Skip to main content Accessibility help

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.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-5f56664f6-n72nm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-07T11:28:16.729Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Law, Legalization, and Politics

An Agenda for the Next Generation of IL/IR Scholars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2013

By
Kenneth W. Abbott  and
Duncan Snidal
Edited by
Jeffrey L. Dunoff  and
Mark A. Pollack
Jeffrey L. Dunoff
Affiliation:
Temple University, Philadelphia
Mark A. Pollack
Affiliation:
Temple University, Philadelphia
Get access

Summary

Framing the Agenda

The intersection of international law and international relations (IL/IR) has developed into a sophisticated intellectual enterprise, as the papers in this volume attest. Although IL/IR continues to make important contributions to both disciplines, however, there remains room for further advances, in part by rebalancing the exchange between the two disciplines. This chapter suggests a research agenda for the field as it moves into its next generation. Our argument turns on a series of conceptual pairings: IL and IR, law at a point in time and law over time, values and interests (and with them constructivist and rationalist analyses), and especially law and politics. Our approach seeks to avoid privileging either side of these pairings, which are sometimes presented as (false) dichotomies; in fact, we argue that the vitality of the IL/IR nexus lies in its ability to bring together these elements and exploit the synergies and tensions among them.

International Law/International Relations

Much of the initial work in IL/IR (including our own) was oriented toward understanding IL from an IR perspective as “another” international institution. As a result, IL/IR scholarship has been somewhat one-sided, with IR (often wielded by lawyers) used to explain IL – mainly at a high level of generality – but with far less feedback from IL to IR. It is now time to reverse the gunsights: to ask what IL can contribute to IR, and what IL/IR has to offer traditional IL scholars and practitioners. We urge IL/IR scholars to engage more concretely with the practices of international law, a process which has already begun in this volume. Doing so, we suggest, will especially enrich rationalist/positivist IR analyses of law and legalization.

Type
Chapter
Information
Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations
The State of the Art
 , pp. 33 - 56
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abbott, Kenneth W. (2005). “Toward a Richer Institutionalism for International Law and Policy,” Journal of International Law and International Relations, Vol. 1, No. 1–2, pp. 9–34.Google Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W (2012). “The Transnational Regime Complex for Climate Change,” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 571–90.
Abbott, Kenneth W., and Gartner, David (forthcoming). “Reimagining Participation in International Institutions,” Journal of International Law & International Relations.
Abbott, Kenneth W., and McElwee, Pamela (2010). “Global Institutions as Constraints on Local Conservation Decisions,” working paper.
Abbott, Kenneth W., and Snidal, Duncan (1998). “Why States Act through Formal International Organizations,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W., and Snidal, Duncan (2000). “Hard and Soft Law in International Governance,” International Organization, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 421–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W (2002). “Values and Interests: International Legalization in the Fight against Corruption,” Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 31, No. S1, pp. 141–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W (2004). “Pathways to International Cooperation,” in Eyal Benvenisti and Moshe Hirsch (eds.), The Impact of International Law on International Cooperation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 50–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W (2009a). “The Governance Triangle: Regulatory Standards Institutions and the Shadow of the State,” in Walter Mattli and Ngaire Woods (eds.), The Politics of Global Regulation (Princeton, Princeton University Press), pp. 44–88.Google Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W (2009b). “Strengthening International Regulation through Transnational New Governance: Overcoming the Orchestration Deficit,” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 501–78.Google Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W (2010). “International Regulation without International Government: Improving IO Performance through Orchestration,” Review of International Organizations, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 315–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W., Keohane, Robert O, Moravcsik, Andrew, Slaughter, Anne-Marie, and Snidal, Duncan (2000). “The Concept of Legalization,” International Organization, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 401–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W., Genschel, Philipp, Snidal, Duncan, and Zangl, Bernhard (2012). “International Organizations as Orchestrators,” paper presented at Conference on International Organizations as Orchestrators, Center for Advanced Studies, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universtät, Munich, May 20–22.
Alter, Karen J. (2013). “The Multiple Roles of International Courts and Tribunals: Enforcement, Dispute Settlement, Constitutional and Administrative Review,” in Jeffrey L. Dunoff and Mark A. Pollack (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 345–70.Google Scholar
Benvenisti, Eyal, and , George W. Downs, (2007). “The Empire's New Clothes: Political Economy and the Fragmentation of International Law,” Stanford Law Review, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 595–632.Google Scholar
Betsill, Michele M., and Bulkeley, Harriet (2006). “Cities and the Multilevel Governance of Global Climate Change,” Global Governance, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 141–59.Google Scholar
Bodansky, Daniel (2011). “A Tale of Two Architectures: The Once and Future UN Climate Change Regime,” Arizona State Law Journal, Vol. 43, pp. 697–713.Google Scholar
Brewster, Rachel (2010). “The Limits of Reputation on Compliance,” International Theory, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 323–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewster, Rachel (2013). “Reputation in International Relations and International Law Theory,” in Jeffrey L. Dunoff and Mark A. Pollack (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 524–43.Google Scholar
Brunnée, Jutta, and Toope, Stephen J (2010). Legitimacy and Legality in International Law: An Interactional Account (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Büthe, Tim (2010). “Global Private Politics: A Research Agenda,” Business and Politics, Vol. 12, No. 3, Article 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Checkel, Jeffrey T. (1998). “The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,”World Politics, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 324–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chwieroth, Jeffrey M. (2010). Capital Ideas: The IMF and the Rise of Financial Liberalization (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Coleman, James S. (1986). “Social Theory, Social Research, and a Theory of Action,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 91, No. 6, pp. 1309–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conant, Lisa (2013). “Whose Agents? The Interpretation of International Law in National Courts,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 394–420.Google Scholar
Downs, George W., and Jones, Michael A. (2002). “Reputation, Compliance and International Law,” Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 31, No. S1, pp. S95–S114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, George W., Rocke, David M., and Barsoom, Peter N. (1996). “Is the Good News about Compliance Good News about Cooperation?,” International Organization, Vol. 50, No. 3, pp. 379–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunoff, Jeffrey L., and Pollack, Mark (2013). “International Law and International Relations: Introducing an Interdisciplinary Dialogue,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L. and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 3–32.Google Scholar
Eberlein, Burkard, Abbott, Kenneth W., Black, Julia, Meidinger, Errol, and Wood, Stepan (2012). “Interactions in Transnational Business Governance: Mapping and Conceptualizing a Terrain,” paper presented at Workshop on Interactions in Transnational Business Governance (TBG): Assessing Impacts on Regulatory Capacity and Performance, Hertie School of Governance, Berlin, May 16.
Elster, Jon (1989). Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falkner, Robert, Stephan, Hannes, and Vogler, John (2010). “International Climate Policy after Copenhagen: Towards a ‘Building Blocks’ Approach,” Global Policy, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 252–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James and Wendt, Alexander (2002). “Constructivism v. Rationalism: A Skeptical View,” in Carlsnaes, Walter, Risse, Thomas, and Simmons, Beth (eds.), Handbook of International Relations (London: Sage), pp. 52–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnemore, Martha, and Sikkink, Katherine (1998). “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change,” International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 887–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnemore, Martha, and Toope, Stephen (2001). “Alternatives to ‘Legalization’: Richer Views of Law and Politics,” International Organization, Vol. 55, No. 3, pp. 743–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, Lon (1964). The Morality of Law (New Haven: Yale University Press).Google Scholar
Garrett, Geoffrey, and Weingast, Barry (1993). “Ideas, Interests, and Institutions: Constructing the European Community's Internal Market,” In Goldstein, Judith & Keohane, Robert (eds.), Ideas and Foreign Policy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press), pp. 173--206.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, Jack L., and Posner, Eric A. (2005). The Limits of International Law (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Guzman, Andrew (2005). “The Design of International Agreements,” European Journal of International Law, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 579–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guzman, Andrew (2008). How International Law Works: A Rational Choice Theory (New York: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guzman, Andrew (2009). “How International Law Works: A Response to Commentators,” International Theory, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp 335–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie (2009). Forced to Be Good: Why Trade Agreements Boost Human Rights (Ithaca: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie, Victor, David, and Lupu, Yonatan (2012). “Political Science Research on International Law: The State of the Field,” American Journal of International Law, Vol. 106, No. 1, pp. 47–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, Herbert L. A. (1994). The Concept of Law (2nd ed. Bulloch, P. A. and Raz, J, eds.) (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
Hawkins, Darren G., Lake, David A., Nielson, Daniel L., and Tierney, Michael J., eds. (2006). Delegation and Agency in International Organizations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedström, Peter, and Ylikoski, Petri (2010). “Causal Mechanisms in the Social Sciences,” Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 36, pp. 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedström, Peter, and Swedberg, Richard (1996). “Social Mechanisms,” Acta Sociologica, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 281–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helfer, Laurence R. (2005). “Exiting Treaties,” Virginia Law Review, Vol. 91, No. 7, pp. 1579–1648.Google Scholar
Helfer, Laurence R. (2006). “Not Fully Committed? Reservations, Risk, and Treaty Design,” Yale Journal of International Law, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 367–82.Google Scholar
Helfer, Laurence R. (2013). “Flexibility in International Agreements,” in Jeffrey L. Dunoff and Mark A. Pollack (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 175–96.Google Scholar
Howse, Robert, and Teitl, Ruti (2010). “Beyond Compliance: Rethinking Why International Law Matters,” Global Policy, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 127–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keck, Margaret E., and Sikkink, Kathryn (1998). Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press).
Klabbers, Jan (2005). “The Relative Autonomy of International Law or the Forgotten Politics of Interdisciplinarity,” Journal of International Law and International Relations, Vol. 1, No. 1–2, pp. 35–48.Google Scholar
Koh, Harold (1997). “Why Do Nations Obey International Law?,” Yale Law Journal, Vol. 106, No. 8, pp. 2599–2659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koremenos, Barbara (2013). “Institutionalism and International Law,” in Jeffrey L. Dunoff and Mark A. Pollack (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 59–82.Google Scholar
Koremenos, Barbara, and Betz, Timm (2013). “The Design of Dispute Settlement Procedures in International Agreements,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L. and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 371–93.Google Scholar
Koremenos, Barbara, Lipson, Charles, and Snidal, Duncan (2001). “The Rational Design of International Institutions,” International Organization, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 761–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kydd, Andrew (2009). “Reputation and Cooperation: Guzman on International Law,” International Theory, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 295–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liese, Andrea, and Beisheim, Marianne (2011). “Transnational Public-Private Partnerships and the Provision of Collective Goods in Developing Countries,” in Thomas Risse (ed.), Governance without a State?: Policies and Politics in Areas of Limited Statehood (New York: Columbia University Press), pp. 115–43.Google Scholar
Martin, Lisa L. (2013). “Against Compliance,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L. and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 591–610.Google Scholar
Mattli, Walter, and Woods, Ngaire (2009). “In Whose Benefit? Explaining Regulatory Change in Global Politics,” in Mattli, Walter and Woods, Ngaire (eds.), The Politics of Global Regulation (Princeton: Princeton University Press), pp. 1–43.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew (2013). “Liberal Theories of International Law,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 83–118.Google Scholar
Nau, Henry (2011). “No Alternative to ’Isms,’” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 2, pp. 487–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pauwelyn, Joost, and Elsig, Manfred (2013). “The Politics of Treaty Interpretation: Variations and Explanations Across International Tribunals,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 445–73.Google Scholar
Posner, Eric A., and de Figueiredo, Miguel F. P. (2005). “Is the International Court of Justice Biased?,” Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 599–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, Eric A., and Sykes, Alan O. (2011). “Efficient Breach of International Law: Optimal Remedies, ‘Legalized Noncompliance,’ and Related Issues,” Michigan Law Review, Vol. 110, No. 2, pp. 243–94.Google Scholar
Price, Richard (1995). “A Genealogy of the Chemical Weapons Taboo,” International Organization, Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 73–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratner, Steven R. (2013). “Persuading to Comply: On the Deployment and Avoidance of Legal Argumentation,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L. and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 568–90.Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph (1994). “Authority, Law and Morality,” in Raz, J. (ed.), Ethics in the Public Domain: Essays in the Morality of Law and Politics (Oxford: Clarendon Press), pp. 194–221.Google Scholar
Shelton, Dinah, ed. (2000). Commitment and Compliance: The Role of Non-Binding Norms in the International Legal System (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Shaffer, Gregory, and Pollack, Mark (2010). “Hard vs. Soft: Alternatives, Complements and Antagonists in International Governance,” Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 94, No. x, pp. 706–99.Google Scholar
Shaffer, Gregory, and Pollack, Mark (2013). “Hard Law and Soft Law,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 197–222.Google Scholar
Snidal, Duncan (2012). “Rational Choice and International Relations,” in Carlsnaes, Walter, Risse, Thomas, and Simmons, Beth (eds.), Handbook of International Relations, 2nd ed. (London: Sage), pp. 85–111.Google Scholar
Tannenwald, Nina (1999). “The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Normative Basis of Nuclear Non-Use,” International Organization, Vol. 53, No. 3, p. 433–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Alexander (2010). “Rational Design in Motion: Uncertainty and Flexibility in the Global Climate Regime,” European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 269–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Alexander (2013). “Coercive Enforcement in International Law,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L. and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 502–23.Google Scholar
Trachtman, Joel P. (2013). “Open Economy Law,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L. and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 544–67.Google Scholar
Voeten, Erik (2013). “International Judicial Independence,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L. and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 421–44.Google Scholar
von Stein, Jana. (2013). “The Engines of Compliance,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L. and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 477–501.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×