12th August 2024: digital purchasing is currently unavailable on Cambridge Core. Due to recent technical disruption affecting our publishing operation, we are experiencing some delays to publication. We are working hard to restore services as soon as possible and apologise for the inconvenience. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 March 2019
The growth of transnational private regulation has involved a great many types of changes, including changes in the types of actors that make rules, in the degree of formality of rules, and in the spatial boundaries of rules. One type of change that merits more focused attention is in the media of rules. Historically a major shift was from rules that were communicated orally, to rules that were inscribed in physical objects. Changes in these objects, from stone or clay to paper and print media were also consequential, enabling rules to be created, preserved and disseminated in new ways. This shift was closely associated with the growth of public authority and its accompanying artefacts such as written constitutions, official documents, and paper money. Today further technological changes in information and communications media are widely recognized as associated with structural transformations of all types of institutions. These technologies facilitate the use of networks and transnational supply chains by business. They stimulate the growth of global social movements and undermine state censorship. They lead to experiments with e-Government and threaten the business models of newspapers and the music industry. But what exactly is the significance of these technological changes for the creation, preservation and dissemination of rules, and how do these changes in the media of rules interact with the growth of transnational private regulation?
1 On transnational regulation, see for instance, John Braithwaite & Peter Drahos, Global Business Regulation (2000); Burkard Eberlein, Kenneth Abbott, Julia Black, Errol Meidinger & Stepan Wood, Interactions in Transnational Business Governance Interactions: Conceptualizing a Terrain, paper under review at Regulation & Governance (2013); Thomas Hale and David Held eds, Handbook of Innovations in Transnational Governance (2011), Christian Tietje & Alan Brouder, Handbook of Transnational Economic Governance Regimes (2009).Google Scholar
2 Lessig, Lawrence, Code. Version 2.0. (2006).Google Scholar
3 Riles, Annelise, Collateral Knowledge: Legal Reasoning in Global Financial Markets (2011); Annelise Riles, The Anti-Network: Private Global Governance, Legal Knowledge and the Legitimacy of the State, 56 Amer'n J. of Comp. L. Special Symposium Issue 605-30 (2008).Google Scholar
4 Biggins, John & Scott, Colin, Extending and Contracting Jurisdictions in a Transnational Private Regulatory Regime: Efficiency, Legitimacy, ISDA and the OTC Derivatives Markets, UCD Working Papers in Law, Criminology & Socio-Legal Studies Research Paper No. 51/2011, November 1, (2011), available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1952582 (last accessed: 1 December 2012).Google Scholar
5 Hansen, Hans Krause & Salskov-Iversen, Dorte, Critical Perspectives on Private Authority in Global Politics (2008).Google Scholar
6 On documents, see for instance, Annelise Riles, Documents: Artifacts of Modern Knowledge (2006). On passports see Mark Salter, Rights of Passage: The Passport in International Relations (2003). On currencies, see Eric Helleiner, The Making of National Money: Territorial Currencies in Historical Perspective.Google Scholar
7 Shah, Nisha, The Territorial Trap of the Territorial Trap: Global Transformation and the Problem of the State's Two Territories, 6 Int'l Pol'tl Soc'y 57-76 (2012).Google Scholar
8 Spruyt, Hendrik, The Sovereign State and its Competitors: An Analysis of Systems Change (1996).Google Scholar
9 Helleiner, Eric, The Making of National Money: Territorial Currencies in Historical Perspective (2003).Google Scholar
10 Kern, Stephen, The Culture of Time and Space 1880-1918 (1986).Google Scholar
11 Vogel, Steven Kent, Freer Markets, More Rules: Regulatory Reform in Advanced Industrial Countries (1996).Google Scholar
12 “Control at a distance” is associated with Foucault's concept of governmentality. See Mike Reed Organizational Analysis as Discourse Analysis: A Critique in Discourse + Organization 193-213 (David Grant, Tom Keenoy & Cliff Oswick eds., 1998).Google Scholar
13 Global Governmentality: Governing International Spaces (Wendy Larner &William Walters eds., 2004).Google Scholar
14 Slaughter, Anne-Marie, Disaggregated Sovereignty: Towards the Public Accountability of Global Government Networks”. 39 Gov't & Oppos'n 122-55 (2004); Anne-Marie Slaughter, a New World Order (2004).Google Scholar
15 Levi-Faur, David, The Global Diffusion of Regulatory Capitalism,” 598 The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 12-32 (2005).Google Scholar
16 Hawkins, Darren, David Lake, Daniel Nielson & Michael J. Tierney eds., Delegation and Agency in International Organizations (2006).Google Scholar
17 Sabel, Charles & Zeitlin, Jonathan Learning from Difference: The New Architecture of Experimentalist Governance in the EU in Experimentalist Governance in the European Union, Towards a New Architecture 1-28 (Charles Sabel & Jonathan Zeitlin eds., 2010).Google Scholar
18 McKeen-Edwards, Heather & Porter, Tony, Transnational Financial Associations and the Governance of Global Finance: Assembling Power and Wealth (book manuscript in press); Aihwa Ong & Stephen Collier, Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics and Ethics as Anthropological Problems (2005); Saskia Sassen, Territory, Authority, Rights: From Medieval to Global Assemblages. Princeton: Princeton University Press (2006).Google Scholar
19 Calliess, Gralf-Peter & Zumbansen, Peer, Rough Consensus and Running Code: a Theory of Transnational Private Law (2010)Google Scholar
20 The Laws of the Markets (Michel Callon ed., 1998); Bruno Latour, Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory (2005).Google Scholar
21 MacKenzie, Donald, Making Things the Same: Gases, Emission Rights and Politics of Carbon Markets.” 34 Accounting, Organizations and Society 440-455 (2009).Google Scholar
22 Hansen, Hans Krause & Porter, Tony What do numbers do in global governance? International Political Sociology (forthcoming). See also Keith Robson Accounting Numbers as “Inscription”: Action at a Distance and the Development of Accounting, 17 Accounting, Organization and Society 685-708 (1992).Google Scholar
23 Ferguson, Glover, Have your Objects Call my Objects, Harv. Bus. Rev. 138-44 (2002).Google Scholar
24 Murphy, Craig, International Organization and Industrial Change: Global Governance since 1850 (1994).Google Scholar
25 Lessig, , supra note 2.Google Scholar
26 Porter, Tony, “Making Serious Measures: Numerical Indices, Peer Review and Transnational Actor Networks,” 15 J. of Int'l Rel. & Dev. (2011) 532-57.Google Scholar
27 On transnational democracy, accountability and legitimacy, see The Challenges of Global Business Authority: Democratic Renewal, Stalemate, or Decay? (Tony Porter & Karsten Ronit eds., 2010), Walter Mattli & Ngaire Woods, In Whose Benefit? Explaining Regulatory Change in World Politics, in The Politics of Global Regulation 1-43 (Walter Mattli & Ngaire Woods eds., 2009), Ruth Grant and Robert Keohane, Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics, 99 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 29-43 (2005), Global Accountabilities: Participation, Pluralism and Public Ethics (Alnoor Ebrahim & Edward Weisband eds., 2007). A well-recognized distinction is between input and output legitimacy (Fritz Scharpf, Governing in Europe. Effective and Democratic? (1999). Conceptually and ethically it is easier to focus on input because the observer is claiming that everyone should have an opportunity to participate in decisions that affect them, an easier claim to justify than is the observer's preference for a particular outcome. This is the approach taken here.Google Scholar
28 On capture, see Stefano Pagliari ed., The Making of Good Financial Regulation: Towards a Policy Response to Regulatory Capture (2012). For instance there may be public policy benefits in allowing knowledgeable firms to have privileged access while protecting the confidentiality of their commercial secrets. A more extreme view is that voluntary contracting between individual firms is preferable to mandatory public or private regulation, but the credibility of this view is low in the aftermath of the global financial crisis of 2007.Google Scholar
29 On democracy, accountability and TPR, see supra note 27.Google Scholar
30 United Nations Conference on Trade and Development The Digital Divide Report: ICT Diffusion Index 2005 (2006).Google Scholar
31 On the use of supply chain tracking technology for regulatory purposes, see Graeme Auld, Benjamin Cashore, Cristina Balboa, Laura Bozzi & Stefan Renckens, Can Technological Innovations Improve Private Regulation in the Global Economy? 12 Bus. & Pol. (2010). Efforts to use Walmart's electronic systems for these purposes are discussed in Hansen & Porter, supra note 20.Google Scholar
32 Weintraub, Jeff, The Theory and the Politics of the Public/Private Distinction, in Public and Private in Thought and Practice: Perspectives on a Grand Dichotomy 1-42 (Jeff Weintraub & Krishan Kumar eds., 1997).Google Scholar
33 Kaul, Inge & Mendoza, Ronald, Advancing the Concept of Public Goods, in Providing Global Public Goods: Managing Globalization 78-111 (Inge Kaul, Pedro Conceicao, Katell Le Goulven and Ronald Mendoza eds., 2003).Google Scholar
34 This argument draws upon an unpublished paper I produced for a project initiated by Jacqueline Best and Alexandra Gheciu entitled “Constitutive public practices in a world of changing boundaries”. The argument was informed by an unpublished overview paper they provided for that project. A copy of my paper is available upon request. On the project, see Centre for International Policy Studies, The Return of the Public, but not as We Knew It: Changing Practices of Global Governance, University of Ottawa, available online at: http://cips.uottawa.ca/projects/publicprivate-interaction-and-the-transformation-of-global-governance-2/ (last accessed: 1 December 2012).Google Scholar
35 On economic definitions, see Harold Demsetz, Toward a Theory of Property Rights, 57 Amer. Econ. Rev. 347-59 (1967); Alkuin Kölliker, Conclusion I: Governance Arrangements and Public Goods Theory: Explaining Aspects of Publicness, Inclusiveness and Delegation, in New Modes of Governance in the Global System: Exploring Publicness, Delegation and Inclusiveness 201-35 (Koenig-Archibugi, Mathias & Michael Zürn eds., 2006).Google Scholar
36 Bechtold, Stefan, The Present and Future of Digital Rights Management — Musings on Emerging Legal Problems, in Digital Rights Management – Technological, Economic, Legal and Political Aspects, Berlin: Springer 597-654 (Eberhard Becker et. al. eds., 2003); Karen Coylem, The Technology of Rights: Digital Rights Management, Based on a talk given at the Library of Congress (2003), available at: www.kcoyle.net/drm_basics1.html (last accessed: 1 December 2012).Google Scholar
37 D'Amato, Anthony, International Law: Process and Prospect (1986).Google Scholar
38 Abbott, Kenneth & Snidal, Duncan, Hard and Soft Law in International Governance, 54 Int'l Org. 421-56 (2000); William Bradford, International Legal Compliance: Surveying the Field 36 Georgetown J. of Int'l L. 495-36 (2005); Claire Kelly, Enmeshment as a Theory of Compliance, 37 New York Univ. J. of Int'l L. & Pol. 303-56 (2005); Edward Luck & Michael Doyle eds., Int'l L. & Org.: Closing the Compliance Gap (2004); Aseem Prakash & Matthew Potoski, Collective action through voluntary environmental programs: a club theory perspective,” 35 Pol. Stud. J. 773-92 (2007); Commitment and Compliance: The Role of Non-Binding Norms in the International Legal System (Dinah Shelton ed., 2000); Beth Simmons, Compliance with International Agreements, in International Law: Classic and Contemporary Readings 181-200 (Charlotte Ku & Paul Diehl eds., 2003).Google Scholar
39 Luhmann, Niklas, Law as a Social System (2004); Thomas Risse, “Let's Argue!” Communicative Action in World Politics, 54 Int'l Org. 1-39 (2000).Google Scholar
40 Porter, Tony, Transnational Policy Paradigm Change and Conflict in the Harmonization of Vehicle Safety and Accounting Standards, in Internationalization and Policy Paradigm Change 64-90 (Grace Skogstad ed., 2011).Google Scholar
41 Mitchell, Ronald B, Regime Design Matters: Intentional Oil Pollution and Treaty Compliance”, 48 International Organization 425-458 (1994).Google Scholar
You have
Access
