Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:52:46.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Political Economy of Legal Globalization: Juridification, Adversarial Legalism, and Responsive Regulation. A comment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2005

David Levi-Faur
David Levi-Faur
Affiliation:
Research School of Social Science, Australian National University, and University of Haifa, Israel, [email protected].
Get access

Abstract

This article is a critique of Kelemen and Sibbitt's “The Globalization of American Law” (International Organization, Winter 2004). I first deal with the inconsistency of their treatment of their dependent variable, suggesting that they should have examined the interaction of three different diffusion processes. I then suggest that the explanations that they provide for the globalization of the American style are inadequate, and that the explanations that they reject require a second look. Consequently, their article conveys at best a partial picture of the process of change, its sources, and its outcomes. I highlight their inadequate treatment of the World Society Approach (WSA), the notion of regulatory competition, and the reduction of the role of ideas and agency, particularly the role of neoliberal ideas and big American and European business, to mere reflections of economic processes of globalization and liberalization. I also suggest that Kelemen and Sibbitt's did not lift their gaze beyond the boundaries of the political science discipline. In particular I argue that they do not examine the interaction of juridification, legalization, and judicialization on the one hand and adversarial legalism and responsive regulation on the other. I conclude with some suggestions for an interdisciplinary perspective on the study of global legal and regulatory change.I am grateful for intriguing comments from and discussions with John Braithwaite, Peter Cane, Peter Drahos, Peter Grabosky, and Frans van Waarden. All responsibility is, of course, mine.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 59 , Issue 2 , April 2005 , pp. 451 - 462
Copyright
© 2005 The IO Foundation and Cambridge University Press

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Acharya, Amitav. 2004. How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? Norm Localization and Institutional Change in Asian Regionalism. International Organization 58 (2):239–75.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, John. 2002. Restorative Justice and Responsive Regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Braithwaite, John. 2003. Meta-Regulation for Access to Justice. Paper presented to the General Aspects of Law (GALA) Seminar Series. Berkeley: University of California, November.
Braithwaite, John, and Peter Drahos. 2000. Global Business Regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dezalay, Y., and G. B. Garth. 2002. The Internationalization of Palace Wars, Lawyers, Economists and the Contest to Transform Latin American States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dolowitz, David, and David Marsh. 2000. Learning from Abroad: The Role of Policy Transfer in Contemporary Policy Making. Governance 13 (1):5–24.Google Scholar
Drori, S. Gilli, John W. Meyer, Francisco O. Ramirez, and Evan Schofer. 2003. Science in the Modern World Polity: Institutionalization and Globalization. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
Eisner, Marc. 2000. Regulatory Politics in Transition. 2d ed. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Epp, R. Charles. 1998. The Rights Revolution. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Finnemore, Martha. 1996. National Interests in International Society. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization, 52 (4):887–917.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Judith L., Miles Kahler, Robert O. Keohane, and Anne-Marie Slaughter. 2001. Legalization and World Politics. Special Issue of International Organization 54 (3).Google Scholar
Jacoby, Wade. 2000. Imitation and Politics: Redesigning Modern Germany. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Kagan, Robert. 1997. Should Europe Worry About Adversarial Legalism? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 17 (2):165–84.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert. 2001. Adversarial Legalism. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Kelemen, R. Daniel, and Eric C. Sibbitt. 2004. The Globalization of American Law. International Organization 58 (1):103–36.Google Scholar
Meyer, John W., John Boli, George M. Thomas, and Francisco O. Ramirez. 1997. World Society and the Nation-State. American Journal of Sociology 103 (1):144–81.Google Scholar
Morag-Levine, Noga. 2003. Partners No More: Relational Transformation and the Turn to Litigation in Two Conservationist Organizations. Law & Society Review 37 (2):457–509.Google Scholar
Morgan, Bronwen. 2003. Social Citizenship in the Shadow of Competition: The Bureaucratic Politics of Regulatory Justification, Law, Justice, and Power. Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate Dartmouth.
Nelken, David. 2003. Comparativists and Transferability. In Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions, edited by Legrand Pierre and Munday Roderick, 437–66 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nelken, David, and Johannes Feest, eds. 2001. Adapting Legal Cultures. Oxford, England: Hart.
Parker, Christine. 2002. The Open Corporation: Effective Self-Regulation and Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rogers, M. Everett. 1995. The Diffusion of Innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press.
Scheuerman, E. William. 2001. Reflexive Law and the Challenges of Globalization. Journal of Political Philosophy 9 (1):81–102.Google Scholar
Scott, Colin. 2004. Regulation in the Age of Governance: The Rise of the Post-Regulatory State. In The Politics of Regulation in the Age of Governance, edited by Jacint Jordana and David Levi-Faur, 145–74. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.
Simmons, A. Beth, and Zachary Elkins. 2004. The Globalization of Liberalization: Policy Diffusion in the International Political Economy. American Political Science Review 98 (1):171–89.Google Scholar
Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 2004. A New World Order. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Stone Sweet, Alec. 2000. Governing with Judges: Constitutional Politics in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sunstein, Cass. 1990. After the Rights Revolution: Reconceiving the Regulatory State. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Tate, C. Neal, and Torbjorn Vallinder, eds. 1995. The Global Expansion of Judicial Power. New York: New York University Press.
Teubner, Gunther, ed. 1987. Juridification of Social Spheres: A Comparative Analysis in the Areas of Labour, Corporate, Antitrust and Social Welfare Law. New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Teubner, Gunther. 2001. Legal Irritants: How Unifying Law Ends Up in New Divergencies. In Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, edited by Peter A. Hall and David Soskice, 417–41. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vogel, David. 1989. Fluctuating Fortune: The Political Power of Business in America. New York: Basic Books.
Waarden, van Frans. Forthcoming, Does Deregulation Produce Lawyerocracy? Regulation and Litigation as Alternative Institutions for Reduction of Uncertainty in Economic Transactions. Governance.
Watson, Alan. 1974. Legal Transplants: An Approach to Comparative Law. Edinburgh, Scotland: Scottish Academic Press.