No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
O sentido do político na concepção do transconstitucionalismo: perspectiva sociológica
Abstract
a questão de saber se existe ou não pode ser encontrada em todos além do Estado tem sido o tema central da disputa acadêmica nas últimas décadas. Essa contribuição deriva do insight histórico que tem formas extensas de ordenar posses, qualidades constitucionais sempre existiram abaixo, ao lado e acima do estado. Nas últimas décadas, o debate sobre o constitucionalismo além do Estado se desdobrou em dois discursos separados: O primeiro é dirigido principalmente por cientistas políticos e pelo direito público e é caracterizado por uma tentativa de criar um estado nacional Este último está sistematicamente subestimando a dimensão política das estruturas transnacionais. A fim de colmatar esta lacuna para o número de figuras-chave de um conceito transnacional específico do político está sendo concretizada.
A evolução da vida em sociedade e a compreensão sobre o respeito à dignidade da pessoa humana fez surgir diversos instrumentos de proteção e mecanismos especializados em mediar possíveis violações. Nas Américas, o Sistema Interamericano de proteção dos direitos humanos, possui um órgão jurisdicional de suma importância para a proteção desses direitos: a Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos. Ela tem como função receber e julgar demandas que envolvam Estados com alcance regional. O acesso depende do cumprimento de requisitos essenciais de admissibilidade. A questão que se coloca no artigo é se é possível empregar as decisões da Corte como instância de revisão de sentenças nacionais, como uma quarta instância, e a dinâmica causada por essas decisões no âmbito doméstico dos Estados e na esfera internacional. O método é o hipotético-dedutivo e a metodologia bibliográfica e documental. Aqui serão analisados detalhes relevantes que se iniciam na análise e se estendem até a sentença final litígio
A questão de saber se existe ou não pode ser encontrada em todos além do Estado tem sido o tema central da disputa acadêmica nas últimas décadas. Essa contribuição deriva do insight histórico que tem formas extensas de ordenar posses, qualidades constitucionais sempre existiram abaixo, ao lado e acima do estado. Nas últimas décadas, o debate sobre o constitucionalismo além do Estado se desdobrou em dois discursos separados: O primeiro é dirigido principalmente por cientistas políticos e pelo direito público e é caracterizado por uma tentativa de criar um estado nacional Este último está sistematicamente subestimando a dimensão política das estruturas transnacionais. A fim de colmatar esta lacuna para o número de figuras-chave de um conceito transnacional específico do político está sendo concretizada. Palavras-chave: Constitucionalismo. Lei global. Transparência. Prestação de contas. Sociedade mundial.
A teoria da justiça política, segundo Hóffe, fundamentada na justiça comutativa, sustenta que a fundamentação das reivindicações normativas da sociedade na comunidade discursiva, como o fazem Apel e Habermas em sua ética do discurso, é apenas uma fundamentação derivada, pois a comunidade discursiva necessariamente pressupõe direitos humanos. Por sua vez, a ética do discurso argumenta que os direitos humanos só podem ser legitimados através do discurso. Este artigo mostra que o pressuposto normativo tanto para a comunidade discursiva quanto para o princípio da justiça comutativa é que todos os seres humanos são autorizados a uma partilha do mundo. Somente através desta premissa de uma justiça distributiva pode haver parceiros capazes de exercer reciprocidade e participantes do discurso que também tenham algo sobre o que tenham de decidir juntos.
Die folgenden Überlegungen werden zu demonstrieren versuchen, dass unter Gegenwartsbedingungen jede politische Kommunikation in ein System der Weltpolitik eingebettet ist und dass dies strukturell auch dann gilt, wenn dem einzelnen kommunikativen Akt diese Einbettung nicht unmittelbar anzusehen ist, weil er sich selbst nur als ein lokales oder regionales Geschehen ausflaggt. Im Vergleich zu dieser grundlegenden Hypothese der Unabweisbarkeit der Weltpolitik ist die anschließende Frage, ob dieses System der Weltpolitik auch einen Weltstaat konstituiert, von nachgeordneter Bedeutung. Für die Beantwortung dieser letzteren Frage hängt viel davon ab, welche Bedingungen man postulieren will, damit man bereit ist, einen Zusammenhang verdichteter politischer Kommunikation einen Staat zu nennen.
This chapter presents a broad-ranging account of the impact of the emergence of 'world society' on the ideals of constitutional democracy. This argument is based on the premise that constitutionalism has always maintained the Janus-face of inclusion and exclusion, emancipation and oppression. Although Western constitutionalism has acquired its inclusive qualities at the price of its cosmopolitan claims, it has nevertheless been able to provide a legal means of coordinating conflicting powers within nation-state systems. The democratic possibilities which are inherent in the emergence of a world society can be realised only by promoting an agenda of radical reform which, in conceptual terms, requires us to overcome the limitations of dualistic and representational thinking.
As social practices now frequently extend beyond national boundaries, experiences and expectations about fair and legitimate politics have become increasingly fragmented. Our ability to understand and interpret others and to tolerate difference, rather than overcome diversity, is therefore at risk. This book focuses on the contested meanings of norms in a world of increasing international encounters. The author argues that cultural practices are less visible than organizational practices, but are constitutive for politics and need to be understood and empirically ‘accounted’ for. Comparing four elite groups in Europe, Antje Wiener shows how this invisible constitution of politics matters. By comparing individual interpretations of norms such as democracy and human rights, she shows how they can mean different things, even to frequently traveling elite groups.
Global legal pluralism is not simply a result of political pluralism, but is instead the expression of deep contradictions between colliding sectors of a global society. At core, the fragmentation of global law is not simply about legal norm collisions or policyconflicts, but rather has its origin in contradictions between society-wide institutionalized rationalities, which law cannot solve, but which demand a new legal approach to colliding norms. This thesis will be evolved with three arguments: (1) The fragmentation of global law is more radical than any single reductionist perspective - legal, political, economic or cultural - can comprehend. Legal fragmentation is merely an ephemeral reflection of a more fundamental, multidimensional fragmentation of global society itself. (2) Any aspirations to a normative unity of global law are thus doomed from the outset. A meta-level at which conflicts might be solved is wholly elusive both in global law and in global society. Instead, we might expect intensified legal fragmentation. (3) Legal fragmentation cannot itself be combated. At the best, a weak normative compatibility of the fragments might be achieved. However, this is dependent upon the ability of conflicts law to establish a specific network logic, which can effect a loose coupling of colliding units.
The paper discusses the recent refusal of the Australian Federal Court to assure a native title right for the Aboriginal community in the Kimberley area of north-western Australia to object to any visual or auditory recordings or reproductions of what is to be found at sacred Wanjina and Wunggurr sites. This paper first aims to shed light on the collisions between the land-tied cultural traditions of the Wanjina-Wunggurr community and modern law from the perspective of “propertisation,” a theory which is currently gaining ground in legal and sociological discussions. Second, the relationship between the common law doctrine of native title and intellectual property (IP) law is analysed and the shortcomings of both concepts and further legal remedies in effectively protecting and preserving the sacred rock art sites are identified. Finally, these shortcomings are reflected against the backdrop of recent developments at the level of international law in the field of indigenous peoples’ rights and cultural expressions.
Zusammenfassung
In den vergangenen Jahrzehnten haben nicht-rechtliche und nichtpolitische Funktionssysteme in Europa ihre strukturellen Kopplungen mit den Systemen für Politik und Recht in nationalstaatlicher Form zunehmend durch Kopplungen zur EU substituiert. Weil europäische Kopplungen weniger strikt sind als nationale Kopplungen, erhöht dieser Wechsel die Autonomie der nicht-politischen und nichtrechtlichen Systeme. Der Grund für die geringere Zudringlichkeit der EU liegt in ihrer internen Struktur. Trotz bestimmter staatsähnlicher Merkmale muss die EU verstanden werden als ein Konglomerat, das eine breite Reihe von Rationalitätsformen horizontal bündelt. Ihre Politik zielt darauf ab, Asymmetrien zwischen funktional differenzierten Segmenten der Gesellschaft zu reduzieren, anstatt substantielle Einheit zu schmieden. Deswegen beschreibt sich das politische System der EU nicht als ein System, das anderen funktionalen Systemen übergeordnet ist.
States remain a central form of ordering but only one among several. In the transnational space, a wide range of autonomous public- and private-norm producing organizations and regimes operates, which is not, or only partly controlled, by states. The consequence is that the contemporary world is characterized by a multiplicity of overlapping normative orders that rely on different organizational principles: for example, some are territorially bound and some are functionally delineated. Governance structures have emerged as the form through which the multiplicity of orders is linked together. They are inter-contextual forms which simultaneously serve as buffer zones and transmission belts between these orders. As such, governance structures can be understood as institutional mechanisms that fulfill the function of ensuring the societal embeddedness of autonomous normative orders in the wider world through increased reflexivity. The type of law which has emerged in order to structure the governance phenomenon reflects the societal function of governance structures. Transnational law is an “in between worlds” law in the sense that a central aspect of transnational law is the framing of learning processes capable of ensuring mutual adaptability between normative orders. As such transnational law fulfills a different function than nation-state law which in essence remains oriented towards the upholding of already established normative expectations. As governance structures are the no man’s land between normative orders, they possess an intrinsic political quality. They are the battlefields were the delineation of normative orders are established and continuously reaffirmed. Grasping the kind of political processes unfolding within governance structures is however conditioned by the development of a concept of the political which reflects the inter-contextual function of governance structures.
Die Weltgesellschaft ist das einzige Gesellschaftssystem, das gegenwärtig in der Welt existiert. Diese Behauptung formuliert
eine hochgradig unwahrscheinliche Hypothese. In einer ersten Annäherung wird man nach dem Begriff der Gesellschaft fragen.
Trifft es zu, dass der Begriff der Gesellschaft im Blick auf kleine gesellschaftliche Systeme entworfen worden ist, die nur
wenige Hundert und im äußersten Fall wenige Tausend Mitglieder einschlossen? Wie soll es möglich sein, ein- und denselben
Begriff sowohl auf tribale Sozialsysteme wie auf eine potentielle Weltgesellschaft anzuwenden?
The recent proliferation of transnational forms of legal regulation and recognition has transformed the way we understand the global legal configuration, both in quantitative and in qualitative terms. Quantitatively, so dense are the connections and so significant the overlaps between legal orders that they can no longer easily be compartmentalized—still less marginalized—as mere boundary disputes. Qualitatively, the underlying basic grid, or “order of orders,” through which we make sense of such connections and overlaps, is no longer well understood in traditional Westphalian terms—as the accommodation of mutually exclusive state sovereignties within a largely facilitative framework of international law. Rather, there is an emerging “disorder of orders,” with traditional state sovereigntist, unipolar, global-hierarchy, regional, legal-field discursive (including global versions of both “constitutional” and “administrative” law), coherentist, and pluralist grids of understanding of the relationship between normative orders vying with one another, but with none gaining ascendancy. The future of the global legal configuration is likely to involve more of the same. It is likely we will not witness the reestablishment of a new dominant order of orders but, instead, will depend on the terms of accommodation reached among these competing models and among the actors— popular, judicial, and symbolic—who are influential in developing them.
Where does the nation-state end and globalization begin? InTerritory, Authority, Rights, one of the world's leading authorities on globalization shows how the national state made today's global era possible. Saskia Sassen argues that even while globalization is best understood as "denationalization," it continues to be shaped, channeled, and enabled by institutions and networks originally developed with nations in mind, such as the rule of law and respect for private authority. This process of state making produced some of the capabilities enabling the global era. The difference is that these capabilities have become part of new organizing logics: actors other than nation-states deploy them for new purposes. Sassen builds her case by examining how three components of any society in any age--territory, authority, and rights--have changed in themselves and in their interrelationships across three major historical "assemblages": the medieval, the national, and the global. The book consists of three parts. The first, "Assembling the National," traces the emergence of territoriality in the Middle Ages and considers monarchical divinity as a precursor to sovereign secular authority. The second part, "Disassembling the National," analyzes economic, legal, technological, and political conditions and projects that are shaping new organizing logics. The third part, "Assemblages of a Global Digital Age," examines particular intersections of the new digital technologies with territory, authority, and rights. Sweeping in scope, rich in detail, and highly readable,Territory, Authority, Rightsis a definitive new statement on globalization that will resonate throughout the social sciences.
The concept of “network” has become the most central concept within the work of Karl‐Heinz Ladeur (KHL). It is an omnibus concept which he uses to extrapolate insights at all levels: It is used to provide a general framework at the level of Gesellschaftstheorie (social theory) in the sense that it provides insights into the general structure of society and thereby into the context within which legal processes unfold. At the level of organizational theory it provides a basis for understanding the transformation of organizational structures as it unfolds through the breakdown of hierarchy and the boundaries between the private and the public, just as the network concept plays an important role in its attempt to formulate a legal theory which is adequate for a society which, according to KHL, has become postmodern. This article seeks to critically examine the function and “added value” of KHL’s network concept in relation to the European integration and constitutionalization process. It is argued that the concept provides a very useful overall framework, but that its usefulness might be enhanced when combined with more concrete studies of the actual function of networks in the EU context, just as the network concept should be more directly combined with an attempt to develop a conceptual framework for the juridification of networks.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1489938
In order to cope with transnational law, we have to abandon hierarchical legal models which, up to the present, have dominated western legal discourse. In the emergence of a new world society, law is undergoing a mutation. This mutation is here understood as a new form of interaction with legal texts. While law has been interpreted until now with regard to auctoritas, i.e. to an external reference (e. g. God, the King, the Pope, the Legislator), this mode of interaction with the legal text can no longer grasp new normative phenomena which in the recent literature have been subsumed under the concept of transnational law. The authors take inspiration from the Jewish model of interpretation of legal texts – as an example of an alternative and more adequate approach to global legal phenomena – and try to elaborate this argument on the basis of European private law.
Regimes can be defined as sets of implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules, and decision-making procedures around which actorsʹ expectations converge in a given area of international relations. Principles are beliefs of fact, causation, and rectitude. Norms are standards of behavior defined in terms of rights and obligations. Rules are specific prescriptions or proscriptions for action. Decision-making procedures are prevailing practices for making and implementing collective choice. This usage is consistent with other recent formulations. Keohane and Nye, for instance, define regimes as “sets of governing arrangements” that include “networks of rules, norms, and procedures that regularize behavior and control its effects.” Haas argues that a regime encompasses a mutually coherent set of procedures, rules, and norms. Hedley Bull, using a somewhat different terminology, refers to the importance of rules and institutions in international society where rules refer to “general imperative principles which require or authorize prescribed classes of persons or groups to behave in prescribed ways.” Institutions for Bull help to secure adherence to rules by formulating, communicating, administering, enforcing, interpreting, legitimating, and adapting them. Regimes must be understood as something more than temporary arrangements that change with every shift in power or interests. Keohane notes that a basic analytic distinction must be made between regimes and agreements. Agreements are ad hoc, often “one-shot,” arrangements.
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
Max Weber (1864-1920) was one of the most prolific and influential sociologists of the twentieth century. This classic collection draws together his key papers. This edition contains a new preface by Professor Bryan S. Turner. © 2009 H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills for selection Preface Bryan Turner.
This chapter challenges the idea that constituent power is a necessary or neutral presupposition of politics. It argues that the concept of constituent power is a vital component of the deep and resilient global structure of imperial authority, one that denies and seeks to suppress the 'always/already constituted' way in which political community and authority is experienced and practised in other non-imperial contexts. It concludes by considering the conditions under which these alternative ways of constituting and doing politics might challenge or escape the dominant influence of the imperial authority structure.
ISBN 978-1-403-98652-8
edited by Michel Senellart ; general editors, François Ewald and Alessandro Fontana ; english series editor : Arnold I. Davidson ; translated by Graham Burchell.
This book explains the emergence and functioning of three forms of governance structures within the context of the European integration and constitutionalisation process: comitology, (regulatory) agencies and the Open Method of Co-ordination. The point of departure is the insight that the intergovernmental/supranational distinction, which most theories of European integration and constitutionalisation rely on, has lost its strength. A new paradigm of EU research is therefore needed.
Against this background it is suggested that the distinction between governing and governance provides a more appropriate basis for analysing the phenomenon of integration and constitutionalisation in Europe. The distinction between governing and governance allows for an understanding of the EU as a hybrid consisting of a governing dimension, characterised by legal and organisational hierarchy, and a governance dimension which operates within a network form characterised by legal and organisational heterarchy. The function of governance structures is to ensure the embeddedness of the governing dimension in the wider society. Instead of representing contradictory developments, the two dimensions are therefore mutually constitutive in the sense that more governing implies more governance and vice versa. These theoretical insights are illustrated through two detailed case studies which respectively reconstruct the operational mode of the Open Method of Coordination within EU Research & Development Policy and the regulatory system for the EU chemicals market (REACH).
The book is inter-disciplinary in nature and incorporates insights from law, political science and sociology.
Reviews and review essays:
- Thomas Conzelmann, European Law Journal, volume 19, Issue 1, 143 – 45, 2013.
- Agustin José Menéndez, European Public Law, Vol. 18, 3, 556–563, 2012.
- Mark Fenwick, The European Union Institute in Japan Review, Feb., 1 – 5, Feb. 2012.
- Edoardo Chiti, The Common Market Law Review, Vol. 48, 1, 265-66, 2011.
- Maartje de Visser, European Law Review, Vol. 36, 3, June, 440 – 442, 2011.
- Sarah Kahn-Nisser and Gianluigi Palombella: ‘Integration and Function: Taming Governance in the EU?, Transnational Legal Theory, Vol. 1, 4, 587 – 595, Dec. 2010.
- Chris Thornhil, Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 37, 4, 687-90, Dec. 2010.
A Social Theory of the Nation-State: the political forms of modernity beyond methodological nationalism, construes a novel and original social theory of the nation-state. It rejects nationalistic ways of thinking that take the nation-state for granted as much as globalist orthodoxy that speaks of its current and definitive decline. Its main aim is therefore to provide a renovated account of the nation-state's historical development and recent global challenges via an analysis of the writings of key social theorists. This reconstruction of the history of the nation-state into three periods: classical (K. Marx, M. Weber, E. Durkheim), modernist (T. Parsons, R. Aron, R. Bendix, B. Moore), contemporary (M. Mann, E. Hobsbawm, U. Beck, M. Castells, N. Luhmann, J. Habermas). For each phase, it introduces social theory's key views about the nation-state, its past, present and future. In so doing this book rejects methodological nationalism, the claim that the nation-state is the necessary representation of the modern society, because it misrepresents the nation-state's own problematic trajectory in modernity. And methodological nationalism is also rejected because it is unable to capture the richness of social theory's intellectual canon. Instead, via a strong conception of society and a subtler notion of the nation-state, A Social Theory of the Nation-State tries to account for the 'opacity of the nation-state in modernity'.
Das Konzept der Weltgesellschaft gehört nicht zu jenen analytischen Begriffen der Sozialwissenschaften, die der Selbstauffassung der von ihnen bezeichneten Gegenstände fremd gegenüberstehen und diese Fremdheit vielleicht sogar ab-sichtsvoll kultivieren. Das Konzept greift vielmehr auf vielfältige Traditionen der Selbstbeschreibung von Gesellschaft zurück, in denen sich früh das Bewußt-sein einer globalen, schließlich sogar weltweiten Reichweite sozialer Beziehun-gen artikuliert. Diese begriffsgeschichtlichen Zusammenhänge, die bisher kaum erforscht worden sind, seien hier nur in einführender Absicht kurz skizziert. 1 In einer ersten Bestandaufnahme zeigen sich mindestens sechs Traditionszusam-menhänge, in denen sich das gegenwärtige Bewußtsein von Weltgesellschaft vorbereitet hat: 1. Die Semantik und das Recht des Fremden, eine der universellen Semantiken menschlicher Gesellschaften überhaupt, die in der Regel nur ein Innen (die Ein-heimischen) und ein Außen (die Fremden) voneinander unterscheidet und Re-geln und Rollenmuster für den Umgang mit den Fremden vorgibt, sobald diese an der Grenze oder im Inneren der eigenen Gesellschaft angetroffen werden sollten. Für diesen Zweck der Unterscheidung von Innen und Außen benötigt die Semantik des Fremden keine Vorstellungen über translokale Sozialität. Das än-dert sich mit dem Fremdenrecht, dem ‚ius gentium" des römischen Reiches, das eine Sozialorganisation konstituiert, die nebeneinander ‚nationes' und ‚gentes' kennt und die auf diese Weise für beliebige fremde Populationen eine Form der Inklusion vorsehen konnte. 2 Damit wird erstmals eine Sozialorganisation denk-bar, die in ihrer potentiellen Extension unbegrenzt ist. An diese Denktradition schließt die spanische Rechtstheorie des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts an, wenn sie unter dem Eindruck der kolonialen Expansion Spaniens eine dieser neuen Situa-tion entsprechende globale gesellschaftliche Ordnung zu denken versucht. Das ‚ius gentium' definiert jetzt die rechtliche Struktur dieser globalen Sozialord-nung. Es wird als ein Gewohnheitsrecht verstanden, das von den Gewohnheiten 1 Siehe zum folgenden Kimminich 1974; Stichweh 2004. 2 Vgl. Riedel 1975, 725.
Abstract Es gibt bereits viel europäische Öffentlichkeit. Die öffentliche Thematisierung Europas wie im BSE-Fall, im Korruptionsfall
oder im Bereich der Migrationspolitik hat Resonanzen erzeugt, die über nationale Öffentlichkeiten hänausreichen. Um diese
Öffentlichkeit in Europa zu fassen, wird zunächst ein analytisches Modell der variablen sozialen Lokalisierung dieser Öffentlichkeit
vorgeschlagen. Im Unterschied zu nationaler Öffentlichkeit ist diese Öffentlichkeit nicht mehr an die Unterstellung einer
Sprachgemeinschaft (ein „Volk“ oder „Demos“) gebunden. An deren Stelle treten Netzwerke politischer Akteure, die über issue-spezifische
Kommunikationsgemeinschaften, nicht mehr über Sprachgemeinschaften zusammengehalten werden. Die Strukturoptionen dieser emergenten
Öffentlichkeit werden schließlich in einem weiteren analytischen Modell bestimmt mit Implikationen für die normative Frage
nach der Demokratisierungsfunktion und -fähigkeit europäischer Öffentlichkeit.
Summary There is already a public sphere in Europe. The public debate in Europe on issues such as the BSE-scandal, the corruption
in the Commission or the regulation of migration and the treatment of migrants have led to forms of public resonance that
cross national borders. To grasp this public space in Europe, an analytical model of the variable social location of this
public space is proposed. Contrary to the national public space, this emerging European public space is no longer tied to
the condition of a community of language, to a people speaking the same language (“Volk”). Such community is replaced by networks
of political actors which are held together by an issue-specific community of discourse, no longer by a community of language.
The structural options of this emerging public space in Europe are then summarized in an analytical model which has implications
for the normative question of whether such a European public space can fulfill the function of democratizing the European
Union.
This article argues that Shmuel N. Eisenstadt’s theoretical framework contains some elements of modernization theory threatening to neglect the contingencies of social processes and the possible breaks within historical trajectories. This is demonstrated via an analysis of the history of the US-American South that cannot be interpreted with an Eisenstadtian framework without seriously misrepresenting this particular region. It is argued that the development of “Dixie” was not a predetermined process which led to a smooth integration into US-society, but a path which was decisively influenced by many unforeseen factors and events in various periods of its history.
The Role of Business in Global Governance offers an empirically rich analysis of the new political role of corporations in the co-performance of governance functions beyond the state. Within comparative case studies, potential explanations of the political role of transnational corporations are systematically tested.
Though heated, recent debate on the German Federal Court’s ‘Maastricht’ judgment may be argued to have overlooked one of the primary problems posed by European integration: the lack of new concepts to describe the emerging supranational order. The following argues that a discussion which on the one hand has overstressed the significance of nationalism, and which on the other continues to seek a ‘normative’ basis for a collective European order, has failed to pay due regard to the practical–functional elements of historical nation–state building. Further, such analyses have failed to recognise that traditional, hierarchical, centralised and unitary states have long been transformed ‘from within’ through a process of pluralisation and fragmentation. Accordingly, the ‘network–concept’ is tested here not only for its viability as a basis for a new conceptualisation of a supranationality which is characterised by heterarchical and decentralised relationships, but also for its relevance for the re–conceptualisation of the political and legal structures of the traditional nation–state.
The concept of embeddedness plays a central role in the segment of economic sociology and social theory which is inspired by the works of Karl Polanyi. But to the extent that embeddedness is understood in a substantialist manner, implying the existence of a unitary lifeworld, the desire for embeddedness is an impossible aspiration under modern conditions. Throughout the modern era it is however possible to observe the emergence of complex societal stabilization mechanisms, which serve as substitutes to traditional forms of embeddedness. The emergence of function specific cultures, in the form of, for example, legal, political and scientific cultures, establishing a ‘second nature’ in the Hegelian sense, is one example of this. Other examples are (neo-)corporatist institutions which fulfilled a central stabilising role in classical modernity and the kind of network based governance arrangements which fulfil a similar position in today’s radicalised modernity.
This essay focuses on Wal-Mart's role in an important emerging phenomenon: the development of efficient systems of private law making by non-governmental organizations that sometimes supplement, and sometimes displace traditional legal systems. These emerging global systems of private law making are spearheaded by an important group of large multinational corporations like Wal-Mart. It arises in the shadow of, parallel with, and in response to the less successful attempts by national and international bodies to regulate economic behavior on a global scale. These systems are grounded in private law, contractual and business connections between the great multi-national corporations and the many entities with which they have business relationships. This essay concentrates on one aspect of those connections - supplier or supply chain agreements involving multinational corporations. It examines the way Wal-Mart is able to use those contractual relationships to legislate behavior among its suppliers with respect to product quality, working conditions for the suppliers' employees, ethical conduct, and similar matters. The particulars of those behaviors reflect Wal-Mart's perception of the tastes and expectations of its consumers, investors and the financial community. Those tastes and expectations, in turn, are formed by elements of civil society and spread by elements of the media. Civil society elements serve not only to form consumer tastes, but also to develop Wal-Mart's specific set of behavior norms and then independently monitor compliance by Wal-Mart and its suppliers with their obligations. The media independently serves as the source of legitimacy and the conduit through which the results of civil society monitoring efforts, and the efforts of Wal-Mart to correct these breaches are transmitted. The media also serves as a forum through which consumer and investment tastes in behavior are developed. Together, multinationals, elements of civil society, the media, and the consumer-investor community constitute the elements of an autonomous system for the efficient regulation of economic behavior on a global scale that may contribute to the development of functionally differentiated and partial global systems of common law beyond the state.
Multilevel trade governance and transnational social regulation put democratic self-regulation under stress. A growing number of supra- and transnational norms, rules, and regulations on trade, environmental issues, or any other field of regulation, prove that we are facing another great transformation, the transformation of international relations and intergovernmental politics into law-generating fora, with government and private networks and a number of court-like institutions as central actors. This process of transnational juridification limits parliamentary rooms for manoeuvre and comprehensively alienates many citizens submitted to transnational regulation from this process. This contribution attempts to clarify the mechanisms at work. In a second step it seeks to identify possible concepts that could grasp this transformation, and confronts them again with the problem of self-government. In a bow to the particularities of the transnational sphere, it tries to resist the methodological nation-state trap. Instead, it supports a constitutionalization of participative structures in global administrative governance. The outline, degree, and limits of such a concept are not self-explaining. The EU and its attempts to integrate civic participation, thus, may illustrate concrete outlines of such a project. This reconstruction allows for concluding observations on global structures and the constitutionalization of participatory transnational governance on a global scale.
On the backdrop of the 2008 financial crisis this paper introduces an understanding of societal crises as a reduction in the meaning production of social entities, which can either be internally or externally provoked. The emergence of constitutions and, more generally, constitutional structures, can be understood as responses to both forms of crisis. This is the case because they are double-edged structures which are simultaneously oriented towards the maintenance of internal order and stability within a given social entity at the same time as they frame the transfer of the meaning components between the social entities and their environments. Thus, the 2008 financial crisis indicates a failure of constitutional bonding. When observed from an overall structural perspective, the reasons for this failure can be traced back to an increased discrepancy between the structural composition of world society and the constitutional structures in place. The crisis reflects a failure to respond to two simultaneous, inter-related and mutually reinforcing structural transformations. First, there is the increased globalisation, which has led to massive dislocations in the relative centrality of the different national configurations for the reproductive processes of functional systems. Second, there is a structural transformation of the transnational layer of world society through a reduced reliance on the centre/periphery differentiation and an increased reliance on functional differentiation. One of the many consequences of this development is the emergence of new forms of transnational law and politics. A new constitutional architecture which reflects these transformations is needed in order to ensure an adequate constitutional bonding of economic processes, as well as of other social processes.
The EU is often assessed against the standard of democracy, which it has no fair chance to fulfil. A new and attractive normative agenda is needed if the EU is to escape its deep legitimacy crisis. This article proposes to substitute the discourse on the democratic deficit of the EU with a discourse on its contribution to transnational justice. Whilst the democratic discourse most often focuses on parliamentary competences and divided government, the discourse on justice centres on the people, puts primary emphasis on power asymmetries and on overcoming the obstacles to justifiable political outcomes. The proposal to analyse the EU in terms of justice does not lower the normative standard but corrects it.
Across an amazing sweep of the critical areas of business regulation - from contract, intellectual property and corporations law, to trade, telecommunications, labour standards, drugs, food, transport and environment - this book confronts the question of how the regulation of business has shifted from national to global institutions. Based on interviews with 500 international leaders in business and government, this book examines the role played by global institutions such as the WTO, the OECD, IMF, Moody’s and the World Bank, as well as various NGOs and significant individuals. The authors argue that effective and decent global regulation depends on the determination of individuals to engage with powerful agendas and decision-making bodies that would otherwise be dominated by concentrated economic interests. This book will become a standard reference for readers in business, law, politics and international relations.
572 p., tabl. Pour parler aujourd'hui non des puissants, comme certaine histoire, ou du pouvoir, comme certaine philosophie, mais des jeux sociaux, les champs, où se produisent les différents enjeux de pouvoir et les différents atouts, les capitaux, nécessaires pour y triompher, il faut mobiliser toutes les ressources de la statistique, de la théorie anthropologique et de l'histoire sociale. Comment s'est constituée la configuration singulière de pouvoirs, intellectuels, politiques, bureaucratiques, économiques, qui domine les sociétés contemporaines? Comment ces pouvoirs, notamment ceux qui s'autorisent de l'autorité conférée par l'Ecole, obtiennent- ils notre reconnaissance? Qu'est-ce que la compétence dont se réclament les technocraties ? Le travail de consécration qu'accomplit l'institution scolaire, notamment à travers les grandes écoles, s'observe dans l'histoire, à des variantes près, toutes les fois qu'il s'agit de produire une noblesse; et les groupes socialement reconnus, en particulier les grands corps, qui en sont le produit, fonctionnent selon une logique tout à fait semblable à celle des divisions d'Ancien Régime, nobles et roturiers, grande et petite noblesse. La noblesse d'Etat qui dispose d'une panoplie sans précédent de pouvoirs, économiques, bureaucratiques et même intellectuels, et de titres propres à justifier son privilège, titres d'écoles, titres de propriété et titres de noblesse, est l'héritière structurale ― et parfois généalogique ― de la noblesse de robe qui, pour se construire comme telle, contre d'autres espèces de pouvoirs, a dû construire l'Etat moderne, et tous les mythes républicains, méritocratie, école libératrice, service public. Grâce à une écriture qui alterne l'humour de la distance ethnographique avec la rigueur du raisonnement statistique ou de la construction théorique, Pierre Bourdieu propose une réalisation accomplie d'une anthropologie totale, capable de surmonter l'opposition entre l'évocation et l'explication, la description qui fait voir et le modèle qui fait comprendre. Déchirant l'écran des évidences qui protègent le monde familier contre la connaissance, il dévoile les secrets de la magie sociale qui se cache dans les opérations les plus ordinaires de l'existence quotidienne, comme l'octroi d'un titre scolaire ou d'un certificat médical, la nomination d'un fonctionnaire ou l'institution d'une grille des salaires.
This paper, a distillation of findings from the NYU Global Administrative Law Research Project, considers the emergence and the need for further development of administrative law mechanisms to promote greater accountability in decision making and rulemaking in the rapidly proliferating variety of global regulatory structures. These include formal international organizations (such as the WTO, the Security Council, World Bank, the Climate Change regime, etc), informal intergovernmental networks of domestic regulatory officials (such as the Basel Committee of national bank regulators), domestic authorities implementing global regulatory law, hybrid public-private and purely private transnational regulatory regimes. The subjects of such global regulatory systems include individuals, firms and other economic actors, states, and occasionally NGOs. These regimes and subjects, we argue, are part of a single global administrative space distinct from the domains of international law and domestic administrative law. We define global administrative law as the principles, procedures, and review mechanisms that are emerging to govern decision making and regulatory rulemaking by these bodies. We identify a number of structural mechanisms that have arisen to develop and apply global administrative law, including domestic courts and legislatures reviewing domestic implementation of global standards and national officials’ participation in global administrative decisions, and new mechanisms developed at the global level for governance of international and transnational regulatory bodies. We examine the sources and content of the various doctrinal principles and requirements that have been developed and enforced by these mechanisms (such as transparency, participation, reasoned decision making, review, and substantive standards such as proportionality), and their sources. We next consider the normative foundations of global administrative law, including intra-regime control, liberal notions of protection of the rights of individuals and of economic actors, protection of the rights of states, and securing democracy with respect to global regulation. We examine these normative foundations in relation to three conceptions of international ordering -- pluralist, solidarist, and cosmopolitan -- and in relation to North-South differences. We then consider different strategies for constructing global administrative law, including bottom-up approaches that seek to extend domestic administrative law to global regulatory decisions and top-down approaches that develop new administrative law mechanisms at the global level. We also examine the positive political theory of global administrative law. We conclude that the field of global administrative law is an important emerging phenomenon, distinct from international law and from domestic administrative law, that deserves systematic study and development.
This paper provides an outline of some of the issues I am dealing with in connection to a research project being undertaken on Global Corporate Citizenship (GCC). This research is in its early stages so what is provided here is preliminary and designed to raise rather more issues than it solves. In particular, I am concerned to deal with what it might mean for companies to be described, or to describe themselves, as Global Corporate Citizens. In the general literature on corporate responsibility there is a move away from companies being described, or describing themselves, as Corporately Socially Responsible (CSR) to them re-describing themselves as Global Corporate Citizens (GCC). I want to ask what is involved in this (self)description as ‘citizens'? Can citizenship be applied first to companies and then extended into the global arena in which they operate? When looking at the actual practices of companies that claim to be either simply socially responsible or more recently corporate citizens , there is not much difference between them. Much the same ‘content', as it were, in terms of the claims to what they are doing or should do, adheres under both titles. So is it merely a matter of words? Does it make any difference that on the one had they claim to be socially responsible or on the other to be global citizens? I will argue that this is a very significant change in terminology that is having, and will continue to have, significant affects that need to be analysed and appreciated. To explore these implications, the following analysis situates GCC in a wider framework of the progressive juridicalization and constitutionalization of the international arena more generally.
Prior to the industrial revolution, the predominant form of economic organization in western Europe and north America was the guild. Guilds were network forms, loose associations of independent producers, with strong local and regional identities, in which cooperation and competition were combined. The decline of the guild was brought about in large part by legal changes which privileged the emerging conjunction of the vertically integrated enterprise and mass consumer market. If present- day network forms are not be consigned to the margins of capitalism as their predecessors were, we need a set of legal concepts and techniques which can underpin and protect network relations, most importantly in the context of competition law.
Festschrift für Gunther Teubner zum 65. Geburtstag
- Soziologische Jurisprudenz
Soziologische Jurisprudenz. Festschrift für Gunther Teubner zum 65. Geburtstag. Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter, 2009.
Democracy and the Formation of the Public Space in Brazil
- Leonardo Avritzer
- Culture
AVRITZER, Leonardo. Culture, Democracy and the Formation of the Public Space in Brazil.
In: SOUZA, Jessé; SINDER, Valter (ed.). Imagining Brazil. Lanham MD: Rowman & Littlefield,
2005.
Il faut défendre la Société
- Michel Foucault
FOUCAULT, Michel. Il faut défendre la Société. Cours au Collége de France, 1975-76. Paris:
Gallimard, 1997.
Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechtsoder Naturrecht und Staatswissenschaft im Grundrisse Werke
- Georg W F Hegel
HEGEL, Georg W. F. Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechtsoder Naturrecht und
Staatswissenschaft im Grundrisse Werke. Band 7. Frankfurt aM: Suhrkamp Verlag, [1821]
Elemente einer Verfassung des Informationsflusses im Internet
- Vagias Digitale Karavas
- Grundrechte
KARAVAS, Vagias. Digitale Grundrechte. Elemente einer Verfassung des
Informationsflusses im Internet. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag, 2007.