Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-09T13:28:06.739Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Globalization of American Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2004

R. Daniel Kelemen  and
Eric C. Sibbitt
R. Daniel Kelemen
Affiliation:
R. Daniel Kelemen is University Lecturer in Politics and Fellow of Lincoln College, University of Oxford. He can be reached at daniel.kelemen@politics.ox.ac.uk.
Eric C. Sibbitt
Affiliation:
Eric C. Sibbitt is an Associate at Sullivan & Cromwell in Tokyo. He can be reached at sibbitte@sullcrom.com.
Get access

Abstract

A substantial body of research suggests that the United States has a distinctive legal style characterized by detailed rules, extensive transparency requirements, adversarial procedures for dispute resolution, costly legal contestation involving many lawyers, and frequent judicial intervention in administrative affairs. Recently, scholars of comparative law and public policy have asked whether this American legal style is spreading around the world. Some scholars have argued that legal styles are converging on an American model, while others have argued that distinctive national legal styles will persist. This article addresses this emerging debate. We argue that American legal style is spreading to other jurisdictions. However, we depart from predominant explanations, which attribute convergence to international regulatory competition or emulation. Instead, we argue that economic liberalization and political fragmentation have undermined traditional approaches to regulation and have generated functional pressures and political incentives to shift toward American legal style.The authors thank Kenneth Abbott, Ward Bower, Kent Calder, Robert G. DeLaMater, Tom Ginsburg, Jack Goldsmith, Milton Heumann, Mark D. Hunsaker, Nicolas Jabko, Robert Kagan, Susan Lawrence, Kathleen McNamara, Michael Paris, Mark Ramseyer, Amy Searight, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Tatsushi Terada, David Vogel, Albert Yoon, and participants in presentations at the 2001 International Studies Association Convention, the 2001 American Political Science Association Convention, Northwestern University's Center for International and Comparative Studies, the University of Chicago Law School, and Princeton University's Center of International Studies for their comments on earlier versions of the article. The authors thank Rachael Snyder, Fatima Khan, Hisako Yamamoto, Masako Ishiwata, and Kei Yamaguchi for their research assistance and Akiko Tsuda, Akemi Ideuchi, and Mio Kato for secretarial assistance. Kelemen thanks the Frank Kneller Fund at Rutgers University and the Center of International Studies at Princeton University for financial support. Views expressed herein are those of the authors alone and are not necessarily those of any institutions with which they are affiliated.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 58 , Issue 1 , February 2004 , pp. 103 - 136
Copyright
© 2004 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

Abel, Richard. 1994. Transnational Law Practice. Case Western Reserve Law Review 44:737–870.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen. 1998. Who Are the “Masters of the Treaty”?: European Governments and the European Court of Justice. International Organization 52 (1):121–47.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen. 2001. Establishing the Supremacy of European Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
BEUC (The European Consumers' Organisation). 2000. Response to the Commission's Green Paper on Liability for Defective Products. BEUC/016/2000. Available from European Commission Web site at 〈http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/goods/liability/replies.htm〉. Accessed 20 August 2003.
Black, Donald. 1976. The Behavior of Law. New York: Academic Press.
Bullock, Robert. 2000. Market Opening in Japan. In New Perspectives on U.S.-Japan Relations, edited by Gerald Curtis, 39–81. Tokyo: Japan Center for International Exchange.
Cohen, Jason. 1997. The Japanese Product Liability Law. Fordham International Law Journal 21:108–89.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities (Commission). 1976. Proposal for a Directive on Strict Liability for Defective Products. O.J. (C 241).
Commission of the European Communities (Commission). 1999a. Financial Services Action Plan. COM (1999) 232 final, 11 May 1999.
Commission of the European Communities (Commission). 1999b. Green Paper on Liability for Defective Products. COM (1999) 396 final, 28 July 1999.
Commission of the European Communities (Commission). 2000. Progress on Financial Services: 2nd Report. COM (2000) 336 final. 30 May 2000.
Commission of the European Communities (Commission). 2001. Report from the Commission on the Application of Directive 85/374 on Liability for Defective Products. COM (2000) 893, 31 January 2001.
Commission of the European Communities (Commission). 2002a. Financial Services Action Plan, Sixth Report. COM (2002) 267, 3 June 2002.
Commission of the European Communities (Commission). 2002b. Commission Proposal for a Council Directive to Improve Access to Justice in Cross-Border Disputes. COM (2002) 13. Unpublished.
Cooter, Robert, and Tom Ginsburg. 1996. Comparative Judicial Discretion. International Review of Law and Economics 16 (3):295–313.Google Scholar
Council of Ministers. 1985. Council Directive 85/374 on the Approximation of the Laws, Regulations and Administrative Provisions of the Member States Concerning Liability for Defective Products. O.J. (L210/29).
Curtis, Gerald. 1999. The Logic of Japanese Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
Dezalay, Yves. 1996. Between the State, Law and the Market. In International Regulatory Competition and Coordination, edited by William Bratton et al., 59–87. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Drezner, Daniel. 2001. Globalization and Policy Convergence. International Studies Review 3 (1):53–78.Google Scholar
Duck, Ken. 1996. Now That the Fog Has Lifted: The Impact of Japan's Administrative Procedures Law. Fordham International Law Journal 19:1686–763.Google Scholar
Epp, Charles. 1992. Do Lawyers Impair Economic Growth? Law & Social Inquiry 17 (4):585–623.Google Scholar
European Parliament. 2001. Resolution on the Final Report of the Committee of Wise Men on the Regulation of European Securities Markets, RSP/2001/2530, 15 March 2001.
Ferejohn, John. 1995. Law, Legislation and Positive Political Theory. In Modern Political Economy, edited by Jeffrey Banks and Eric Hanushek, 191–215. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Finnemore, Martha. 1996. National Interests and International Society. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Franchino, Fabio. 2001. Delegation and Constraints in the National Execution of EC Policies. West European Politics 24 (4):169–92.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc. 1983. Mega-Law and Mega-Lawyering in the Contemporary United States. In The Sociology of the Professions, edited by Robert Dingwall and Philip Lewis, 152–76. London: MacMillan Press.
Galanter, Marc. 1992. Law Abounding: Legalisation Around the North Atlantic. Modern Law Review 55 (1):1–24.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc. 1996. The Assault on Civil Justice. In Legal Culture and the Legal Profession, edited by Lawrence Friedman and Harry Scheiber, 79–116. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.
Garrett, Geoffrey. 1998. Global Markets and National Politics: Collision Course or Virtuous Circle? International Organization 52 (4):787–824.Google Scholar
Garrett, Geoffrey, R. Daniel Kelemen, and Heiner Schulz. 1998. The European Court of Justice, National Governments and Legal Integration in the European Union. International Organization 52 (1):149–76.Google Scholar
Goebel, Roger. 1989. The Internationalization of Law and Legal Practice. Tulane Law Review 63:443–523.Google Scholar
Goldthorpe, John. 1984. Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Haley, John. 1978. The Myth of the Reluctant Litigant. Journal of Japanese Studies 4 (2):359–89.Google Scholar
Hall, Ivan. 1997. Cartels of the Mind. New York: Norton.
Harlow, Carol. 1999. Citizen Access to Political Power in the European Union. EUI Working Paper RSC No. 99/2. Florence, Italy: European University Institute.
Hayward, Jack. 1982. Mobilising Private Interests in the Service of Public Ambitions. In Policy Styles in Western Europe, edited by Jeremy Richardson, 111–40. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Henderson, Dan. 1997. Role of Lawyers in Japan. In Japan, Economic Success and Legal System, edited by Harald Baum, 27–67. New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Hodges, Christopher. 2000. Product Liability in Europe. Business Law International 3:171–91.Google Scholar
Horn, Murray. 1995. The Political Economy of Public Administration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jackson, Howell, and Eric Pan. 2001. Regulatory Competition in International Securities Markets: Evidence from Europe in 1999-Part I. Business Lawyer 56:653.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert. 1997. Should Europe Worry About Adversarial Legalism? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 17 (2):165–84.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert. 2000. Comparing National Styles of Regulation in Japan and the U.S. Law & Policy 22 (3–4):225–44.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert. 2001. Adversarial Legalism. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Kagan, Robert, and Lee Axelrad. 1997. Adversarial Legalism: An International Perspective. In Comparative Disadvantages? Social Regulations and the Global Economy, edited by Pietro Nivola, 146–80. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Karmel, Roberta. 1999. The Case for a European Securities Commission. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 38:9–43.Google Scholar
Kelemen, R. Daniel. 2000. Regulatory Federalism: EU Environmental Policy in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Public Policy 20 (2):133–67.Google Scholar
Kelemen, R. Daniel. 2002. The Politics of Eurocratic Structure: The New European Agencies. West European Politics 25 (4):93–118.Google Scholar
Kissane, Mary. 1997. Global Gadflies: Applications and Implications of U.S.-Style Corporate Governance Abroad. New York Law Journal of International and Comparative Law 17:621–75.Google Scholar
Kitschelt, Herbert, Peter Lange, Gary Marks, and John Stephens, eds. 1999. Change and Continuity in Contemporary Capitalism. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lannoo, Karel. 2001. Updating EU Securities Market Regulation. Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies.
Lannoo, Karel. 2002. Supervising the European Financial System. CEPS Policy Brief No. 21. Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies.
Laurence, Henry. 1999. Spawning the SEC. Indiana Global Legal Studies Journal 6:647–83.Google Scholar
Lehmbruch, Gerhard, and Philippe C. Schmitter. 1982. Patterns of Corporatist Policy Making. London: Sage Publications.
Loss, Louis, and Joel Seligman. 1998. Securities Regulation. 3rd ed. New York: Aspen Publishers.
Majone, Giandomenico. 1996. Regulating Europe. New York: Routledge.
Marcuse, Andrew. 1996. Why Japan's New Products Liability Law Isn't. Pacific Rim Law and Policy 5:365–98.Google Scholar
Martin, Lisa. 1992. Interests, Power and Multilateralism. International Organization 46 (4):765–92.Google Scholar
McCubbins, Matthew, Roger Noll, and Barry Weingast. 1987. Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control. Journal of Law Economics and Organization 3 (2):243–77.Google Scholar
McCubbins, Matthew, Roger Noll, and Barry Weingast. 1989. Structure and Process, Policy and Politics: Administrative Arrangements and the Political Control of Agencies. Virginia Law Review 75:431–82.Google Scholar
Meyer, John W., John Boli, George Thomas, and Francisco Ramirez. 1997. World Society and the Nation-State. American Journal of Sociology 103 (1):144–81.Google Scholar
Milhaupt, Curtis. 1994. Managing the Market: The Ministry of Finance and Securities Regulation in Japan. Stanford Journal of International Law 30:423–82.Google Scholar
Miyazawa, Setsuo. 2001. The Politics of Judicial Reform in Japan. Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal 2 (2):89–121.Google Scholar
Moe, Terry. 1990. The Politics of Structural Choice. In Organization Theory from Chester Barnard to the Present and Beyond, edited by Oliver Williamson, 116–53. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mommsen, Wolfgang, and Jaap De Moor, eds. 1992. European Expansion and Law. New York: Berg Publishers.
Nottage, Luke. 2000. The Present and Future of Product Liability Dispute Resolution in Japan. William Mitchell Law Review 27:215–35.Google Scholar
Okamura, Kazumi, and Chieko Takeshita. 1989. Laws and Regulations Relating to Insider Trading in Japan. Tokyo: Commercial Law Center.
Okimoto, Daniel. 1989. Between MITI and the Market. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
Pekkanen, Robert. 2000. Japan's New Politics: The Case of the NPO Law. Journal of Japanese Studies 26 (1):111–43.Google Scholar
Pollack, Mark. 1997. Delegation, Agency and Agenda Setting in the European Community. International Organization 51 (1):99–134.Google Scholar
Prechal, Sacha. 1995. Directives in European Community Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ramseyer, J. Mark. 1994. The Puzzling (In)Dependence of Courts. The Journal of Legal Studies 23:721–47.Google Scholar
Ramseyer, J. Mark, and Frances Rosenbluth. 1993. Japan's Political Marketplace. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Repeta, Lawrence, and Jody Chafee. 1998. Japanese Government Information: New Rules for Access. Available from Japan Information Access Project Web site 〈http://www.jiaponline.org/publications/docs/1998/june/joho.pdf〉. Accessed 30 September, 2003.
Richardson, Jeremy, ed. 1982. Policy Styles in Western Europe. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Rosenbluth, Frances, and Michael Thies. 2001. The Electoral Foundations of Japan's Financial Politics. Policy Studies Journal 29 (1):23–37.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, Phil. 2000. Japan's New Products Liability Law. Law and Policy in International Business 31 (2):453–516.Google Scholar
Sakamoto, Takayuki. 1999. Building Policy Legitimacy in Japan. New York: MacMillan Press.
Sarumida, Hiroshi. 1996. Comparative Institutional Analysis of Product Safety Systems in the U.S. and Japan. Cornell International Law Journal 29:79–145.Google Scholar
Schwarze, Jürgen, ed. 1996. Administrative Law under European Influence. London: Sweet and Maxwell.
Shapiro, Martin. 1992. The Giving Reasons Requirement. University of Chicago Legal Forum 179–220.
Shapiro, Martin. 1993. The Globalization of Law. Indiana Journal of Global Studies 1 (1):37–64.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Martin. 1996. The Globalization of Judicial Review. In Legal Culture and the Legal Profession, edited by Lawrence Friedman and Harry Scheiber, 119–35. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.
Shapiro, Martin. 1998. Globalization and Freedom of Contract. In The State and Freedom of Contract, edited by Harry Scheiber, 269–98. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
Shapiro, Martin, and Alec Stone. 1994. The New Constitutional Politics of Europe. Comparative Political Studies 26 (4):397–420.Google Scholar
Simmons, Beth. 2001. The International Politics of Harmonization. International Organization 55 (3):589–620.Google Scholar
Simmons, Beth, and Zachary Elkins. 2001. Globalization and Policy Diffusion: Explaining Three Decades of Liberalization. In Governance in a Global Economy: Political Authority in Transition, edited by Miles Kahler and David Lake. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 2000. Judicial Globalization. Virginia Journal of International Law 40:1103–24.Google Scholar
Sobel, Andrew. 1994. Domestic Choices, International Markets. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Spacone, Andrew. 2000. Strict Liability in the European Union. Roger Williams University Law Review 5:341–84.Google Scholar
Spar, Debora. 1997. Lawyers Abroad. California Management Review 39 (3):8–28.Google Scholar
Stapleton, Jane. 2002. Bugs in Anglo-American Products Liability. South Carolina Law Review 53:1225–61.Google Scholar
Stone Sweet, Alec. 2000. Governing with Judges. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Streeck, Wolfgang, and Philippe Schmitter. 1991. From National Corporatism to Transnational Pluralism: Organized Interests in the Single European Market. Politics and Society 19 (2):133–65.Google Scholar
Swire, Peter. 1996. The Race to Laxity and the Race to Undesirability. Yale Journal on Regulation 14:67–110.Google Scholar
Tate, C. Neal, and Torbjörn Vallinder, eds. 1995. The Global Expansion of Judicial Power. New York: New York University Press.
Trubek, David, Yves Dezalay, Ruth Buchanan, and John Davis. 1994. Global Restructuring and the Law. Case Western Law Review 44:407–98.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, George. 2002. Veto Players. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Upham, Frank. 1987. Law and Social Change in Postwar Japan. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Upham, Frank. 1996. Privatized Regulation: Japanese Regulatory Style in Comparative and International Perspective. Fordham International Law Journal 20:396–511.Google Scholar
van Waarden, Frans. 1995. Persistence of National Policy Styles. In Convergence or Diversity?, edited by Brigitte Unger and Frans van Waarden, 333–72. Aldershot, England: Avebury.
Vogel, David. 1986. National Styles of Regulation: Environmental Policy in Great Britain and the U.S. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Vogel, David. 1995. Trading Up: Consumer and Environmental Regulation in a Global Economy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Vogel, Steven. 1996. Freer Markets, More Rules. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Warren, Manning. 1994. The European Union's Investment Services Directive. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Business Law 15:181–220.Google Scholar
Weaver, R. Kent, and Bert Rockman, eds. 1993. Do Institutions Matter? Government Capabilities in the United States and Abroad. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
West, Marc. 1994. The Pricing of Shareholder Derivative Actions in Japan and the U.S. Northwestern University Law Review 88:1436.Google Scholar
West, Marc. 2001. Why Shareholders Sue: The Evidence from Japan. Journal of Legal Studies 30:351–82.Google Scholar
Wiegand, Wolfgang. 1991. The Reception of American Law in Europe. American Journal of Comparative Law 39 (2):229–49.Google Scholar
Wiegand, Wolfgang. 1996. Americanization of Law: Reception or Convergence? In Legal Culture and the Legal Profession, edited by Lawrence Friedman and Harry Scheiber, 137–52. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.