Tendencias posmodernas de la soberanía estatal: una aproximación teórica a los conceptos de autoridad, legitimidad y autonomía

• Juan Camilo Puentes Sánchez ^[1] ; Rodolfo Andrés Correa Vargas ^[2] ; Laura Victoria Cárdenas Rojas ^[3]
  1. [1] Universidad de Salamanca

     Universidad de Salamanca

     Salamanca, España

     
  2. [2] Universidad Autónoma Latinoamericana

     Universidad Autónoma Latinoamericana

     Colombia

     
  3. [3] Fundación Universitaria Luis Amigó

     Fundación Universitaria Luis Amigó

     Colombia

     

  Mostrar afiliaciones +
• Localización: Nuevo derecho, ISSN-e 2500-672X, ISSN 2011-4540, Vol. 21, Nº. 36, 2025
• Idioma: español
• Títulos paralelos:
  • Postmodern trends in state sovereignty: a theoretical approach to the concepts of authority, legitimacy and autonomy
• Enlaces
  • Texto Completo Ejemplar
• Resumen
  • español

    El artículo examina la evolución del concepto de soberanía en el contexto de la postmodernidad, centrándose en la distinción entre soberanía interna y externa. Se destaca cómo la intervención de actores no estatales ha reconfigurado el papel tradicional del Estado como único agente soberano, planteando interrogantes sobre si la soberanía sigue siendo una cualidad irrestricta en los modelos estatales contemporáneos. Se analiza la influencia de las fuerzas posmodernas en la erosión de la soberanía estatal, evidenciando cómo organizaciones internacionales, empresas transnacionales y ONG han asumido funciones antes exclusivas del Estado, lo que plantea un desafío a la autoridad estatal tradicional. Además, se aborda la disminución en la resolución de conflictos a través de mecanismos jurídicos clásicos, señalando que cada vez menos disputas entre individuos se resuelven mediante procesos judiciales formales. Esta tendencia, fundamentada en la creciente individualización y enfocada en lo personal sobre lo colectivo, plantea desafíos para la aplicación de la ley y la garantía de los derechos de las partes involucradas. En el contexto económico, se examina cómo el neoliberalismo ha influido en la narrativa económica predominante, afectando la soberanía estatal y reconfigurando las relaciones de poder en la sociedad posmoderna. En resumen, el artículo ofrece una reflexión profunda sobre la transformación de la soberanía en la era posmoderna, destacando los desafíos y cambios significativos que enfrentan los Estados en un entorno globalizado y en constante evolución.

  • English

    The article examines the evolution of the concept of sovereignty in the context of postmodernity, focusing on the distinction between internal and external sovereignty of a State. It highlights how the intervention of non-state actors has reconfigured the traditional role of the State as the sole sovereign agent, raising questions about whether sovereignty remains an unrestricted quality in contemporary state models. The influence of postmodern forces in the erosion of state sovereignty is analyzed, demonstrating how international organizations, transnational companies, and NGOs have taken on functions previously exclusive to the State, posing a challenge to traditional state authority. Furthermore, the decrease in conflict resolution through classical legal mechanisms is addressed, noting that fewer disputes between individuals are resolved through formal judicial processes. This trend, based on increasing individualization and focused on personal over collective, presents challenges for the application of the law and the protection of the rights of the parties involved. In the economic context, the article examines how neoliberalism has influenced the predominant economic narrative, affecting state sovereignty and reshaping power relations in the postmodern society. In summary, the article offers a profound reflection on the transformation of sovereignty in the postmodern era, highlighting the significant challenges and changes that States face in a globalized and constantly evolving environment.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Allott, P. (1990). Parliamentary sovereignty. From austin to hart. The Cambridge Law Journal, 49(3), 377–380. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197300122135
  • Austin, J. (1995). Austin: the province of jurisprudence determined (W. E. Rumble, Ed.). Cambridge University. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511521546
  • Barkin, J. S. (2006). International Organization: Theories and Institutions. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22559-8
  • Barkin, J. S. y Cronin, B. (1994). The state and the nation: changing norms and the rules of sovereignty in international relations. International...
  • Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and Simulation (S. F., Glaser, Trans). The University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9904
  • Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid Modernity. Polity Press.
  • Beardsworth, R. (2015). From Moral to Political Responsibility in a Globalized Age. Ethics & International Affairs, 29(1), 71-92. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679414000781
  • Bertsou, E. (2019). Rethinking political distrust. European Political Science Review, 11(2), 213-230. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773919000080
  • Bevir, M. (2009). Key concepts in governance. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446214817
  • Bevir, M. (Ed.). (2010). The SAGE handbook of governance. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446200964
  • Biebricher, T. (2019). The political theory of neoliberalism. Stanford University Press.
  • Biersteker, T. J. y Weber, C. (Eds.). (1996). State Sovereignty as Social Construct. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511598685
  • Breyer, S. G., Stewart, R. B., Sunstein, C. R. y Vermeule, A. (2006). Administrative law and regulatory policy: problems, text, and cases...
  • Bryan, F. M. (2003). Real democracy: the new england town meeting and how it works. University of Chicago Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/R/bo3641466.html
  • Bull, H. (1977). The anarchical society. Macmillan Education UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-24028-9
  • Cahill, D., Cooper, M., Konings, M. y Primrose, D. (Eds.). (2018). The SAGE handbook of neoliberalism. SAGE.
  • Capella, J.-R. (2008). Fruta prohibida: una aproximación histórico-teorética al estudio del derecho y del estado (5.a ed.). Trotta.
  • Cassese, S. (2015). Global administrative law: The state of the art. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 13(2), 465-468. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mov022
  • Castells, M. (Ed.). (2004). The network society: a cross-cultural perspective. Edward Elgar.
  • Chayes, A. y Chayes, A. H. (1998). The new sovereignty: Compliance with international regulatory agreements. Harvard University Press.
  • Coicaud, J.-M. (2002). Legitimacy and politics: A contribution to the study of political right and political responsibility. Cambridge University...
  • Dahl, R. A. (2020). On democracy. Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv18zhcs4
  • Derrida, J. (2005). De la gramatología (8.a ed.). Siglo XXI.
  • Dunn, J. (1990). Interpreting political responsibility: Essays 1981-1989. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400861453
  • Finer, S. E. (1997). The history of government from the earliest times: Vol. I: ancient monarchies and empires. Oxford University Press.
  • Frognier, A. P. (2001). Nation: sociological aspects. En N. J. Smelser y P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social y Behavioral...
  • Gargarella, R. (1997). Crisis de la representación política. Fontamara.
  • Garner, J. W. (1925). Limitations on national sovereignty in international relations. American Political Science Review, 19(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.2307/2938889
  • Garrett, G. (1995). Capital mobility, trade, and the domestic politics of economic policy. International Organization, 49(4), 657-687. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020818300028472
  • Giabardo, C. V. (2020). Private justice: The privatisation of dispute resolution and the crisis of law. Wolverhampton Law Journal, 4, 14-31....
  • Grinin, L. E. (2012). State sovereignty in the age of globalization: Will it survive? Globalistics and Globalization Studies, 211-237.
  • Guitián, E. G. (2001). Crisis de la representación política: Las exigencias de la política de la presencia. Revista de Estudios Políticos,...
  • Habermas, J. (1997). Más allá del Estado nacional. Fondo de Cultura Económica.
  • Han, B. C. (2015). The burnout society. Stanford University Press.
  • Hardin, R. (Ed.). (2004). Distrust. Russell Sage Foundation. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7758/9781610442695
  • Harlow, C. (2006). Global administrative law: The quest for principles and values. European Journal of International Law, 17(1), 187-214....
  • Harvey, D. (2007). A Brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford University Press.
  • Hinsley, F. H. (1986). Sovereignty (2.a ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  • Jackson, R. (2007). Sovereignty: The evolution of an idea. Polity.
  • Kingsbury, B., Krisch, N. y Stewart, R. B. (2005). The emergence of global administrative law. Law and Contemporary Problems, 68(3/4), 15-61....
  • Korff, B. S. A. (1923). The problem of sovereignty. American Political Science Review, 17(3), 404-414. https://doi.org/10.2307/1944043
  • Krasner, S. D. (1999). Sovereignty: Organized hypocrisy. Princeton University Press.
  • Lansford, T. (2010). Sovereignty. En G. T. Kurian, J. E. Alt, S. Chambers, G. Garrett, M. Levi y P. D. Mcclain (Eds.), The encyclopedia of...
  • Lansford, T. (2021). Evolution and devolution: The dynamics of sovereignty and security in post-Cold War Europe. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315196992
  • Lindblom, P. H. (1992). The privatization of justice: Some aspects of recent developments in American and Swedish procedural law. Netherlands...
  • Lindsay, S. M. (1915). Constitutional limitations on government powers. Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science in the City of New...
  • Lipovetsky, G. (2003). La era del vacío: Ensayos sobre el individualismo contemporáneo. Anagrama.
  • Lowell, A. L. (1888). The limits of sovereignty. Harvard Law Review, 2(2), 70-87. https://doi.org/10.2307/1322069
  • MacCormick, N. (1999). Questioning sovereignty. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198268765.001.0001
  • Marcilla Córdoba, G. (2005). Desregulación, Estado social y proceso de globalización. Doxa: Cuadernos de Filosofía del Derecho, 28, 239-263....
  • Maritain, J. (1950). The Concept of sovereignty. The American Political Science Review, 44(2), 343-357. https://doi.org/10.2307/1950275
  • Marsonet, M. (2017). National sovereignty vs. globalization. Academicus International Scientific Journal, 15, 47-57. https://doi.org/10.7336/academicus.2017.15.03
  • McBeth, A., Nolan, J. y Rice, S. (2017). The international law of human rights (2.a ed.). Oxford University Press.
  • Morgenthau, H. J. (1948). The problem of sovereignty reconsidered. Columbia Law Review, 48(3), 341-365. https://doi.org/10.2307/1118308
  • Morgenthau, H. J. (1967). Politics among nations: The struggle for power and peace. Alfred A. Knopf.
  • Morris, L. (1997). Globalization, migration and the nation-state: The path to a post-national Europe? The British Journal of Sociology, 48(2),...
  • Murray, P. L. (2007). Privatization of civil justice. Willamette Journal of International Law and Dispute Resolution, 15(2), 133-154.
  • Ortega, R. R. (2007). Potestad normativa y servicios públicos locales: Los servicios regulados. Revista de Estudios Locales. Cunal, Extra...
  • Ortega, R. R. (2010). Paradojas de la intervención administrativa económica: El bucle de la mejora regulatoria. La administración pública...
  • Ortega, R. R. (2016). Novedades en la regulación de las entidades instrumentales de naturaleza pública. Innovaciones en el procedimiento administrativo...
  • Ortega, R. R. (2021). Derecho administrativo económico (9a ed.). Marcial Pons.
  • Pascual, J. J. M. (2014). La actividad administrativa de regulación: Definición y régimen jurídico. Revista Digital de Derecho Administrativo,...
  • Perrineau, P. (2009). The crisis in political representation. En P. Perrineau y L. Rouban (Eds.), Politics in France and Europe (pp. 3-14)....
  • Philpott, D. (1995). Sovereignty: An introduction and brief history. Journal of International Affairs, 48(2), 353-368.
  • Pierson, C. (2011). The modern state (3.a ed.). Routledge.
  • Pitkin, H. F. (1967). The concept of representation. University of California Press.
  • Puentes, J. C. (2022a). Lo posmoderno, una clarificación conceptual. Revista humanidades, 12(2), e51303. https://doi.org/10.15517/h.v12i2.51303
  • Puentes, J. C. (2022b). Del gobierno a la gobernanza: Una aproximación normativa desde lo posmoderno. Nuevo Derecho, 18(31), Article 31. https://doi.org/10.25057/2500672X.1471
  • Puentes, J. C. (2022c). La nación en la era posmoderna: ¿Existe todavía? Advocatus, 19(38), 135-158. https://doi.org/10.18041/0124-0102/a.38.9751
  • Puentes, J. C. (2024). El territorio posmoderno: Un acercamiento normativo a los procesos de producción, organización y orientación del espacio....
  • Rieger, E. y Leibfried, S. (2003). Limits to globalization: Welfare states and the world economy. Polity.
  • Risse, T. (2015). Limited statehood: A critical perspective. En S. Leibfried, E. Huber, M. Lange, J. D. Levy, F. Nullmeier y J. D. Stephens...
  • Rudalevige, A. (2021). By Executive order: Bureaucratic management and the limits of presidential power. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv17nmzjz
  • Sassen, S. (1996). Losing control? Sovereignty in the age of globalization. Columbia University Press.
  • Schyns, P. y Koop, C. (2010). Political distrust and social capital in Europe and the USA. Social Indicators Research, 96(1), 145-167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9471-4
  • Scutt, J. A. (1988). The privatisation of justice: Power differentials, inequality, and the palliative of counselling and mediation. Women’s...
  • Shinoda, H. (2000). Re-examining sovereignty. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780333981764
  • Steger, M. B. y Roy, R. K. (2021). Neoliberalism: A very short introduction (2.a ed.). Oxford University Press.
  • Stiglitz, J. (2002). Globalization and its discontents. W.W. Norton y Company.
  • Susen, S. (2015). The ‘postmodern turn’ in the social sciences. Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Torcal, M. y Montero, J. R. (Eds.). (2006). Political disaffection in contemporary democracies: social capital, institutions, and politics....
  • Utaker, A. (1974). On the binary opposition. Linguistics, 12(134), 73-93. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1974.12.134.73
  • Walters, M. D. (2020). A. V. dicey and the common law constitutional tradition: A legal turn of mind. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139236249
  • Weinstein, J. B. (1996). Some benefits and risks of privatization of justice through ADR. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 11(2),...
  • Wenqi, Z. (2006). On co-operation by states not party to the International Criminal Court. International Review of the Red Cross, 88(861),...
  • Zagrebelsky, G., Marcenò, V. y Pallante, F. (2020). Manual de Derecho constitucional. Zela Grupo Editorial.
  • Zürn, M. y Deitelhoff, N. (2015). Internationalization and the State: Sovereignty as the External Side of Modern Statehood. En S. Leibfried,...