Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Questionable Role of Experts in Global Governance

Toward a More Democratic Approach

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Democracy and Globalization

Part of the book series: Economic Analysis of Law in European Legal Scholarship ((EALELS,volume 10))

  • 278 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the role of experts in creating regulations and policies on the global level. The questions that should be answered are what role do experts actually play, what do they represent, how are they elected, and how accountable are they. The analysis will start by presenting M. Foucault’s and D. Kennedy’s arguments regarding knowledge and the role of experts. It will be argued that experts not only represent ‘knowledge’ but also different intuitions and presumptions. They are subject to various institutional pressures, to interests combined with values and to the politics of daily life. We should be aware of that and to see that the dichotomy of knowledge and politics collapses, that there is no longer pure knowledge that is detached from politics. Unfortunately we are not aware of that, especially when experts use the language that supports the outcome that is desired. In effect, they preserve the private law actors-public law actors dichotomy, because it serves, for example, the interests of multinational corporations, not to expand the scope of their responsibility. In the light of this we can say that changing our understanding of knowledge should also change our understanding of law as separate from politics, as mirroring a reality thanks to those that know best. With this in mind, we can start to look for better ways of holding experts accountable for what they do and to try to ensure transparency in the process of the creation of regulation and policy formation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Kennedy (2008), p. 832.

  2. 2.

    See Benforado and Hanson (2012); Chen and Hanson (2004), pp. 1103–1253.

  3. 3.

    See Collins and Evans (2006), pp. 39–110.

  4. 4.

    Kennedy (2005b), p. 5.

  5. 5.

    Kennedy (2005b), p. 6.

  6. 6.

    Foucault (1979), p. 28.

  7. 7.

    Foucault (1979), p. 27.

  8. 8.

    Kennedy (2005b), p. 10. Even though several multilateral initiatives have been very successful in securing world peace, David Kennedy argues that too often they function through a vocabulary that promotes war.

  9. 9.

    More on that see: Kennedy (2004), p. 112.

  10. 10.

    See, for example, Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. 569 U.S. 108, 133 S. Ct. 1659; 185 L. Ed. 2d671; 2013 U.S. LEXIS 3159; 81 U.S.L.W. 4241.

  11. 11.

    Kennedy (2005b), p. 5.

  12. 12.

    Kennedy (2005b), p. 11.

  13. 13.

    See Robbins (1993).

  14. 14.

    Kennedy (2005b), p. 20. More on that see Kennedy (2005a).

  15. 15.

    See Sorrel (2018), pp. 20–36; Silver (2018), pp. 95–116.

  16. 16.

    Kennedy (2005a), p. 1.

  17. 17.

    For more on this issue, see Michelman (1998), pp. 1717–1734; Parker (1994).

  18. 18.

    About the role that unexpressed various legal doctrines play in decisions of arbitrators and judges, see Gaillard (2010), pp. 1–11.

  19. 19.

    See Mansbridge (2008), pp. 251–271.

  20. 20.

    See Bourdieu (1991), pp. 655–669.

  21. 21.

    See Danielsen (2006), pp. 85–99; Ruggie (2004), pp. 10–15.

  22. 22.

    See, for example, Weissbrodt and Kruger (2003), pp. 901–922.

  23. 23.

    See Danielsen (2005), pp. 411–425. See also Roe (2003), pp. 21–28.

  24. 24.

    See Danielsen (2010), pp. 49–68. See also Braithwaite and Drahos (2008).

  25. 25.

    As an example of regulatory approach, see Danielsen (2005), see Kingsbury et al. (2005), pp. 15–61.

  26. 26.

    See Ruggie (2008, 2010).

  27. 27.

    See, for example, Bogs (2001); Hart and Zingales (2017), pp. 247–274.

  28. 28.

    Kasturi et al. (2015), pp. 1–15, https://hbr.org/2015/01/the-truth-about-csr, accessed on November 30, 2020.

  29. 29.

    For example, the future of the Alien Tort Statute in the USA, which allows to hold corporations accountable for their human rights violations, is no longer clear after the court ruling in the Kiobel Case. For more information on the Alien Tort Statue, see Hufbauer and Mitrokostas (2004), pp. 245–262.

  30. 30.

    Danielsen (2006), p. 99.

  31. 31.

    Ibidem. For more information on decentralization and system change see Holtmann and Rademacher (2016), pp. 281–298.

  32. 32.

    Such approach would mirror, to a certain extend, the bottom-up approach presented as a solution to the problems of creation of global administrative law, whose main problem is the lack of transparency, accountability and democratic review. See Kingsbury et al. (2005), p. 55.

  33. 33.

    It is worth mentioning that among the advocates of the disaggregated system today is Anne-Marie Slaughter who argues that we can witness in the future disaggregated sovereignty thanks to establishing cooperation within the networks of experts. She understands that such networks present significant accountability and legitimacy concerns, however she believes that there are means to increase accountability and proposes norms to govern the relations of members of government networks with one another. See: Slaughter (2004), pp. 159–190.

  34. 34.

    On the role of a common vocabulary, see Kennedy (2005a), p. 26, 42. See also Michelman (1989), pp. 256–269.

  35. 35.

    Kingsbury et al. (2005), p. 57.

  36. 36.

    The business judgment rule is a doctrine in corporate law in common law countries that protects corporate executives from legal allegations about the way it conducts business. The business judgment rule protects the business decisions of corporate directors and officers who are sued by shareholders for claims of a breach of the duty of care. In case of lack of evidence that the board has blatantly violated some rule of conduct, the courts will not review or question its decisions. It should be noted however that by doing that the courts are confusing the business judgment rule with the standard of care that governs the conduct of corporate directors and officers. See: Triem (2007), pp. 23–44.

  37. 37.

    Kingsbury et al. (2005), p. 57.

  38. 38.

    See Kingsbury et al. (2005), p. 57, 56.

  39. 39.

    Kennedy (2005a), p. 22.

  40. 40.

    Such a future is envisaged in Hansmann and Kraakman (2004), pp. 33–68.

  41. 41.

    There are many initiatives in particular regions, such as those in Switzerland or Poland, to include people in the decision making process, and there are further propositions as to how to establish an “open” democracy. See Landemore (2020).

  42. 42.

    See, for example, the variety of issues raised, in recent years, by the “Me Too”, Black Lives Matter, and Yellow Vests movements, as well as by the Global Climate Strikes.

  43. 43.

    For more on this issue, see for example Rothstein (2017); Goldstone (2018); Burgess (2018), pp. 342–367.

  44. 44.

    For the importance of culture and the politics of place, see Kennedy (2008), p. 835.

  45. 45.

    Kennedy, The Dark Side of Virtue, 112. For more on how language constrains our ability to think and see problems, see Tolmach Lakoff (1992).

  46. 46.

    For example, we could look at how experts dealt with the problems caused by the financial crisis. For more detail, see Mellor (2010); O’Halloran and Groll (2019).

  47. 47.

    There are number of initiatives in that regard. See: Volker (2012), pp. 99–158.

  48. 48.

    Kennedy (2005a), p. 10.

  49. 49.

    On the end of history, see Fukuyama (2006).

  50. 50.

    See, for example, Dahinden (2013); Ruus (2011), pp. 268–289.

  51. 51.

    On the issue of the possibility of democratization, transparency and legitimacy in international law, see Koskenniemi (2006).

References

  • Benforado A, Hanson J (2012) Atrubitions and ideologies: two divergent visions of human behavior behind our laws, policies and theories. In: Hanson J (ed) Ideology, psychology and law. Oxford University Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199737512.001.0001

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bogs C (2001) The end of politics: corporate power and the decline of the public sphere. The Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu P (1991) Universal corporatism: the role of intellectuals in the modern world. Poetics Today 12(4):655–669

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite J, Drahos P (2008) Regulatory capitalism: how it works, ideas for making it work better. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess SK (2018) Between the desire for law and the law of desire: #MeToo and the cost of telling the truth today. Philosophy Rhetoric 51(4):342–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen R, Hanson J (2004) Categorically biased: the influence of knowledge structures on law and legal theory. Calif Law Rev 77:1103–1253

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins HM, Evans R (2006) The third wave of science studies: studies of expertise and experience. In: Selinger E, Crease RP (eds) The philosophy of expertise. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 39–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahinden M (2013) Democracy promotion at a local level: experiences, perspectives and policy of Swiss International Cooperation. Int Dev Policy, 4.3/2013, http://journals.openedition.org/poldev/1517. Accessed 22 Nov 2020

  • Danielsen D (2005) How corporations govern: taking corporate power seriously in transnational regulation and governance. Harv Int Law J 46(2):411–425

    Google Scholar 

  • Danielsen D (2006) Corporate power and global order. In: Orford A (ed) International law and its others. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 85–99

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Danielsen D (2010) Local rules and a global economy: an economic policy perspective. Transnatl Legal Theory 1(1):49–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2010.11424501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault M (1979) Discipline and punish, the birth of the prison. Vintage Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama F (2006) The end of history and the last man. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaillard E (2010) The representations of international arbitration. J Int Dispute Settlem 1(2):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idq012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstone L (2018) America’s Relentless Suppression of Black Voters. The New Republic, October 24, 2018, available at https://newrepublic.com/article/151858/americas-relentless-suppression-black-voters, Accessed 22 Nov 2020

  • Hansmann H, Kraakman R (2004) The end of history for corporate law. In: Gordon JN, Roe MJ (eds) Convergence and persistence in corporate governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 33–68

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hart O, Zingales L (2017) Companies should maximize shareholder welfare not market value. J Law Financ Account 2(2):247–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holtmann E, Rademacher C (2016) Decentralization of power and of decision-making — an institutional driver for systems change to democracy. Hist Soc Res 41(3):281–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Hufbauer GC, Mitrokostas NK (2004) International implications of the Alien Tort Statute. J Int Econ Law 7(2):245–262. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/7.2.245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasturi RV, Chase L, Sohel K (2015) The truth about CSR. Harv Bus Rev pp 1–15. https://hbr.org/2015/01/the-truth-about-csr. Accessed 30 Nov 2020

  • Kennedy D (2004) The dark sides of virtue. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy D (2005a) Of war and law. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy D (2005b) Challenging expert rule: the politics of global governance. Sydney J Int Law, 27

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy D (2008) The mystery of global governance. Ohio Northern Univ Law Rev 34(3):827–860

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilanowski M (2016) The questionable role of experts in global governance. Beyond David Kennedy’s approach. Econ Law 4:481–491

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingsbury B, Krisch N, Stewart R (2005) The emergence of global administrative law. Law Contemp Probl 68(3):15–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. 569 U.S. 108, 133 S. Ct. 1659; 185 L. Ed. 2d671; 2013 U.S. LEXIS 3159; 81 U.S.L.W. 4241

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskenniemi M (2006) Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission, Geneva, 1 May-9 June and 3 July-11 August 2006, A/CN.4/L.682, https://legal.un.org/ilc/documentation/english/a_cn4_l682.pdf. Accessed 22 Nov 2020

  • Lakoff RT (1992) Talking power: the politics of language. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Landemore H (2020) Open democracy. Reinventing popular rule for the twenty-first century. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge J (2008) Deliberative democracy or democratic deliberation? In: Rosenberg SW (ed) Deliberation, participation, and democracy: can the people govern? Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 251–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Mellor M (2010) The future of money: from financial crisis to public resource. Pluto Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelman F (1989) Bringing the law to life: a plea for disenchantment. Cornell Law Rev 74(2):256–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelman F (1998) Protecting the people from themselves,’ or how direct can democracy be? UCLA Law Rev 45(6):1717–1734

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Halloran S, Groll T (2019) After the crash: financial crises and regulatory responses. Columbia University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parker R (1994) Here, the people rule, a constitutional populist Manifesto. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins B (1993) Secular vocations: intellectuals, professionalism, culture. Verso, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Roe M (2003) Political determinants of corporate governance: political context, corporate impact. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199205301.001.0001

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein R (2017) The color of law, a forgotten history of how our government segregated America. Liveright Publishing, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie J (2004) How to Marry civic politics and private governance. In: Kuper A (ed) The impact of corporations on global governance: a report of the empire and democracy project. Center on International Cooperation, New York, pp 10–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie J (2008) Clarifying the Concepts of ‘Corporate Sphere of Influence’ and ‘Complicity’: report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises, UN Human Rights Council, 15 May 2008, A/HRC/8/16, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/484d1fe12.html. Accessed 13 Nov 2016

  • Ruggie J (2010) Protect, respect and remedy: the united nations framework for business and human rights. In: Baderin M, Ssenyonjo M (eds) International human rights law: six decades after the UDHR and beyond. Ashgate, Farnham

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruus J (2011) Democratic participation at the local level in post-communist states: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania. In: Schiller T (ed) Local direct democracy in Europe. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Berlin, pp 268–289

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Silver D (2018) The moral accountability of the financial industry for the global financial crisis. Midwest Stud Philosophy 42(1):95–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter A-M (2004) Disaggregated sovereignty: towards the public accountability of global government networks. Gov Opposition 39(2):159–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorrel T (2018) Responsibility in the financial crisis. Midwest Stud Philosophy 42(1):20–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triem FW (2007) Judicial Schizophrenia in corporate law: confusing the standard of care with the business judgment rule. Alaska Law Rev 23(24):23–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Volker R (2012) Responsibility in international law. In: von Bogdandy A, Wolfrum R (eds) Max Planck yearbook of United Nations law, vol 16, pp 99–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Weissbrodt D, Kruger M (2003) Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights. Am J Int Law 97(4):901–922

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nicolaus Copernicus University, Department of Law and Administration, Torun, Poland

    Marcin Kilanowski

Authors
  1. Marcin Kilanowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcin Kilanowski .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland

    Charlotte Sieber-Gasser

  2. Department of Political and Social Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Alberto Ghibellini

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kilanowski, M. (2021). The Questionable Role of Experts in Global Governance. In: Sieber-Gasser, C., Ghibellini, A. (eds) Democracy and Globalization. Economic Analysis of Law in European Legal Scholarship, vol 10. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69154-7_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69154-7_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-69153-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-69154-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation