting Research Fellow, Stanford University (SCANCOR)
1999-2003 Research Fellow, NUPI, PhD Student, University of Bergen
Aktivitet
Filter
Clear all filters
Norske interesser og multilateralt samarbeid. Multimeldingen – fem år etter
The White Paper 'Norway’s role and interests in multilateral cooperation' (Report to the Storting No. 27 – 2018-2019) – hereafter called 'the Multilateral Report' – contains a thorough analysis of multilateral cooperation and Norwegian interests. It describes the various functions of multilateral cooperation, how disagreements between major powers affect such cooperation, and how this impacts Norwegian interests. The White Paper was submitted to the Storting in June 2019. By that time, Russia had already annexed Crimea, the U.S., under President Trump, had shown a more negative attitude towards multilateral cooperation, and China’s desire to influence multilateral cooperation was evident. At the same time, the report preceded the Covid-19 pandemic and the subsequent criticism from low- and middle-income countries of how Western nations handled the pandemic, as these countries did not have the same access to vaccines. And, not least: the report came before Russia’s 2022 attack on Ukraine, Hamas’ attack on Israel, and the ensuing war in Gaza. Although the rivalry between the U.S. and China was already increasing in 2019, five years later, it has a more defining character for international politics. The developments in recent years show even more clearly than before that the norm that international problems are best solved through multilateral cooperation has weakened. The Multilateral Report pointed to several causes for this, primarily increased rivalry and the preference of major powers for bilateral solutions, and how, for example, China has succeeded in influencing the interpretation of human rights in multilateral forums. In this report, we discuss how the analysis and conclusions of the White Paper hold up five years later. The short version is that they hold up well: the analysis of increased rivalry and the growing 'bilateralization' of international cooperation has proven to align more with the reality than one might wish. At the same time, we paint a somewhat more complex picture than what was described in the Multilateral Report, focusing on fragmentation and the emergence of a significant ecosystem of informal governance initiatives that supplement but also alter the nature of the multilateral system. We also discuss in some detail the importance of analyzing how the various functions of the multilateral system are affected by rivalry, bilateralization, and fragmentation. Such a discussion is relevant in order to assess which multilateral functions are most important for safeguarding Norwegian interests. For example, it is not a given that support for a multilateral organization is an effective measure to promote a 'rules-based' order. We conclude with a discussion on how Norway should relate to the fact that our interest in a rules-based order will not be the same if the content of the rules reflects less of the values they do today. The report focuses on changes in the multilateral system and does not analyze specific multilateral organizations. Rather, we use examples from various multilateral organizations to try to illustrate more general trends. For example, we do not have a specific analysis of NATO or the EU as multilateral organizations. Both can be characterized as multilateral since both have three or more members, but the distinctive nature of the EU and NATO reflects less the developments in multilateral organizations more generally.
Evolving Linkages Between Indo-Pacific and European Security: Challenges and Their Dynamics
NUPI is proud to host Aiko Takahara, Distinguished Visiting Professor, Tokyo Woman’s Christian University, Senior Adjunct Fellow of the Japan Institute of International Affairs, and Distinguished Research Fellow of the Japan Forum on International Relations.
How ad hoc coalitions deinstitutionalize international institutions
As ad hoc coalitions (AHCs) proliferate, particularly on the African continent, two questions crystallize. First, what consequences do they bring...
The Political Economy of Global Climate Action: Where Does the West Go Next After COP28?
This report offers a critical, candid examination of the landscape of global climate action. Current efforts are lacking even amid consecutive UN climate conferences that build upon the successes of the 2015 Paris Agreement. It argues that the incremental progress achieved thus far is insufficient to address the escalating climate crisis. Challenges of domestic political economy and lacking global governance are substantively at fault. We identify several related barriers to effective climate action, including mismatched time horizons, shared public and private responsibility, the complexity of global challenges, and problems of global collective action and burden distribution. The report explores the distributional costs of climate policies, emphasizing the impacts of populism on climate action (and vice versa), and the need for a fair transition. Global governance challenges are attributable to the limits of existing multilateral institutions and the persistently difficult geopolitical and macroeconomic outlook. We conclude by offering a set of specific policy recommendations, spanning corporate taxation, public investment, long-term commitment mechanisms, the climate action-energy security interface, corporate responsibility, and the imperative of a just, equitable, and participatory transition. The proposed strategies can contribute to achieving time-consistent, decisive and systemic action that tackles the urgent climate crisis, building on political incentives and disincentives. This systematic lens – focused on political economy and global governance constraints - needs to be applied to all climate action policies to get ahead of the curve in the global and domestic political environment in which we find ourselves.
NUPIpodden #11: Hva er greia med internasjonale organisasjoner?
Hvorfor blir internasjonale organisasjoner mindre viktige – og har det noe å si? Hvem er det egentlig som bestemmer hva organisasjonene skal bruke...