Within contemporary liberal philosophy and political theory, it is now commonplace to view moral cosmopolitanism as the default position. Even philosophers defending the normative significance of national identity, state sovereignty, or partial loyalties do so with reference to the cosmopolitan core belief in the equal moral worth of individual persons. However, as the apparent recent surge in nationalist and xenophobic politics demonstrates, the acceptance of this abstract theory among philosophers does not necessarily reflect the views of the masses. For committed cosmopolitans, therefore, it is imperative to ask not only the theoretical question—concerning the right normative conclusions to draw from cosmopolitan core beliefs—but also the strategic and motivational question: how cosmopolitan norms can be advanced in the real world. The Cosmopolitan Potential of Exclusive Associations is an important contribution to the latter question, as Bettina Scholz explores the ways in which membership in voluntary, not-for-profit associations could generate and maintain such norms.

Scholz’s analysis is an interesting synthesis of cosmopolitan moral philosophy, constructivist approaches in international relations, and civil society scholarship. Uniquely, with regards to the first, it is clear that the author is not engaged in a defense of any particular cosmopolitan theory, or indeed in a defense of cosmopolitanism at all: A more cosmopolitan world is simply assumed to be desirable (p. 5). Instead of advancing a particular, comprehensive account of cosmopolitanism, Scholz draws on Mark E. Warren’s work on the effects of civil society associations on democratic norms (Democracy and Association, 2001), and employs cosmopolitan theory as a resource for developing evaluative criteria for the effects of associational membership on the development of cosmopolitan norms. Thus, for example, membership in associations can strengthen commitment to institutional norms and generate new transnational institutions; it can foster emotions of empathy and a recognition of a shared humanity; it can generate shared identities across borders; and it can facilitate new public spheres for democratic deliberation. These effects, importantly, are often unintended by the founders and members of these associations, who are not necessarily motivated by cosmopolitanism. Indeed, Scholz’s engagement with empirical work on the development of norms leads to a valuable insight: Support for cosmopolitan norms, however partial, can arise from transnational associations that are not consciously cosmopolitan and are often, by definition, exclusive in their membership.

Scholz demonstrates this evaluative framework by considering one historical and three contemporary case studies: The British Abolitionist movement in the nineteenth century; the humanitarian aid organization Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders, hereafter MSF); the International Olympic Committee (IOC); and members of the Anglican Communion opposed to liberal interpretation of the Bible and to the inclusion of gay men in the ordained ministry. In each of these cases, Scholz analyzes the institutional, developmental, shared identity, and public sphere effects, and (perhaps more importantly) the tensions and trade-offs among these effects. For example, in the case of MSF volunteers, while “the common experience of working in traumatic or difficult situations may build the developmental effect of empathy” (p. 131), the professional nature of this work does not cultivate a sense of shared community between volunteers and their patients. In the more controversial case of the Anglican Communion, while the exclusion of gay men and women from aspects of membership is clearly in tension with cosmopolitan norms of equal respect (p. 185), Scholz also points out that the debate has facilitated new avenues of transnational deliberation, including a recognition of similarities between conservative Anglicans in North America and Africa, and empowerment of Anglicans in the global south (pp. 175–81).

Each of these chapters is similarly structured around the four categories of effects, which at times leads to some unnecessary repetition: They work better, in this reader’s view, as stand-alone pieces than as a development or elucidation of the general theoretical framework. Nonetheless, the dilemmas and tensions presented in them remain salient and important, and the radical difference between the aims and motivations of the three contemporary cases under examinations—–MSF, IOC, and the dissident Anglican ministers—strengthens Scholz’s point that the cosmopolitan effects of associations should be examined independently of the intentions of their members.

This important insight, however, raises several questions and avenues for future research. The first of these regards the scope of the framework. Scholz’s reliance on civil society scholarship delimits the kinds of associations in which she is interested, to match the traditional focus on associations within the nation-state. Specifically, cases in the book are limited to nonstate, not-for-profit, nonviolent, voluntary associations (pp. 7–9, 21–23). Yet if what we are interested in are the effects of membership, rather than the ends of membership, why must it be so? After all, scholars of “embedded” or “rooted” cosmopolitanism have pointed to the cosmopolitan potential of states (e.g., Lea Ypi, Global Justice and Avant-Garde Political Agency, 2011); nonvoluntary associations, such as the nation (Kwame Anthony Appiah, “Cosmopolitan Patriots,” Critical Inquiry, 23(3), 1997); and even violent associations, such as the armed forces (Toni Erskine, Embedded Cosmopolitanism, 2008). The case of for-profit associations is even clearer: Ever since the days of Adam Smith and Karl Marx, it was noted that commercial society is inherently cosmopolitan, in that capital aspires to transcend the boundaries of the state and other particularist loyalties, as Scholz herself mentions in passing (p. 99). Of course, all of these examples are at best imperfectly cosmopolitan in the normative sense, and in some respects harmful to cosmopolitanism; but is this not true for the cases considered in the book as well?

Another question that remains ambiguous is whether the effects considered pertain to the members of the association or to nonmembers as well. As Scholz clearly states, she is not interested in addressing “cosmopolitanism from the perspective of an individual moral agent . . . [but] in understanding how associations can contribute to the advancement of cosmopolitanism” (p. 10). This, combined with the insight that these effects are often unintended by members, and that they may be only imperfectly advancing cosmopolitan norms, leads me to think that there is a place in Scholz’s theoretical framework to consider the effects on the institutional obligations, identities, and attitudes of nonmembers as well. It seems plausible, after all, that the existence and actions of such humanitarian organizations as MSF and such international sports associations as IOC have at least the potential to advance cosmopolitan attitudes outside of their direct members, be it their audience, their patients, their victims—or even otherwise-unaffected third parties. A clear example of this may be the international protest surrounding the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, where the failings of one transnational sports association (FIFA) had the effect of advancing norms of global solidarity.

These limitations of scope need not detract from the valuable insights of this book, which will be of interested to scholars in the fields of political theory and international relations alike. While both abstract philosophical work and empirical scholarship on the emergence of norms are undoubtedly important, it is crucial to recognize the value of works such as Scholz’s, which seek to bridge the gap between the normative and the descriptive, and do not shy away from acknowledging the messy and complex reality of politics.