International organizations’ lives often extend far beyond the moment of their initial contracting. How IOs do adapt to shifting circumstances in their member states global geopolitical changes, and even internal dynamics within the IO itself? This special issue on the life cycle of international cooperation explores the ebbs and flows of the IOs that underpin the international system. Firm theory, organizational sociology, and agency theory all have incorporated life cycles perspectives into the study of organizations, but IR has yet to fully harness these frameworks. A life cycles approach centers on, first, incorporating the IO itself as the core unit of analysis and, second, the dynamic processes within IOs — including life stages such as false starts, consolidation, inertia, growth, revitalization, death, and succession. Incorporating these dynamic processes into our understanding of IOs reminds us that historically, IOs have always experienced periods of both flourishing and faltering. Grasping the mechanisms that drive these changes is indispensable for a thorough understanding of the international system’s vitality and resilience. Articles in this issue explore the durability of IOs in the face of crises; the measures that IOs deploy to legitimize their existence; the role of individual leaders’ rhetoric in IO vitality; the tradeoffs that member states face between pulling the plug on an IO versus creating a new institution; the effect of member-state IO withdrawal on the international system overall; and the mass public’s perceptions of such withdrawals.

国际组织的生命周期往往远远超出其最初签订合同的时刻。国际组织如何适应其成员国不断变化的环境、全球地缘政治变化，甚至国际组织本身的内部动态？本期关于国际合作生命周期的特刊探讨了支撑国际体系的国际组织的兴衰。企业理论、组织社会学和代理理论都已将生命周期视角纳入组织研究中，但IR尚未充分利用这些框架。生命周期方法的重点是，首先，将IO本身作为分析的核心单元；其次，IO内部的动态过程——包括错误启动、整合、惯性、增长、振兴、死亡和继承等生命阶段。将这些动态过程纳入我们对国际组织的理解中，提醒我们历史上国际组织总是经历繁荣和衰落的时期。掌握推动这些变化的机制对于透彻理解国际体系的活力和韧性必不可少。本期文章探讨了国际组织在危机面前的持久性；国际组织为使其存在合法化而采取的措施；个别领导人的言论在信息作战活力中的作用；成员国在终止国际组织与创建新机构之间面临的权衡；成员国退出国际投资对整个国际体系的影响；以及大众对此类撤回的看法。