Content uploaded by Luk Van Langenhove
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Luk Van Langenhove on Jan 06, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Enhancing Global Governance Through Regional Integration
... This means that developed countries need to undergo their own liberalisation to create space for foreign imports in the same way they have pushed developing nations. sources of the problems that governance mechanisms attempt to address go further than states and are situated at transnational, regional or global level (Thakur, & Van Langenhove, 2006). Therefore, multilateralism requires a new approach for the development of international law. ...
Utilising the lens of the global value chain (GVC) framework, this qualitative study assesses the effectiveness of the business and human rights initiatives in facilitating governance in the largely informal business activities (or value-less chains) in developing countries. The postcolonial legal criticism methodology frames the understanding of the liability of multinational corporations (MNCs) for the human rights harms arising out of their activities and how it is approached. It also helps in the evaluation of the success of the initiatives that have been developed to deal with this challenge. In simpler terms, these initiatives are made up of a "galaxy of norms" that include classic enforceable "hard law" to voluntary principles generated by global organisations, individual states and private actors including corporations. The misapplication of the international labour standards and the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) in select tobacco growing countries in Africa served as a yardstick for this this exercise. This study concludes that the impact of the business and human rights initiatives, irrespective of whether they are binding or not, in holding MNCs liable for damages in low-wage countries has generally been dismal. The initiatives are driven from the countries of the North who endlessly engage in 'regime shifting' and purposeful fragmentation of the law. As a result, they have not ensured that victims realise any form of corrective justice. The idea is that since the current governance regime and the related initiatives, both private and public, do not prioritise economic development of poor countries, they simply perpetuate colonial continuities as well as deepen disparities and inequality. Due to the complexity of problems associated with MNC activities, the study recommends a binding legal instrument that will create a central court that would oversee matters of corporate liability and state culpability in cross-boundary economic crimes. This instrument should be jointly developed by institutions such as UNHRC, ILO and WTO to reduce fragmentation in international law. Furthermore, all future business and human rights initiatives should not only be about compensation and or remedial action, but they should add developmental aspects to their purpose. In addition, this study proposes that new forms of contracts should be used to bridge the ever growing gap between private interests and public interest. Lastly, it is necessary to reduce the separation of the public and private realms, to harmonise international law and national laws as well as to make public and private interests compatible.
... comes not only from national governments but also from markets (Mattli 1999;Malamud 2011) and from civil society (Puchala 1968;Thakur and Langenhove 2006). ...
Abstract The creation of international organizations and the signature of free trade agreements have become common in Latin America. However, few studies have tackled the attitudes of political elites. This work aims to analyze the determinants of support by Latin American legislators for free trade agreements with the US and the EU, and for the Pacific Alliance and ALBA. Results show that ideology, pro-state/market positions, and trustworthiness vis-à-vis Chinese and Russian governments are the main predictors.
Современные дебаты о глобальном управлении и международном порядке отражают растущую обеспокоенность переменами, которые переживает современный мир. Данная работа, основываясь на предшествующих обсуждениях, предлагает модифицированный подход к содержательной дифференциации концептов «глобальный порядок» и «глобальное управление». Он исходит из очевидного отличия этих концептов по нескольким ключевым параметрам, включая (а) потребности и стимулы, лежащие в основе появления глобального порядка и вызывающих необходимость глобального управления; (б) характер действий, связанных с конструированием порядка и организацией управления; (в) результат этих дей-ствий; (г) состав акторов и их ролевые функции. Более чёткое смысловое разграничение концептов глобального порядка и глобального управления расширяет пространство обоснованных суждений относительно проблем, с которыми сталкивается мировое сообщество в ходе своего эволюционного развития. Благодаря этому появляется возможность более чёткого понимания того, свидетельствуют ли кризисные ситуации о непреодолимых дефектах сложившегося международного порядка в целом или же в большей степени отражают неспособность найти адекватные механизмы преодоления частичных возмущающих воздействий и появляющихся новых вызовов. Ключевые слова: международное общество, международная система, международный порядок, власть, геополитика, глобальное управление, международные институты, глобализация, взаимозависимость, региональная интеграция, государство, международные акторы, растущие державы, неправительственные организации.
Papers collected in this book are presented in the international scientific conference "Globalization of Politics" that was held on October, 12-13 2007 in Dubrovnik, Croatia. The conference was organized by the Political Science Research Centre and Scientific Forum, in cooperation with the University of Dubrovnik. It gathered eminent scientists and experts in the field from Croatia and different European countries that represented a wide variety of different perspectives on the topic. Globalization of politics is certainly important and emerging topic that concerns the actual international politics and its transformation in the age of globalization. Papers in the book analyze and discuss a really broad spectrum of issues, starting from more general and theoretical ones, such as reflections of globalization on democracy, changes of governance, nation-state and its role, formation, and role of regions and new configuration of politics, rule of law and new geopolitics in the age of globalization, etc. Some of the papers are particularly focused on the issues connected with regional organizations, mainly the European Union, and furthermore on specific national case studies. Different approaches and methodology ensure the multidisciplinary character of the book that in the end offers multi-layered reading which presents the most important and relevant discussions on the subject.
‘Our world today is more connected, contested and complex. The European Union needs to take a fresh look at this uncertain environment, in which opportunities and challenges coexist. This will help promote the European Union’s interests globally, and ensure our security at home and abroad.’
Globalization, the much-debated phenomenon of the last decade, has affected the governance of policies. Social policy governance is one of the most affected notions of the globalization process. Context of debates on social policy governance has been transformed from state-centric analysis to the multi-centric analysis. The future of the social policy is highly linked to both global governance and regional governance. In this regard, the aim of this chapter is to draw attention to the multi-centric nature of the social policy governance and to form a framework for the effects of intergovernmental institutions on social policy governance and to discuss their weaknesses and strengths particularly regarding the United Nations, Bretton Woods institutions and the European Union.
Because of the state’s unique role in China’s national system of capitalism within the post-Cold War international system, state capitalism in catch-up development, as practised by China, is different from the historical patterns in the previous two rounds of ‘state capitalism’. In particular, the state is in command of new tools and instruments to control and coordinate the behaviour of national capital, making it possible for a genuine model of national development to emerge. Meanwhile, the hybrid nature of state capitalism of China implies that it is interested in promoting a set of ‘parallel structures’ in global governance without mounting a full-scale challenge to the current institutional structure of the global system. The nature of the domestic complex of state capitalism in China foresees that these ‘parallel structures’ will continue to exist without directly replacing Western-dominated structures in global governance. However, the long-term sustainability of such parallel structures is highly contingent upon China’s relative position within the capitalist world system and the nature of global capitalism.
