This article examines the emergence of early international organizations and efforts to export European institutional models to the periphery as part of the global expansion of a European international order. In particular, it focuses on the 1884–85 Berlin Conference as a pivotal moment in that expansion and the failed attempt to transplant the Treaty of Vienna model for transboundary river governance to the Congo River. Scholarship on the spread of institutions has highlighted the dangers of applying institutional models from one context to another, but there has been limited attention on why European institutional models are so compelling in the first place. Based on primary historical material, I show that despite some awareness among the diplomats at Berlin that the African context differed from the European one, this knowledge did not disrupt their underlying confidence in the Vienna model. I contend that the reason this model was so compelling was that it was built on two interrelated geographical imaginaries that constituted the diplomats’ understanding of the global and the political possibilities available to them. The first imaginary constituted the periphery as conceptually empty and ready to be remade by European models; the second constituted Europe as the generative site of universal models. Together, these taken-for-granted imaginaries made the diplomats’ practices of adopting the Vienna model seem natural and self-evident. These imaginaries continue to have implications for international politics today as we consider one-size-fits-all technocratic solutions and benchmarks for global progress.

本文考察了早期国际组织的出现，以及作为欧洲国际秩序全球扩张的一部分将欧洲制度模式输出到外围国家的努力。特别是，它关注 1884-85 年柏林会议作为扩张的关键时刻，以及将跨界河流治理的维也纳条约模式移植到刚果河的失败尝试。关于制度传播的学术研究强调了将制度模型从一种情况应用到另一种情况的危险，但对欧洲制度模型为何如此引人注目的关注却很有限。基于主要历史材料，我表明尽管柏林的外交官们意识到非洲背景与欧洲背景不同，这些知识并没有破坏他们对维也纳模式的基本信心。我认为这个模型之所以如此引人注目，是因为它建立在两个相互关联的地理想象之上，这两个地理想象构成了外交官对全球和他们可用的政治可能性的理解。第一个想象空间构成了概念上空洞的外围，并准备好由欧洲模式进行改造；第二个是将欧洲作为通用模型的发源地。这些理所当然的想象共同使外交官采用维也纳模式的做法显得自然而然。当我们考虑放之四海而皆准的技术官僚解决方案和全球进步基准时，这些想象继续对当今的国际政治产生影响。我认为这个模型之所以如此引人注目，是因为它建立在两个相互关联的地理想象之上，这两个地理想象构成了外交官对全球和他们可用的政治可能性的理解。第一个想象空间构成了概念上空洞的外围，并准备好由欧洲模式进行改造；第二个是将欧洲作为通用模型的发源地。这些理所当然的想象共同使外交官采用维也纳模式的做法显得自然而然。当我们考虑放之四海而皆准的技术官僚解决方案和全球进步基准时，这些想象继续对当今的国际政治产生影响。我认为这个模型之所以如此引人注目，是因为它建立在两个相互关联的地理想象之上，这两个地理想象构成了外交官对全球和他们可用的政治可能性的理解。第一个想象空间构成了概念上空洞的外围，并准备好由欧洲模式进行改造；第二个是将欧洲作为通用模型的发源地。这些理所当然的想象共同使外交官采用维也纳模式的做法显得自然而然。当我们考虑放之四海而皆准的技术官僚解决方案和全球进步基准时，这些想象继续对当今的国际政治产生影响。