International institutions are under massive pressure today: Dissatisfied powers are openly challenging existing rules and structures - through criticism, subversion, withdrawal, or even outright sabotage. This project examines when and why states move from moderate criticism to escalating challenges to international institutions, and under what conditions institutions withstand such challenges. Our research shows that an organization’s institutional characteristics, e.g., voting rules, informal channels of influence, or bureaucratic independence, significantly determine how far states escalate their challenges. At the same time, the project demonstrates that the resilience of multilateral institutions depends crucially on whether other member states and institutional leaders step up to the plate when powerful states adopt a confrontational stance.
Publications
- Heinkelmann-Wild, T. (2026). (De) coding ‘America First’: Trump's contestation of international institutions and its consequences. International Affairs, 102(1), 43-62.
- Daßler, B., Heinkelmann-Wild, T., & Kruck, A. (2025). How negative institutional power moderates contestation: Explaining dissatisfied powers’ strategies towards international institutions. The Review of International Organizations, 20(4), 1081-1118.
- Heinkelmann-Wild, T., Kruck, A., & Zangl, B. (2024). The cooptation dilemma: Explaining US contestation of the liberal trade order. Global Studies Quarterly, 4(2), ksae024.