Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Framework for Interactions Between National, European and Global Administrative Systems of Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Beyond Networks - Interlocutory Coalitions, the European and Global Legal Orders

Part of the book series: Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation ((SEELR,volume 8))

  • 515 Accesses

Abstract

The present chapter takes its cue from two of the most controversial aspects of globalization of administrative governance. The first relates to the convergence between administrative rules pertaining to different supranational regulatory systems – and, specifically, between the European Union and other supranational regulatory regimes (and regulators) such as the World Bank, the World Trade Organization and the United Nations. These principles include transparency, public liability, the granting of adequate procedural rights to the parties involved, and judicial review. The second controversial aspect of globalization of administrative law discussed in this chapter concerns the emergence of formalized networks of civil society actors at the supranational level. These networks, and the influence they exert on the scope and dictates of supranational legal systems, are crucial to obtain a representative picture of the spill over of methods of administrative governance across the European and the global legal systems. In the first part, this chapter illustrates the historical, political and legal factors that drive the interactions between the European legal order and other supranational systems of norms. In the second part, this chapter illustrates the growing involvement of civil society networks in supranational policy-making, and discusses its counter-arguments, namely: the accountability problem, the issue of efficiency, and the democratic deficit. This chapter concludes by detailing the structure of this book and by presenting the selected case studies that will be dealt with in this volume.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Heron of Alexandria, Pneumatica, ca 50 AD.

  2. 2.

    For a critique on the distinction between the concepts of public and private in global governance See S.S. Eriksen, O.J. Sending, “There is no global public: the idea of the public and the legitimation of governance” (2013) 5 International Theory 213.

  3. 3.

    See, for instance, N. Krisch, Beyond Constitutionalism: The Pluralist Structure of Postnational Law (Oxford, Oxford Constitutional Theory, 2010).

  4. 4.

    See M.P. Maduro, We the Court: The European Court of Justice and the European Constitution (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 1998).

  5. 5.

    See, for instance, T. Isikel, “Global Legal Pluralism as Fact and Norm” (2013) 2 Global Constitutionalism 160.

  6. 6.

    Archon Fung describes six paths through which associations sustain democracy, namely: (1) through the intrinsic value of associative life; (2) through fostering civic virtues and teaching political skills; (3) through offering resistance to power and checking governments; (4) through improving the quality and equality of representation; (5) through facilitating public deliberation; (6) and, finally, through creating opportunities for citizens and groups to participate directly in governance. For further details See A. Fung, “Associations and Democracy: Between Theories, Hopes, and Realities” (2003) 29 Annual Review of Sociology 515. Mark Warren distinguishes the functions of association into three broad categories: the developmental effects they may have on individuals; their role as medium for broad political discourse; and the institutional effects of their active presence in a democracy. See M.E. Warren, Democracy and Association (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2001).

  7. 7.

    A definition used in this volume in the specific sense of governance without governmental involvement. This includes all forms of cooperative relationship between public and private bodies to fulfil a policy function. See E.O. Czempiel, J. Rosenau, Governance Without Government: Order and Change in World Politics (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1992). Rosenau and Czempiel’s thinking of the concept of global governance denotes all types of control in transnational politics at all levels of social interaction. On governance See also K. Dingwerth, P. Pattberg, “Global Governance as a Perspective on World Politics” (2006) 12 Global Governance 189; D. Held, M. Koenig-Archibugi, Taming Globalization: Frontiers of Governance (Oxford, Polity Press, 2003); D. Held, A. McGrew (eds.), Governing Globalization (Cambridge, Polity Press, 2002); A. Heritier (ed.), Common Goods: Reinventing European and International Governance (Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2002); P. Moreau Defarges, La gouvernance (Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 2003); P. Lascoumes, P. Le Galès, Sociologie de l’action publique (Paris, Armand Colin, 2009).

  8. 8.

    See also J.P. Olsen, “Towards a European Administrative Space?” (2003) 10 Journal of European Public Policy 506; H.C.H. Hofmann, “Mapping the European Administrative Space” 31 West European Politics 662; E.G. Heidbreder, “Structuring the European Administrative Space: Policy Instruments of Multi-Level Administration” (2011) 18 Journal of European Public Policy 709. More generally on European administrative law See S. Cassese, “European Administrative Proceedings” (2004–2005) 68 Law & Contemporary Problems 21; M.P. Chiti, “Forms of European Administrative Action” (2004) 68 Law and Contemporary Problems, 37; F. Bignami, “Creating European Rights: National Values and Supranational Interests”(2004–2005) 11 Columbia Journal of European Law 241. For more general discourse on the evolution of modern administrative law See M. Loughlin, The Idea of Public Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2003). Loughlin’s assumption is that the causes of the extension of the interests of government both for the welfare of the individual citizen and for the corporate well being of the nation is inextricably bound with what he calls the “rise of the masses”. In Loughlin’s opinion, the powers of modern governments impact not only on the individual citizen but also on business organizations of every type. Thus the concern of government extends not only to the welfare of the individual but also to the performance of the economy and prosperity of the nation. As a further consequence, he observes that an extensive body of administrative law has grown rapidly.

  9. 9.

    See also L. Hooghe, G. Marks, Multi-level governance and European integration (Oxford, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2001); A. Littoz-Monnet, “Dynamic Multi-Level Governance – Bringing the Study of Multi-Level Interactions into the Theorising of European Integration” (2010) 14 European Integration Online Papers (EloP) article 14, available at www.eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2010-001a.htm.

  10. 10.

    This volume sets on a comprehensive definition of International Organisations that includes all types of Organisations (unless otherwise indicated, as in the case of public-private partnerships). For an exhaustive taxonomy of the diverse types of organisations in the domain of global governance See E. Benvenisti, The Law of Global Governance, see text at section 1, text n 22 and n 96, chapter 4 n 6 and n 33; P.L. Lindseth, “Supranational Organisations” in I. Hurd, I. Johnstone, J. Katz Cogan (eds.), Oxford Handbook of International Organisations (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015).

  11. 11.

    See also S. Cassese, “Relations between International Organizations and National Administrations”, in IISA, Proceedings, XIXth International Congress of Administrative Sciences, Kluwer 1983. On the foundations of GAL See S. Battini, “L’impatto della globalizzazione sulla pubblica amministrazione e sul diritto amministrativo: quattro percorsi” (2006) Giornale di diritto amministrativo 341; S. Benhabib, Another Cosmopolitanism: Hospitality, Sovereignity, and Democratic Iterations (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2006). Benhabib refers to the distinction between international and cosmopolitan norms of justice. The former emerge through treaty obligations to which states and their representatives are signatories. Cosmopolitan norms of justice accrue to individuals as moral and legal persons in a worldwide society.

  12. 12.

    On Global administrative law See also S. Cassese et al. (eds.), Global Administrative Law. Cases and Materials (New York, IRPA – Iilj 2008); S. Cassese, “The Globalization of Law” (2005) 37 New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 973; S. Battini, Amministrazioni senza Stato (Milano 2003); G. Della Cananea, “Beyond the State: The Europeanization and Globalization of Procedural Administrative Law” (2003) 9 European Public Law 563; A.C. Aman, “Administrative Law in a Global Era” (2002) 54 Administrative Law Review 409, and “Globalization, Democracy, and the Need for a New Administrative Law” (2003) 49 UCLA Law Review 1687; G. Dimitropoulos, “Towards a Typology of Administrative Levels and functions in the Global Legal Order” (2011) 23 European Review of Public Law 433.

  13. 13.

    See generally www.iilj.org/gal.

  14. 14.

    See especially N. Krisch, B. Kingsbury, “Introduction: Global Governance and Global Administrative Law in the International Legal Order” (2006) 17 European Journal of International Law13.

  15. 15.

    On cosmopolitanism, also S. Benhabib Another Cosmopolitan, see text n 11.

  16. 16.

    See judgements n. C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P, par. 321. For commentary on this case See J. D’Aspremont, F. Dopagne, “Kadi: The ECJ’s Reminder of the Elementary Divide between Legal Orders” (2008) International Organization Law Review 1, available at SSRN: www.ssrn.com/abstract=1341982; G. De Burca, “The European Court of Justice and the International Legal Order after Kadi” Jean Monnet Working Paper 01/09, available at www.jeanmonnetprogram.org.

  17. 17.

    See S. Lehne, I. Tseminidou, Where in the world is the EU? (Brussels, Carnegie Europe, 2015) available here: www.carnegieeurope.eu/2015/04/28/where-in-world-is-eu/i7vr.

  18. 18.

    A full acknowledgement of the EU’ participation in global organisations and processes is provided in G. Vesperini, Europe and global law, in C. Cassese (ed.), Research Handbook on Global Administrative Law (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016).

  19. 19.

    More specifically on the role of the EU in the WTO and the Codex Alimentarius Commission (with regard to the regulation of food safety matters) See A. Battaglia, “Food Safety: Between European and Global Administration” (2006) 6 Global Jurist Advances article 8.

  20. 20.

    On the relationship between the Aarhus Convention and European law See L. Collins, “Are We There Yet? The Right to Environment in International and European Law” (2007) 2 The McGill International Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy 119; K. Getliffe, “Proceduralisation and the Aarhus Convention. Does increased participation in the decision-making process lead to more effective EU environmental law?” (2002) 4 EU Environmental Law Review 101.

  21. 21.

    For general discourse on EU as a cosmopolitan democracy and its relationship with other IOs See E.O. Eriksen, “The EU: A Cosmopolitan Vanguard?” (2009) 9 Global Jurist Advances article 6. On the concept of “legal transplant” understood as the inclusion of a part of a legal system within another legal system, See A. Watson, Society and Legal Change (Edinburgh, Scottish Academic Press, 1977).

  22. 22.

    See E. Benvenisti, The Law of Global Governance, see text at section 1, text n 10 and n 96 and chapter 4 n 6 and n 33, at 73.

  23. 23.

    See P. Pawlyak, “Cyber Diplomacy. EU dialogue with third countries” (2015) European Parliamentary Research Service available at www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2015/564374/EPRS_BRI(2015)564374_EN.pdf.

  24. 24.

    See art. 130u of the Treaty of Maastricht.

  25. 25.

    See A. Dobreva, “European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights” (2015) European Parliamentary Research Service.

  26. 26.

    See, for instance, A. Bradford, “The Brussels Effect” (2012) 107:1 Northwestern University Law Review 1.

  27. 27.

    On the relationship between international law and European law conceptualized as both a constraint for the EU institutions and as an instrument for the advancement of European integration See B. De Witte, “International Law as a Tool for the European Union” (2009) 5 European Constitutional Law Review 265. See also M. Koskenniemi (ed.), International Law Aspects of the European Union (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 1998); J.C. Gautron, L. Grard (eds.), Droit international et droit communautaire, perspectives actuelles (Paris, Pedone, 2000); A. Peters, “The Position of International Law within the European community Legal Order” (1997) 40 German Yearbook of International Law; E. De Smijter, “The European Union as an Actor under International Law” (1999) 19 Yearbook of European Law. On the relationship between global governance and regional governance See A.D. Ba, “Contested Spaces. The Politics od Regional and Global Governance”, in A.D. Ba, M.J. Hoffmann, Contending Perspectives on Global Governance. Coherence, Contestation and World Order (London, New York, Routledge, 2005) 190.

  28. 28.

    Data available at S. Lehne, I. Tseminidou, Where in the world is the EU ? see text n 17 and chapter 2 n 18.

  29. 29.

    See e.g. T. Perisin, “EU Regulatory Policy and World Trade” (2015) 11 European Constitutional Law Review 99 .

  30. 30.

    See B. Kingsbury, N. Krisch, R.B. Stewart, The Emergence of Global Administrative Law, see text at section 3, at 21.

  31. 31.

    See F. Schimmelfennig, “Europeanization beyond Europe” (2015) 10 Living Reviews in European Governance 1.

  32. 32.

    See G. Shaffer, “International Trade-WTO-Quantitative Restrictions_Environmental Protection_Andangered Species_U.S. Import Ban on Shrimp” (1999) 93 American Journal of International Law 513.

  33. 33.

    See S. Cassese, When Legal Orders Collide: The Role of Courts (Global Law Press, Editoria Derecho Global, 2010).

  34. 34.

    See K.J. Alter, The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2014).

  35. 35.

    See R.H. Steinberg, “In the Shadow of Law or Power? Consensus-Based Bargaining and Outcomes in the GATT/WTO” (2002) 56 International Organization 441; and “Judicial Lawmaking at the WTO: Discursive, Constitutional, and Political Constraints” (2004) 98 American Journal of International Law 247.

  36. 36.

    See International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, Annual report 2014, available at www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2015/01/09/000470435_20150109143952/Rendered/PDF/936120AR0Box380RENCH0ICSID0AR140FRE.pdf.

  37. 37.

    See L. Friedman Goldstein, C. Ban, The European Human-Rights Regime as a Case Study in the Emergence of Global Governance, in A.D. Ba, M.J. Hoffmann, Contending Perspectives on Global Governance, see text n 27, at 154.

  38. 38.

    An attempt to classify all international judicial bodies has been made by the Project on International Courts and Tribunals. See www.pict-pcti.org/index.html.

  39. 39.

    See S. Spelliscy, “The Proliferation of International Tribunals: A Chink in the Armour” (2001–2002) 15 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 143.

  40. 40.

    See B. Kingsbury, “Is the Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals a Systemic Problem?” (1999) 31 New York University Journal of International Law & Policy 679; S. Cassese, “Administrative Law without the State? The Challenge of Global Regulation” (2005) 37 New York University Journal of International Law & Politics 663; E. Benvenisti, “The Interplay Between Actors as a Determinant of the Evolution of Administrative Law in International Institutions” (2004–2005) 68 Law & Contemporary Problems 319.

  41. 41.

    See Joined Cases 21–24/72, Judgment of 12.12.1972, International Fruit Company NV and Others v Produktschap voor Groenten en Fruit, 1972.

  42. 42.

    See Case 362/04, Leonid Minim v Commission of the European Communities, 31 January 2007.

  43. 43.

    See Conseil D’Etat Case 62814, 1 March 1968, Syndicat Général de Fabricants de Semoules de France.

  44. 44.

    See Case C-73/97 P, French Republic v Comafrica Spa & Dole Fresh Fruit Eur. Ltd. & Co., 1999; Case C-280/93, Germany v Council of the EU, 1994. See also J.P. Trachtman, Bananas, “Direct Effect and Compliance” (1999) 10 European Journal of International Law 655. For a general overview of international trade disputes and individual rights See A. Thies, “EU membership of the WTO: International trade disputes and judicial protection of individuals by EU courts” (2013) 2 Global constitutionalism 237.

  45. 45.

    See Case C-149/96, 23 November 1999, Portuguese Republic v Council of the European Union.

  46. 46.

    See Case C-459/03, 30 May 2006, Commission of the European Communities v Ireland.

  47. 47.

    See B. Carotti, M. Conticelli, “Setting Global Disputes: The Southern Bluefin Tuna Case”, in S. Cassese et al. (eds.), Global Administrative Law. Cases, Materials, Issues, 3tr edn (Rome-New York, IRPA – IILJ 2012) 145.

  48. 48.

    See also R.B. Siegel, “The Jurisgenerative Role of Social Movements in United States Constitutional Law” Yale Working Papers, available at www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/The_jurisgenerative_role_of_social_movements.pdf.

  49. 49.

    On the judicial cross-fertilization See A. Del Vecchio, Giurisdizione internazionale e globalizzazione, (Milano, Giuffrè 1992); R.P. Alford, “The Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals: International Adjudication in Ascendance” (2000) 94 American Society of International Law Proceedings 160; S.S. Abrahamson, M.J. Fischer, “All the World’s a Courtroom: Judging in the New Millennium” (1997) 26 Hofstra Law Review 273; P.S. Berman, “The Globalization of Jurisdiction” (2002) 151 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 311; T. Burgenthal, “Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals: Is it Good or Bad” (2001) 14 Leiden Journal of International Law 267; J.I. Charney, “The Impact on the International Legal System of the Growth of International Courts and Tribunals” (1999) 31 New York University Journal of International Law & Politics 697; T. Treves, “Judicial Lawmaking in an Era of Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals. Development of Fragmentation of International Law?”, in R. Wolfrum, V. Roeben (eds.), Development of International Law in Treaty Making (Berlin, Springer, 2005) 587; M.R. Ferrarese, “When National Actors Become Transnational: Transjudicial Dialogue between Democracy and Constitutionalism” (2009) 9 Global Jurist Frontiers article 2. E.U. Petersmann, “Justice ad Conflict Resolution: Proliferation, Fragmentation, and Decentralization of Dispute Settlement in International Trade” (2006) 27 University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law 273. Some authors have pointed at the problems raised by the proliferation of judicial bodies at the international level. See Y. Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004); R. Higgins, “A Babel of Judicial Voices? Ruminations from the Bench” (2006) 22 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 791. On judicial cross-fertilization in Europe See G. Martinico, F. Fontanelli, “The Hidden Dialogue: When Judicial Competitors Collaborate” (2008) 8 Global Jurist Advances article 7.

  50. 50.

    See East Timor Case (Portugal v Australia), Judgement, ICJ Reports 1995, at 90.

  51. 51.

    See A. Reinisch, C. Irgel, “The participation of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in the WTO dispute settlement system” (2001) 1 Non-State actors and International Law 127.

  52. 52.

    See O. Schachter, “The Invisible College of International Lawyers” (1977) 72 Northwestern University Scholl of Law Review 2017.

  53. 53.

    At present, the process of review is on-going. See the Report on eligibility that has followed the Compliance Review Panel Request No 1/2009.

  54. 54.

    See Request for Inspection No RQ07/03. See generally G. Sgueo, “Proactive Strategies in Global Legality Review” (2010) 1 Rivista trimestrale di diritto pubblico.

  55. 55.

    See the Independent Review Mechanism Eligibility Report for Compliance Review on Compliance Review Request No. RQ2007/1, 24 August 2007, at 20. See also the Compliance Review Report, 20 June 2008.

  56. 56.

    See T. Risse, “Transnational Actors and World Politics, in W.Ch. Zimmerli, K. Richter, M. Holzinger” (eds.), Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance (Berlin, Springer, 2007).

  57. 57.

    See Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995), at 32.

  58. 58.

    See World Bank, Consultations with Civil Society Organizations: General Guidelines for World Bank Staff, Washington 2000, at 5.

  59. 59.

    See K. Andersen, “The Protester” Time Magazine (2011) December 14.

  60. 60.

    M.E. Keck, K. Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders see text at section 1, text n 68, chapter 3 n 28, chapter 4 n 29 and chapter 6 n 24, at 33. See also R. Falk, Global Civil Society: Perspectives, Initiatives, Movements (Oxford, Oxford Development Studies, 1998).

  61. 61.

    See J. Keane, Global Civil Society see text at section 3 and text n 62.

  62. 62.

    See J. Keane, Global Civil Society? see text at section 3 and text n 61.

  63. 63.

    On business’ direct involvement in processing international law and its problems See N. Klein, No logo (New York, Picador 2000) 433; D.M. Trubek, J. Mosher, J.S. Rothstein, “Transnationalism in the Regulation of Labour Relations: International Regimes and Transnational Advocacy Networks ” (2000) 25 Law Social Inquiry 1187. For more specific focus on collaboration projects between companies and the non-for-profit sector See K. Bastmeijer, J. Verschuuren, “NGO-business collaborations and the law: sustainability, limitations of the law, and the changing relationship between companies and NGOs”, in I. Demirag (ed.), Corporate Social Responsibility, Accountability and Governance. Global Perspectives (Sheffield, Greenleaf Publishing, 2005) 314; J.P. Doh, H. Teegen, “Non-governmental Organizations as Institutional Actors in International Business: Theory and Implications” (2002) 11 International Business Review 665.

  64. 64.

    See J.T. Matthews, “Power Shift: The Rise of Global Civil Society” (1997) 76 Foreign Affairs 50.

  65. 65.

    See M. Edwards, NGO Rights and Responsibilities (London, The Foreign Policy Centre, 2000) and also M. Edwards, Civil Society (Cambridge MA, Polity Press, 2004).

  66. 66.

    See L. Salamon, “The Rise of the Non-Profit Sector” (1994) 4 Foreign Affairs 109.

  67. 67.

    See M. Salamon, S.W. Sokolowski, M.A, Haddock, “Measuring the Economic Value of Volunteer Work Globally: concepts, Estimates, and a Roadmap to the Future” (2011) 82 Analysis of Public and Cooperative Economics 217. For further details See International Labor Organization, Manual on the Measurement of Volunteer Work, available at www.ccss.jhu.edu.

  68. 68.

    On the contribution of NGOs to the formation of the international legal order See M.E. Keck, K. Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders see text at section 1, text n 60, chapter 3 n 28, chapter 4 n 29 and chapter 6 n 24; R. Krut, Globalization and Civil Society: NGO Influence in International Decision Making (Geneva, UNRISD, 1997); D. Held, Democracy and the Global Legal Order (Stanford, Polity Press, 1995); M. Shaw, Global Society and International Relations (Cambridge, Polity Press, 1995); R. Falk, On Humane Governance: Toward a New Global Politics (Cambridge, Polity Press, 1995); H.J. Steiner, P. Alston, International Human Rights in Context (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2000); H. Anheier et al., Global Civil Society, see text at section 6.1, text n 81 and see chapter 2 n 27; D. Eberly, The Rise of Global Civil Society. Building Communities and Nations from the Bottom Up (New York - London, Encounter Books, 2008); K. Martens, “NGOs in the UN System: Examining Formal and Informal Mechanisms of Interaction” (2004) 11 International Law Journal of Civil Society 11; H. Cullen, K. Morrow, “International civil society in international law: The growth of NGO participation” (2001) 1 Non-State Actors and International Law 7; R.D. Martenstz, Reconstructing World Politics see text at section 6.1; S. Charnovitz, “Two Centuries of Participation: NGOs and International governance”(1996–1997) 18 Michigan Journal of International Law 183; and, also, S. Charnovitz, “WTO Cosmopolitics” (2002) 34 New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 299; P. Ghils, “International Civil Society: International Non-governmental Organizations in the International System” (1992) 44 The International Journal of Science in Society 417; D. Tarlock, “The Role of Non-Governmental Organizations in the Development of International Environmental Law” (1993) 68 Chicago-Kent Law Review 61.

  69. 69.

    See B. Kingsbury, “First Amendment Liberalism as Global Legal Architecture: Ascriptive Groups and the Problems of the Liberal NGO Model of International Civil Society” (2002) 3 Chicago Journal of International Law 183; M.J. Peterson, “Transnational Activity, International Society, and world Politics” (1992) 21 Millennium 371; K. Raustiala, “The Participatory Revolution in International Environmental Law” (1997) 21 Harvard Environmental Law Review 537; G.A. Christenson, “World Civil Society and the International Rule of Law” (1997) 19 Human Rights Quarterly 724; S.E. Eizenstat, “Non-governmental Organizations as the Fifth Estate” (2004) 5 Seton Hall Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations 15.

  70. 70.

    See K. Martens, “Mission Impossible? Defining Nongovernmental Organizations” (2002) 13 International Journal of Voluntary & Non-profit Organizations 271.

  71. 71.

    See G. Sgueo, “Financial Accountability of Civil Society Organisations. Improving Cooperation with EU Institutions” (2015) European Parliament.

  72. 72.

    See A. Bianchi, Non State Actors in International Law (Burlington, Ashgate, 2009).

  73. 73.

    See L. Cromwell White, The Structure of Private International Organizations (Philadelphia, Pa., George S. Ferguson company, 1933).

  74. 74.

    See K. Martens, Mission Impossible? see text n 70.

  75. 75.

    See ECOSOC Resolution 288 (X) the 27th February 1950.

  76. 76.

    See ECOSOC Resolution 1296 (XLV) of 25th June 1968.

  77. 77.

    See T. Davies, NGOs, A New History of Transnational Civil Society see text at section 6.2, see n 79 and see chapter 4 n 28, at 52.

  78. 78.

    See United Nation Centre on Transnational Corporations, Transnational Corporations in World Development: Trends and Prospects, New York 1988, at 24.

  79. 79.

    See T. Davies, NGOs, A New History of Transnational Civil Society see text at section 6.2, text n 77 and chapter 4 n 28, at 150.

  80. 80.

    See M. Hardt, A. Negri, Empire (Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press, 2000).

  81. 81.

    See K. Anderson, D. Rieff, “Global Civil Society: A Sceptical View” in H. Anheier, M. Glausius, M. Kaldor, Global Civil Society see text at section 6.1, text n 68 and chapter 2 n 27, at 26.

  82. 82.

    See United Nations, ECOSOC, Basic Facts about ECOSOC Status, New York 2012, available here www.csonet.org/index.php?menu=17.

  83. 83.

    See Council of Europe, Fundamental Principles on the Status of Non-governmental Organisations in Europe and Explanatory Memorandum, 2002, paragraphs 33 and 45, available here www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/cdcj/ONG/Fundamental%20Principles%20E.pdf.

  84. 84.

    See J. Mansbridge, “A “Selection Model” of Political Representation” (2009) 17 Journal of Political Philosophy 369.

  85. 85.

    See generally J. De fine Licht, D. Naurin, P. Esaiasson, M. Gilljam, “Does Transparency Generate Legitimacy? An Experimental Study of Procedure Acceptance of Open- and Closed-Door Decision-Making” (2011) QoG Working Paper Series 8.

  86. 86.

    See generally World Health Organization, Implementation of the International Health Regulations, Report of the Review Committee on the Functioning of the International Health Regulations (2005) in Relation to Pandemic (H1N1) 2009, A64/10, available at www.apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA64/A64_10-en.pdf.

  87. 87.

    See S. Charnovitz, WTO Cosmopolitics see text n 68, at 270.

  88. 88.

    See WB Operational Policy 8.00 on Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies (March 2007), available at www.web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/PROJECTS/EXTPOLICIES/EXTOPMANUAL/0,contentMDK:21238942~menuPK:4564185~pagePK:64709096~piPK:64709108~theSitePK:502184,00.html.

  89. 89.

    See J.M. Brinkerhoff, D.W. Brinkeroff, “Government-Nonprofit Relations in Comparative Perspective. Evolution, Themes and New Directions” (2012) 22 Public Administration and Development 3.

  90. 90.

    See N. Lebessis, J. Paterson, Developing New Modes of Governance (European Commission, Forward Studies Unit, 2000).

  91. 91.

    See H. Kriesi, Daniel Bochsler, Jörg Matthes, Sandra Lavenex, Marc Bühlmann, Frank Esser (eds.), Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization (London-New York, Palgrave, 2013).

  92. 92.

    See EU Commission, Communication on EU Regulatory Fitness of December 2012 (“REFIT Communication 2012”).

  93. 93.

    See G. Helleiner, “Markets, Politics and Globalisation” (2001) 2 Journal of Human Development 1.

  94. 94.

    See M. Shapiro, ““Deliberative”, “Independent” Technocracy V. Democratic Politics” see text at section 6.1, at 349.

  95. 95.

    See J. Pauwelyn, R.A. Wessel, J. Wouters (eds.), Informal International Lawmaking (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012).

  96. 96.

    See E. Benvenisti, The Law of Global Governance, see text at section 1, text n 10 and n 22, and see chapter 4 n 6 and n 33, at 87. See also UN Secretary General, Delivering Justice: Programme of Action to Strengthen the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels, doc A/66/749, 2012, available here: www.unrol.org/doc.aspx?d=3141.

  97. 97.

    Exceptions include A. Moravcsik, Is there a “Democratic Deficit” in World Politics? see text at section 7.2, at 346. With specific regard to the European democratic deficit See F.W. Scharpf, Governing in Europe: Effective or Democratic? (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999).

  98. 98.

    See D.M. Malone, “The Security Council in the Post-Cold War Era: A Study in the Creative Interpretation of the U.N. Charter” (2003) 35 New York University Journal of International Law & Policy 487.

  99. 99.

    See UN Doc. A/66L.42/Rev. 1.

  100. 100.

    See Policy of 1 July 2010, available at www.documents.worldbank.org.

  101. 101.

    See Regulation No. 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and the Council of 30 May 2001 Regarding Public Access to Documents (OJ 2001 No. L145/43, 31 May 2001).

  102. 102.

    The three models of consultations are examined in G. Sgueo, “Decentralization, Integration and Transposition” (2010) 1 Three Models of Consultation in the Global Legal Order 253.

  103. 103.

    See generally www.eco-forum.org.

  104. 104.

    See generally www.eeb.org.

  105. 105.

    See generally www.efsa.europa.eu.

  106. 106.

    See generally www.europa.eu/legislation_summaries/energy/european_energy_policy/l27044_en.htm.

  107. 107.

    See generally www.euclidnetwork.eu.

  108. 108.

    See generally www.alter-eu.org.

  109. 109.

    See generally www.alternativetrademandate.org.

  110. 110.

    See generally www.forum-adb.org.

  111. 111.

    See generally www.coe.int/T/NGO/default_en.asp.

  112. 112.

    See generally www.upu.int/consultative_committee/en/index.shtml.

  113. 113.

    See generally www.climatenetwork.org/.

  114. 114.

    See generally www.betteraid.org/en/about-us.html.

  115. 115.

    See generally www.ngocongo.org.

  116. 116.

    See generally www.uncaccoalition.org/en/.

  117. 117.

    See generally www.whiteband.org/en.

  118. 118.

    See WTO Press Release n. 236/2001 “More Appoints Advisory Panel on WTO Affairs”, July 5, 2001.

  119. 119.

    See generally www.eplo.org.

  120. 120.

    See generally www.act4europe.org/code/en/about.asp?Page=41.

  121. 121.

    See generally www.ngo-monitor.org.

  122. 122.

    See generally www.hapinternational.org.

  123. 123.

    See generally www.twn.my/.

References

  • Allott, P. 1992. Reconstituting humanity – New international law. European Journal of International Law 3: 219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anheier, H., M. Glasius, and M. Kaldor. 2001. Global civil society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ankersmit, F.R. 1996. Aesthetic politics: Political philosophy beyond fact and value. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avant, D.D., M. Finnemore, and S.K. Sell. 2010. Who governs the globe? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Batliwala, S., and D. Brown (eds.). 2006. Transnational civil society. An introduction. Bloomfield: Kumarian Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benvenisti, E. 2014. The law of global governance. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, P. 2007. A pluralist approach to international law. Yale Journal of International Law 32: 301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besson, S. 2009. European legal pluralism after Kadi. European Constitutional Law Review 5: 237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohman, J. 2007. Democracy across borders. From Demos to Demoi. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, J. 2000. Should we take global governance seriously? Chicago Journal of International Law 1: 217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown Weiss, E. 2010. On being accountable in a kaleidoscopic world. American Society of International Law Proceedings 104: 477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bull, H. 1995. The anarchical society: A study of order in world politics. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casini, L., and B. Kingsbury. 2009. Global administrative law dimensions of international organizations law. IILJ Working Paper 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassese, S. 2003. Lo Spazio Giuridico Globale. Laterza: Roma-Bari.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassese, S. 2009. Il diritto globale. Torino: Einaudi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charney, J.I. 1993. Universal international law. American Journal of International Law 87: 529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiti, E., and B. Mattarella. 2012. Global administrative law and EU administrative law. Relationships, legal issues and comparison. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chryssochoou, D.N. 2009. The European Synarchy: New discourses on sovereignty. Göttingen Journal of International Law 1: 115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cover, R.M. 1983. The Supreme Court, 1982 Term-Foreword: Nomos and narrative. Harvard Law Review 97: 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crozier, M., S. Huntington, and J. Watanuki. 1975. The crisis of democracy: Report on the governability of democracies to the Trilateral Commission. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. 1999. Can international organizations be democratic? A skeptic’s view. In Democracy’s edges, ed. I. Shapiro and C. Hacker-Cordon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahrendorf, R. 1999. The third way and liberty: An authoritarian streak in Europe’s new center. Foreign Affairs 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, T. 2013. NGOs, a new history of transnational civil society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Burca, G., R.O. Keohane, C. Sabel. 2013. New modes of pluralist global governance. IILJ Working Paper 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Mars, W.E. 2005. NGOs and transnational networks. Wild cards in world politics. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Oliveira, M.D., and R. Tandon (eds.). 1994. Citizens strengthening global civil society. Civicus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donini, A. 1995. The bureaucracy and the free spirits: Stagnation and innovation in the relationship between the UN and NGOs. Third World Quarterly 16: 421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunoff, J.L. 1998. The misguided debate over NGO participation at the WTO. Journal of International Economic Law 1: 433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, G. 1792. Form and foundation, views and laws, proposed for the consideration of members of an universal society. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, E.B. 1976. Turbulent fields and the theory of regional integration. International Organization 30: 173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R.B., and T.J. Biersteker (eds.). 2002. The emergence of private authority in global governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heclo, H. 1978. Issue networks and the executive establishment. In The new American political system, ed. A. King. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Held, D., and K. Koenig-Archibugi. 2004. Introduction. Government and Opposition 39: 125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, R. 1995. Problems and process: International law and how we use it. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kaldor, M. 2003. The idea of global civil society. International Affairs 79: 583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamminga, M.T. 2007. What makes an NGO “Legitimate” in the eyes of states? In The involvement of NGOs in international governance and policy: Sources of legitimacy, ed. A. Vedder. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazansky, P. 1902. Théorie de l’administration international. Revue Generale de Droit International Publique 9: 353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keane, J. 2005. Global civil society? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keck, M.E., and K. Sikkink. 1998. Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kegley, C., and E. Wittkopf (eds.). 1995. The global agenda: Issues and perspectives. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R.O., and J.S. Nye (eds.). 1971. Transnational relations and world politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R.O., and J.S. Nye. 1977. Power and interdependence: World politics in transition. Boston: Little Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingsbury, B., N. Krisch, and R.B. Stewart. 2005. The emergence of global administrative law. Law and Contemporary Problems 68: 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kissinger, H. 2014. World order. Reflections on the character of nations and the course of history. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohler-Koch, B., and C. Quittkat. 2013. De-mystification of participatory democracy: EU governance and civil society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Krasner, S. (ed.). 1983. International regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lador-Lederer, J. 1963. International non-governmental organizations and economic entities: A study in autonomous organization and Ius Gentium. Leyden: A.W. Sythoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, S. 2013. NGOs, civil society and the public sphere. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipschutz, R. 1992. Reconstructing world politics, the emergence of global civil society. Millenium: Journal of International Studies 21: 399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manheim, J. 2001. The death of thousand cuts: Corporate campaigns and the attack on the corporation. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzower, M. 2013. Governing the world. The history of an idea, 1815 to the present. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinnis, J.O. 2012. Accelerating democracy: Transforming government through technology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A. 2002. In defense of the “Democratic Deficit”, reassessing legitimacy in the European Union. Journal of Media and communication Studies 40: 603.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A. 2004. Is there a “Democratic Deficit” in world politics? A framework for analysis. Government and Opposition 39: 336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mullerson, R. 1990. Right to survival as right to life of humanity. Denver Journal of International Law and Policy 19: 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, P. (ed.). 2011. Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ottaway, M. 2001. Corporatism goes global: International organizations, nongovernmental organization networks, and transnational business. Global Governance 7: 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, A., and A. Bianchi (eds.). 2013. Transparency in international law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickard, B. 1956. The greater United Nations. New York: Carnegie Endowment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabkin, J. 2005. Law without nations? Why constitutional government requires sovereign states. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinalda, B., and B. Verbeek. 2004. Decision making within international organizations. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinsch, P.S. 1911. Public international unions: Their work and organization: A study in international administrative law. Boston: Ginn and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J.G. 2004. Reconstructing the global public domain – Issues, actors, and practices. European Journal of International Relations 10: 499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruzza, C. 2007. Advocacy coalitions and the participation of organised civil society in the European Union. In Governance and civil society in the European union: Exploring policy issues, ed. V. Della Sala and C. Ruzza. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L., and H. Anheier. 1996. The emerging non-profit sector. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sapra, S. 2009. The WTO system of trade governance: The stale NGO debate and the appropriate role for non-state actors. Oregon Review of International Law 11: 71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholte, J.A. 2014. Reinventing global democracy. European Journal of International Relations 20: 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, M. 2001. The institutionalization of European administrative space. In The institutionalization of Europe, ed. A. Stone Sweet, W. Sandholtz, and N. Fligstein. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, M. 2005. “Deliberative”, “Independent” Technocracy V. democratic politics: Will the globe echo the E.U.? Law and Contemporary Problems 68: 341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siedentop, L. 2000. Democracy in Europe. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A.M. 2000. Judicial globalization. Virginia Journal of International Law 40: 1103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A.M. 2003. A global community of courts. Harvard International Law Journal 44: 191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A.M. 2004. A new world order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavasage, D. 2004. Open-door or closed door? Transparency in domestic and international bargaining. International Organization 58: 667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, R.B. 2014. Remedying disregard in global regulatory governance: Accountability, participation, and responsiveness. The American Journal of International Law 108: 211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone Sweet, A. 2010. The European Court of Justice and the judicialization of EU governance, living reviews in European governance. Living Reviews in European Governance 2: 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strange, S. 1996. The retreat of the state: The diffusion of power in the world economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, P.E. 2003. Threats and responses: A new power in the streets. New York Times, February 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wapner, P. 1995. Politics beyond the state. World Politics 47: 311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warkentin, C. 2001. Reshaping world politics. NGOs, the internet, and global civil society. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wouters, J., A. Nollkaemper, and E. De Wet (eds.). 2008. The Europeanisation of international law. The status of international law in the EU and its member states. The Hague: TMC Asser Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wouters, J., J. Pauwelyn and R.A. Wessel (eds.). 2012. Informal international law making. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zurn, M. 1998. Democratic governance beyond the nation state?. Institut für Interkulturelle und Internationale Studien Arbeitspapier n. 12.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. New York University, Florence, Italy

    Gianluca Sgueo

Authors
  1. Gianluca Sgueo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sgueo, G. (2016). A Framework for Interactions Between National, European and Global Administrative Systems of Law. In: Beyond Networks - Interlocutory Coalitions, the European and Global Legal Orders. Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation, vol 8. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28875-8_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28875-8_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28873-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28875-8

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

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation