Part I - Between collisions and interaction
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 May 2016
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Contested Regime CollisionsNorm Fragmentation in World Society, pp. 19 - 136Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2016
References
Bibliography
Ackerman, B. A., We the People ,Vol. II: Transformations. (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press, 1998).Google Scholar
Ben-Naftali, O. (ed.), International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law (Oxford University Press, 2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benvenisti, E., and Downs, G. W., ‘The Empire’s New Clothes: Political Economy and the Fragmentation of International Law’, Stanford Law Review, 60 (2007), pp. 595–631.Google Scholar
von Bogdandy, A., and Venzke, I., In wessen Namen? Internationale Gerichte in Zeiten globalen Regierens (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2014).Google Scholar
von Bogdandy, A. and Venzke, I., ‘In Whose Name? An Investigation of International Courts’ Public Authority and Its Democratic Justification’, European Journal of International Law, 23 (2012), pp. 7–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Bogdandy, A., Wolfrum, R., von Bernstorff, J., Dann, P., and Goldmann, M. (eds.), The Exercise of Public Authority by International Institutions (Heidelberg et al.: Springer, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bongiovanni, G., ‘Rechtsstaat and Grundnorm in the Kelsenian Theory’, Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, 70 Beiheft (1997), pp. 93–102.Google Scholar
Brown, G. W., ‘The Constitutionalization of What?’, Global Constitutionalism, 1 (2012), pp. 201–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunkhorst, H., Legitimationskrisen. Verfassungsprobleme der Weltgesellschaft (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2012).Google Scholar
Brunnée, J., and Toope, S. J., ‘Constructivism and International Law’ in Dunoff, J. L. and Pollack, M. A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 119–45.Google Scholar
Brunnée, J. and Toope, S. J., Legitimacy and Legality in International Law: An Interactional Account (Cambridge University Press, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, A., and Keohane, R. O., ‘The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions’, Ethics and International Affairs, 20 (2006), pp. 405–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calliess, G.-P., and Zumbansen, P., Rough Consensus and Running Code. A Theory of Transnational Private Law (Oxford: Hart, 2010).Google Scholar
Cass, D. Z., Constitutionalization of the World Trade Organization (Oxford University Press, 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, H., ‘Book Review – Eric A. Posner’s The Perils of Global Legalism (2009)’, German Law Journal, 13 (2012), pp. 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. L., Globalization and Sovereignty. Rethinking Legality, Legitimacy, and Constitutionalism (Cambridge University Press, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, R., and White, N. D. (eds.), International Organizations and the Idea of Autonomy: Institutional Independence in the International Legal Order (London: Routledge, 2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, X., International Institutions and National Policies (Cambridge University Press, 2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Búrca, G., and Weiler, J. H. H. (eds.), The Worlds of European Constitutionalism (Cambridge University Press, 2012).Google Scholar
Diggelmann, O., and Altwicker, T., ‘Is There Something Like a Constitution of International Law? A Critical Analysis of the Debate on World Constitutionalism’, Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht, 68 (2008), pp. 623–50.Google Scholar
Dobner, P., and Loughlin, M. (eds.), The Twilight of Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunoff, J. L., and Trachtmann, J. P. (eds.), Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law, and Global Governance (Cambridge University Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fassbender, B., The United Nations Charter as the Constitution of the International Community (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fassbender, B., ‘We the Peoples of the United Nations: Constituent Power and Constituent Form in International Law’ in Walker, N. and Loughlin, M. (eds.), The Paradox of Constitutionalism: Constituent Power and Constitutional Form (Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 269–90.Google Scholar
Fassbender, B., and Siehr, A. (eds.), Suprastaatliche Konstitutionalisierung: Perspektiven auf die Legitimität, Kohärenz und Effektivität des Völkerrechts (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer-Lescano, A., and Teubner, G., Regime-Kollisionen: Zur Fragmentierung des globalen Rechts (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2006).Google Scholar
Forst, R., Kritik der Rechtfertigungsverhältnisse. Perspektiven einer kritischen Theorie der Politik (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2011).Google Scholar
Forst, R., Das Recht auf Rechtfertigung – Elemente einer konstruktivistischen Theorie der Gerechtigkeit (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2007).Google Scholar
Forsythe, D. P., and Rieffer-Flanagan, B., The International Committee of the Red Cross: A Neutral Humanitarian Actor (London: Routledge, 2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franck, T. M., The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations (Oxford University Press, 1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frowein, J. A., ‘Konstitutionalisierung des Völkerrechts’ in Dicke, K. et al. (eds.), Völkerrecht und Internationales Privatrecht in einem sich wandelnden internationalen System, Berichte der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Völkerrecht Vol. XXXIX (Heidelberg: C. F. Müller, 2000), pp. 427–47.Google Scholar
Greenwood, C., ‘Human Rights and Humanitarian Law: Conflict or Convergence’, Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 43 (2010), pp. 491–512.Google Scholar
Halberstam, D., ‘Constitutional Heterarchy: The Centrality of Conflict in the European Union and the United States’ in Dunoff, J. L. and Trachtman, J. B. (eds.), Ruling the World? (Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 326–55.Google Scholar
Hambler, C., and Canney, S. M., Conservation (Cambridge University Press, 2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heldmann, S., Das Reziprozitätsprinzip im Humanitären Völkerrecht (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howse, R., ‘Fragmentation and Utopia: Towards an Equitable Integration of Finance, Trade, and Sustainable Development’ in Cassese, A. (ed.), Realizing Utopia. The Future of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 427–41.Google Scholar
Joyner, C. C., and Tyler, Z., ‘Marine Conservation versus International Free Trade: Reconciling Dolphins with Tuna and Sea Turtles with Shrimp’, Ocean Development and International Law, 31 (2000), pp. 127–50.Google Scholar
Kälin, W., ‘Universal Human Rights Bodies and International Humanitarian Law’ in Kolb, R. and Gaggioli, G. (eds.), Research Handbook on Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2013), pp. 441–65.Google Scholar
Kälin, W., and Künzli, J., The Law of International Human Rights Protection (Oxford University Press, 2009).Google Scholar
Kalshoven, F., ‘The International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission – a Sleeping Beauty?’, Humanitäres Völkerrecht – Informationsschriften, 15 (2002), pp. 213–16.Google Scholar
Kammerhofer, J., Uncertainty in International Law: A Kelsenian Perspective (London: Routledge, 2011).Google Scholar
Kingsbury, B., Krisch, N., and Stewart, R. B., ‘The Emergence of Global Administrative Law’, Law & Contemporary Problems, 68 (2005), pp. 15–61.Google Scholar
Kjaer, P. F., Constitutionalism in the Global Realm: A Sociological Approach (London: Routledge, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klabbers, J., An Introduction to International Institutional Law, 2nd edn (Cambridge University Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klabbers, J., Peters, A., and Ulfstein, G. (eds.), The Constitutionalization of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleinlein, T., Konstitutionalisierung im Völkerrecht: Konstruktion und Elemente einer idealistischen Völkerrechtslehre (Heidelberg et al.: Springer, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolb, R., and Gaggioli, G. (eds.), Research Handbook on Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koskenniemi, M., ‘Legal Fragmentation(s)’ in Calliess, G.-P. et al. (eds.), Soziologische Jurisprudenz. Festschrift für Gunther Teubner (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2009), pp. 795–810.Google Scholar
Kotzur, M., ‘“Constitutional Moments” in globaler Perspektive’, Jahrbuch des öffentlichen Rechts der Gegenwart, 62 (2014), pp. 445–58.Google Scholar
Kratochwil, F., The Status of Law in World Society: Meditations on the Role and Rule of Law (Cambridge University Press, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kratochwil, F., ‘Leaving Sovereignty Behind? An Inquiry into the Politics of Post-Modernity’ in Falk, R., Juergensmeyer, M. and Popovski, V. (eds.), Legality and Legitimacy in Global Affairs (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 127–48.Google Scholar
Kratochwil, F., Rules, Norms, and Decisions. On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs (Cambridge University Press, 1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krisch, N., ‘Article 39 UN Charter’ in Simma, B., Nolte, G., Khan, D.-E. and Paulus, A. (eds.), The United Nations Charter: A Commentary, 3rd edn, 2 vols. (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 1272–96.Google Scholar
Krisch, N., Beyond Constitutionalism: The Pluralist Structure of Postnational Law (Oxford University Press, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krisch, N., ‘International Law in Times of Hegemony: Unequal Power and the Shaping of the International Legal Order’, European Journal of International Law, 16 (2005), pp. 369–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumm, M., ‘How Does European Union Law Fit into the World of Public Law? Costa, Kadi and Three Conceptions of Public Law’ in Neyer, J. and Wiener, A. (eds.), Political Theory of the European Union (Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 111–38.Google Scholar
Kuo, M.-S., ‘Between Fragmentation and Unity: The Uneasy Relationship between Global Administrative Law and Global Constitutionalism’, San Diego International Law Journal, 10 (2009), pp. 439–67.Google Scholar
Loughlin, M., and Walker, N. (eds.), The Paradox of Constitutionalism: Constituent Power and Constitutional Form (Oxford University Press, 2007).Google Scholar
MacDonald, T., Global Stakeholder Democracy: Power and Representation Beyond Liberal States (Oxford University Press, 2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, R., ‘The Law of Armed Conflict and International Human Rights Law: Some Paradigmatic Differences and Operational Implications’, Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, 13 (2011), pp. 213–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milliken, J., ‘The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of Research and Methods’, European Journal of International Relations, 5 (1999), pp. 225–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Möllers, C., ‘“We Are (Afraid of) the People”. Constituent Power in German Constitutionalism’ in Loughlin, M. and Walker, N. (eds.), The Paradox of Constitutionalism: Constituent Power and Constitutional Form (Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 87–105.Google Scholar
Moos, L., Individualrechtsschutz gegen menschenrechtswidrige hoheitliche Maßnahmen von Übergangsverwaltungen der Vereinten Nationen am Beispiel der United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nardin, T., ‘International Ethics and International Law’ in Frost, M. (ed.), International Ethics, Vol. III: The Changing Constitution of Global Politics – Ethical Issues (Los Angeles: Sage, 2011), pp. 43–58.Google Scholar
Niesen, P. (ed.), Transnationale Gerechtigkeit und Demokratie (Frankfurt am Main: Campus, 2012).Google Scholar
O’Donoghue, A., Constitutionalism in Global Constitutionalisation (Cambridge University Press, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oeter, S., ‘Fortschrittsnarrative im Humanitären Völkerrecht – Vom Kriegsvölkerrecht zu Menschenrechten in bewaffneten Konflikten’ in Calliess, C. (ed.), Liber amicorum für Torsten Stein (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2015), pp. 1002–26.Google Scholar
Oeter, S., ‘Vom Völkerrecht zum transnationalen Recht – “Transnational Administrative Networks” und die Bildung hybrider Akteursstrukturen’ in Calliess, G.-P. (ed.), Transnationales Recht (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 387–402.Google Scholar
Oeter, S., ‘The Openness of International Organisations for Transnational Public Rule-Making’ in Dilling, O., Herberg, M. and Winter, G. (eds.), Transnational Administrative Rule-Making: Performance, Legal Effects, and Legitimacy (Oxford: Hart, 2011), pp. 235–51.Google Scholar
Oeter, S., ‘Verkoppelung von Recht und Politik im europäischen Verfassungsdenken’ in Franzius, C., Mayer, F. and Neyer, J. (eds.), Strukturfragen der Europäischen Union (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2010), pp. 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oeter, S., ‘Theorising the Global Legal Order – An Institutionalist Perspective’ in Halpin, A. and Roeben, V. (eds.), Theorising the Global Legal Order (Oxford: Hart, 2009), pp. 61–83.Google Scholar
Oeter, S., ‘Chancen und Defizite internationaler Verrechtlichung: Was das Recht jenseits des Nationalstaates leisten kann’ in Zangl, B. and Zürn, M. (eds.), Verrechtlichung – Baustein für Global Governance? (Bonn: Dietz, 2004), pp. 46–73.Google Scholar
Onuf, N., ‘The Constitution of International Society’, European Journal of International Law, 5 (1994), pp. 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellet, A., ‘Notes sur la “fragmentation” du droit international’ in Alland, D. (ed.), Unité et diversité du droit international (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2014), pp. 757–84.Google Scholar
Pernice, I. (ed.), Konstitutionalisierung jenseits des Staates: Zur Verfassung der Weltgemeinschaft und den Gründungsverträgen internationaler Organisationen (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2012).Google Scholar
Peters, A., ‘Global Constitutionalism’ in Gibbons, M. (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Political Thought (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014), Online resource,available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118474396.wbept0421/pdf, accessed on 6 February 2015.Google Scholar
Peters, A., ‘Are We Moving towards Constitutionalization of the World Community?’ in Cassese, A. (ed.), Realizing Utopia: The Future of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 118–35.Google Scholar
Peters, A., ‘Conclusions’, in Klabbers, J., Peters, A. and Ulfstein, G. (eds.), The Constitutionalization of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2009), pp. 342–51.Google Scholar
Peters, A., ‘The Merits of Global Constitutionalism’, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 16 (2009), pp. 397–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, A., ‘Compensatory Constitutionalism’, Leiden Journal of International Law, 19 (2006), pp. 579–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, A., Koechlin, L., Förster, T., and Fenner Zinkernagel, G. (eds.), Non-State Actors as Standard Setters (Cambridge University Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, A., and Armington, K., ‘Global Constitutionalism from an Interdisciplinary Perspective’, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 16 (2009), pp. 385–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersmann, E.-U., ‘From State-Centered towards Constitution “Public Reason” in Modern International Economic Law’ in Bongiovanni, G. (ed.), Reasonableness and Law (Dordrecht and Heidelberg: Springer, 2009), pp. 421–58.Google Scholar
Petersmann, E.-U., ‘Human Rights, Constitutionalism, and the World Trade Organization: Challenges for World Trade Organization Jurisprudence and Civil Society’, Leiden Journal of International Law, 19 (2006), pp. 633–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poiares Maduro, M., ‘Courts and Pluralism: Essay on a Theory of Judicial Adjudication in the Context of Legal and Constitutional Pluralism’ in Dunoff, J. L. and Trachtman, J. B. (eds.), Ruling the World? (Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 356–80.Google Scholar
Posner, E. A., The Perils of Global Legalism (University of Chicago Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reus-Smit, C., ‘The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of Fundamental Institutions’, International Organization, 51 (1997), pp. 555–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwöbel, C., Global Constitutionalism in International Legal Perspective (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teubner, G., and Korth, P., ‘Two Kinds of Legal Pluralism: Collision of Transnational Regimes in the Double Fragmentation of World Society’ in Young, M. A. (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 23–54.Google Scholar
Thornhill, C., ‘Contemporary Constitutionalism and the Dialectic of Constituent Power’, Global Constitutionalism, 1 (2012), pp. 369–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trachtman, J. P., ‘Fragmentation, Coherence and Synergy in International Law’, Transnational Legal Theory, 2 (2011), pp. 505–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tully, J., ‘On Local and Global Citizenship: An Apprenticeship Manual’ in Tully, J., Public Philosophy in a New Key, 2 vols. (Cambridge University Press, 2008), Vol. II, pp. 243–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tully, J., Strange Multiplicity: Constitutionalism in an Age of Diversity (Cambridge University Press, 1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vidmar, J., ‘Norm Conflicts and Hierarchy in International Law: Towards a Vertical International Legal System?’ in de Wet, E. and Vidmar, J. (eds.), Hierarchy in International Law (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 13–40.Google Scholar
Walker, N., ‘Flexibility within a Metaconstitutional Frame: Reflections on the Future of Legal Authority in Europe’ in De Burca, G. and Scott, J. (eds.), Constitutional Change in the EU: From University to Flexibility? (Oxford: Hart, 2000), pp. 9–30.Google Scholar
Webb, P., International Judicial Integration and Fragmentation (Oxford University Press, 2013).Google Scholar
Weiler, J. H. H., and Wind, M. (eds.), European Constitutionalism Beyond the State (Cambridge University Press, 2003).Google Scholar
de Wet, E. and Vidmar, J. (eds.), Hierarchy in International Law (Oxford University Press, 2012).Google Scholar
Wiener, A., The Invisible Constitution of Politics: Contested Norms and International Encounters (Cambridge University Press, 2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, A., ‘Global Constitutionalism’ in Oxford Bibliographies Online: International Relations, available at www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199743292/obo-9780199743292-0092.xml?rskey=CnfQ7M&result=1&q=antje%20wiener#firstMatch.Google Scholar
Wiener, A., ‘Contested Compliance: Interventions on the Normative Structure of World Politics’, European Journal of International Relations, 10 (2004), pp. 189–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, A., Lang, A. F., Tully, J., Maduro, M. P., and Kumm, M., ‘Why a New Journal on Global Constitutionalism? Editorial’, Global Constitutionalism, 1 (2012), pp. 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willets, P., Non-Governmental Organizations in World Politics: The Construction of Global Governance (London, Routledge, 2011).Google Scholar
Young, M. A. (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation (Cambridge University Press, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, M. A., ‘Introduction’ in Young, M. A., (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, M. A. ‘Regime Interaction in Creating, Implementing and Enforcing International Law’ in Young, M. A., (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 85–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bibliography
Agrawala, S., “Context and Early Origins of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,” Climatic Change, 39 (1998), pp. 605–20.Google Scholar
Alter, K. J., and Meunier, S., “The Politics of Regime Complexity,” Perspectives on Politics, 7 (2009), pp. 13–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, M., and Finnemore, M., Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics (Cornell University Press, 2004).Google Scholar
Barnett, M. N., and Finnemore, M., “The Politics, Power and Pathologies of International Organizations,” International Organization, 53 (1999), pp. 699–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blome, K., and Markard, N., “‘Contested Collisions’: Conditions for a Successful Collision Management – The Example of Article 16 of the Rome Statute,” Leiden Journal of International Law, 29 (2016), forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolin, B., A History of the Science and Politics of Climate Change: The Role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge University Press, 2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broude, T., “Keep Calm and Carry On: Martti Koskenniemi and the Fragmentation of International Law,” Temple International and Comparative Law Journal, 27 (2013), pp. 279–92.Google Scholar
Chayes, A., and Chayes, A., The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements (Harvard University Press, 1996).Google Scholar
Crawford, J., and Nevill, P., “Relations between International Courts and Tribunals: The ‘Regime Problem’” in Young, M. (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 235–60.Google Scholar
Drake, W., and Nicolaides, K., “Ideas, Interests and Institutionalization: ‘Trade in Services’ and the Uruguay Round,” International Organization, 46 (1992), pp. 37–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunoff, J. L., “Lotus Eaters: Reflections on the Varietals Dispute, the SPS Agreement and WTO Dispute Resolution” in Berman, G. and Mavroidis, P. (eds.), Trade and Human Health and Safety (Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 153–89.Google Scholar
Dunoff, J. L., “The WTO in Transition: Of Constituents, Competence and Coherence,” George Washington International Law Review, 33 (2001), pp. 979–1013.Google Scholar
Dunoff, J. L., “The Death of the Trade Regime,” European Journal of International Law, 10 (1999), pp. 733–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunoff, J. L., and Trachtman, J. P. (eds.), Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law, and Global Governance (Cambridge University Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer-Lescano, A., and Teubner, G., “Regime Collisions: The Vain Search for Legal Unity in the Fragmentation of Global Law,” Michigan Journal of International Law, 25 (2004), pp. 999–1046.Google Scholar
Harrison, J., Making the Law of the Sea: A Study in the Development of International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2013).Google Scholar
Helfer, L. R., “Regime Shifting: The TRIPs Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking,” Yale Journal of International Law, 29 (2004), pp. 1–83.Google Scholar
Hohmann, J., “Igloo as Icon: A Human Rights Approach to Climate Change for the Inuit?” Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems, 18 (2009), pp. 295–316.Google Scholar
Howse, R., “From Politics to Technocracy – and Back Again: The Fate of the Multilateral Trading Regime,” American Journal of International Law, 96 (2002), pp. 94–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenks, C. W., “The Conflict of Law-Making Treaties,” British Year Book of International Law, 30 (1953), pp. 401–53.Google Scholar
Johnson, T., Organizational Progeny: Why Governments are Losing Control over the Proliferating Structures of Global Governance (Oxford University Press, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, T. and Urpelainen, J., “A Strategic Theory of Regime Integration and Separation,” International Organization, 66 (2012), pp. 645–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnstone, I., “Law-Making Through the Operational Activities of International Organizations,” George Washington International Review, 40 (2008), pp. 87–122.Google Scholar
Kelly, C. R., “Institutional Alliances and Derivative Legitimacy,” Michigan Journal of International Law, 29 (2008), pp. 609–64.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D., “Challenging Expert Rule: The Politics of Global Governance,” Sydney Journal of International Law, 27 (2005), pp. 5–28.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D., The Dark Side of Virtue: Reassessing International Humanitarianism (Princeton University Press, 2005).Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O., and Victor, D., “The Regime Complex for Climate Change,” Perspectives on Politics, 9 (2011), pp. 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klabbers, J., Peters, A. and Ulfstein, G., The Constitutionalization of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koremenos, B., “Institutionalism and International Law” in Dunoff, J. and Pollack, M. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations (Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 59–82.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, M., “The Politics of International Law – 20 Years Later,” European Journal of International Law, 20 (2009), pp. 7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koskenniemi, M., and Leino, P., “Fragmentation of International Law? Postmodern Anxieties,” Leiden Journal International Law, 15 (2002), pp. 553–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kratochwil, F., and Ruggie, J. G., “International Organization: A State of the Art on an Art of the State,” International Organization, 40 (1986), pp. 753–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, A. T. F., “Legal Regimes and Professional Knowledges: The Internal Politics of Regime Definition” in Young, M. (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 113–35.Google Scholar
Limon, M., “Human Rights and Climate Change: Constructing a Case for Political Action,” Harvard Environmental Law Review, 33 (2009), pp. 339–476.Google Scholar
Michaels, R., and Pauwelyn, J., “Conflict of Norms or Conflict of Laws? Different Techniques in the Fragmentation of Public International Law,” Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law, 22 (2012), pp. 349–76.Google Scholar
Murphy, S. D., “Defragmenting International Law: The Significance of Koskenniemi’s 2006 ILC Project,” Temple International and Comparative Law Journal, 27 (2013), pp. 293–308.Google Scholar
Oberthür, S., and Gehring, T. (eds.), Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance: Synergy and Conflict among International and EU Policies (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osofsky, H., “The Inuit Petition as a Bridge? Beyond Dialectics of Climate Change and Indigenous Peoples’ Rights,” American Indian Law Review, 31 (2006–07), pp. 675–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pauwelyn, J., Conflict of Norms in Public International Law: How WTO Law Relates to Other Rules of International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raustiala, K., “Institutional Proliferation and the International Legal Order” in Dunoff, J. L. and Pollack, M. A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspective on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art (Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 293–320.Google Scholar
Raustiala, K., and Victor, D., “The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources,” International Organization, 15 (2004), pp. 277–309.Google Scholar
Stokke, O. S., and Coffey, C., “Institutional Interplay and Responsible Fisheries: Combating Subsidies, Developing Precaution” in Oberthür, S. and Gehring, T. (eds.), Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance: Synergy and Conflict among International and EU Policies (Cambridge: MIT Press 2006), pp. 127–55.Google Scholar
Teubner, G., and Korth, P., “Two Kinds of Legal Pluralism: Collision of Transnational Regimes in the Double Fragmentation of World Society” in Young, M. (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 23–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations Environment Programme and World Trade Organization, Trade and Climate Change (World Trade Organization, 2009).Google Scholar
World Trade Organization and International Labour Organization, Trade and Employment: Challenges for Policy Research (International Labour Office, 2007).Google Scholar
Young, M. A. (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation (Cambridge University Press, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, M. A., Trading Fish, Saving Fish: The Interaction between Regimes in International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, M. A., “Protecting Endangered Marine Species: Collaboration Between the Food and Agriculture Organization and the CITES Regime,” Melbourne Journal International Law, 11 (2010), pp. 441–90.Google Scholar
References
Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D., and Zangl, B. (eds.), International Organizations as Orchestrators (Cambridge University Press, 2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axelrod, M., ‘Savings Clauses and the “Chilling Effect”: Regime Interplay as Constraints on International Govenance’ in Oberthür, S. and Stokke, O. S. (eds.), Managing Institutional Complexity. Regime Interplay and Global Environmental Change (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011), pp. 87–114.Google Scholar
Blome, K., and Markard, N., ‘“Contested Collisions”: Conditions for a Successful Collision Management ? The Example of Article 16 of the Rome Statute’, Leiden Journal of International Law, Available on CJO 2015 doi:10.1017/S0922156515000783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biermann, F., Pattberg, P., van Asselt, H., and Zelli, F., ‘The Fragmentation of Global Governance Architectures: A Framework for Analysis’, Global Environmental Politics, 9 (2009) (4), pp. 14–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buzan, B., and Albert, M., ‘Differentiation: A Sociological Approach to International Relations Theory’, European Journal of International Relations, 16 (2010), pp. 315–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, W. B., Interlinkages and the Effectiveness of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 2008).Google Scholar
Colgan, J. D., Keohane, R. O., and Van de Graaf, T., ‘Punctuated Equilibrium in the Energy Regime Complex’, The Review of International Organizations, 7 (2012), pp. 117–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckersley, R., ‘The Big Chill: The WTO and Multilateral Environmental Agreements’, Global Environmental Politics, 4 (2004) 2, pp. 24–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer-Lescano, A., and Teubner, G., ‘Regime-Collisions: The Vain Search for Legal Unity in the Fragmentation of Global Law’, Michigan Journal of International Law, 25 (2004), pp. 999–1046.Google Scholar
Gehring, T., Dynamic International Regimes. Institutions for International Environmental Governance (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2004).Google Scholar
Gehring, T., ‘The Institutional Complex of Trade and Environment: Toward an Interlocking Governance Structure and a Division of Labor’ in Oberthür, S. and Stokke, O. S. (eds.), Managing Institutional Complexity. Regime Interplay and Global Environmental Change (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011), pp. 227–54.Google Scholar
Gehring, T., and Faude, B., ‘The Dynamics of Regime Complexes: Microfoundations and Systemic Effects’, Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 19 (2013), pp. 119–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gehring, T., and Oberthür, S., ‘Comparative Empirical Analysis and Ideal Types of Institutional Interaction’ in Oberthür, S. and Gehring, T. (eds.), Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance. Synergy and Conflict among International and EU Policies (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press 2006), pp. 307–71.Google Scholar
Gehring, T., and Oberthür, S., ‘The Causal Mechanisms of Interaction between International Institutions’, European Journal of International Relations, 15 (2009), pp. 125–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gehring, T., and Oberthür, S., ‘Institutional Interaction: Ten Years of Scholarly Development’ in Oberthür, S. and Stokke, O. S. (eds.), Managing Institutional Complexity. Regime Interplay and Global Environmental Change (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011), pp. 25–58.Google Scholar
Humrich, C., ‘Fragmented International Governance of Arctic Offshore Oil: Governance Challenges and Institutional Improvement’, Global Environmental Politics, 13 (2013), pp. 79–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, T., and Urpelainen, J., ‘A Strategic Theory of Regime Integration and Separation’, International Organization, 66 (2012), pp. 645–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R. O., After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton University Press, 1984).Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O., ‘Neoliberal Institutionalism: A Perspective on World Politics’ in Keohane, R. O. (ed.), International Institutions and State Power: Essays in International Relations Theory (Boulder, Col.: Westview, 1989), pp. 1–20.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O., and Victor, D. G., ‘The Regime Complex for Climate Change’, Perspectives on Politics, 9 (2011), pp. 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morin, J.-F., and Orsini, A., ‘Regime Complexity and Policy Coherency: Introducing a Co-adjustments Model’, Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 19 (2013), pp. 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberthür, S., ‘Interplay Management: Enhancing Environmental Policy Integration among International Institutions’, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 9 (2009), pp. 371–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberthür, S. and Gehring, T. (eds.), Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance. Synergy and Conflict among International and EU Policies (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberthür, S., and Stokke, O. S., ‘Conclusions: Decentralized Interplay Management in an Evolving Interinstitutional Order’ in Oberthür, S. and Stokke, O. S. (eds.), Managing Institutional Complexity. Regime Interplay and Global Environmental Change (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011), pp. 313–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberthür, S., and Pozarowska, J., ‘Managing Institutional Complexity and Fragmentation: The Nagoya Protocol and the Global Governance of Genetic Resources’, Global Environmental Politics, 13 (2013), pp. 100–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberthür, S., and Pozarowska, J., ‘The Impact of the Nagoya Protocol on the Evolving Institutional Complex of ABS Governance’ in Oberthür, S. and Rosendal, G. K. (eds.), Global Governance of Genetic Resources: Access and Benefit Sharing after the Nagoya Protocol (Abingdon: Routledge, 2014), pp. 178–95.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E., ‘A Polycentric Approach for Coping with Climate Change’, Policy Research Working Paper 5095 (The World Bank, October 2009).Google Scholar
Raustiala, K., and Victor, D. G., ‘The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources’, International Organization, 58 (2004), pp. 277–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosendal, G. K., ‘The Convention on Biological Diversity: Tensions with the WTO TRIPS Agreement over Access to Genetic Resources and the Sharing of Benefits’ in Oberthür, S. and Gehring, T. (eds.), Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance. Synergy and Conflict among International and EU Policies (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006), pp. 79–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sand, P. H., Lessons Learned in Global Environmental Governance (Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute, 1990).Google Scholar
Stokke, O. S., The Interplay of International Regimes: Putting Effectiveness Theory to Work, Report No. 14 (Lysaker, Norway: Fridtjof Nansen Institute, 2001).Google Scholar
Stokke, O. S., ‘Interplay Management, Niche Selection and Arctic Environmental Governance’ in Oberthür, S. and Stokke, O. S. (eds.), Managing Institutional Complexity. Regime Interplay and Global Environmental Change (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011), pp. 143–70.Google Scholar
Tversky, A., and Kahnemann, D., ‘The Framing of Decision and Rational Choice’, Science, 211 (1981), pp. 453–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A., and Kahnemann, D., ‘Choices, Values and Frames’, American Psychologist, 39 (1984), pp. 341–50.Google Scholar
van Asselt, H., The Fragmentation of Global Climate Governance: Consequences and Management of Regime Interactions (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van de Graaf, T., ‘Fragmentation in Global Energy Governance: Explaining the Creation of IRENA’, Global Environmental Politics, 13 (2013), pp. 14–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallbott, L., Wolff, F., and Pożarowska, J., ‘The Negotiations of the Nagoya Protocol: Issues, Coalitions and Process’ in Oberthür, S. and Rosendal, G. K. (eds.), Global Governance of Genetic Resources: Access and Benefit Sharing after the Nagoya Protocol (Abingdon: Routledge, 2014), pp. 33–59.Google Scholar
Wolfrum, R., and Matz, N., Conflicts in International Environmental Law (Berlin: Springer, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, M. A. (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation (Cambridge University Press, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, O. R., The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change: Fit, Scale and Interplay (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, O. R., Institutional Dynamics: Emergent Patterns in International Environmental Governance (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zelli, F., ‘Regime Conflicts and Their Management in Global Environmental Governance’ in Oberthür, S. and Stokke, O. S. (eds.), Managing Institutional Complexity. Regime Interplay and Global Environmental Change (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011), pp. 199–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bibliography
Alford, R. P., ‘The Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals: International Adjudication in Ascendance’, American Society of International Law Proceedings, 94 (2000), pp. 160–5.Google Scholar
Alford, R. P., ‘Federal Courts, International Tribunals, and the Continuum of Deference’, Virginia Journal of International Law, 43 (2003), pp. 675–796.Google Scholar
Amar, A. R., ‘Of Sovereignty and Federalism’, Yale Law Journal, 96 (1987), pp. 1425–1520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anzilotti, D., Corso di diritto internazionale, 3rd edn, 3 vols. (Rome: Athenaeum, 1928).Google Scholar
Arai-Takahashi, Y., The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Principle of Proportionality in the Jurisprudence of the ECHR (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2002).Google Scholar
Archibugi, D., The Global Commonwealth of Citizens: Toward Cosmopolitan Democracy (Princeton University Press, 2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, E., Political Thought in England: From Herbert Spencer to the Present Day (London: Williams and Norgate, 1915).Google Scholar
Berman, H. J., Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983).Google Scholar
Berman, P. S., ‘Judges as Cosmopolitan Transnational Actors’, Tulsa Journal of Comparative and International Law, 12 (2004), pp. 109–21.Google Scholar
Berman, P. S., ‘Conflict of Laws, Globalization, and Cosmopolitan Pluralism’, Wayne Law Review, 51 (2005), pp. 1105–45.Google Scholar
Berman, P. S., ‘Towards a Cosmopolitan Vision of Conflict of Laws: Redefining Governmental Interest in a Global Era’, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 153 (2005), pp. 1819–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, P. S., ‘The New Legal Pluralism’, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 5 (2009), pp. 225–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, P. S., Global Legal Pluralism: A Jurisprudence of Law Beyond Borders (Cambridge University Press, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besselink, L. F. M., ‘National and Constitutional Identity Before and After Lisbon’, Utrecht Law Review, 6 (2010), pp. 36–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besson, S., ‘European Legal Pluralism after Kadi’, European Constitutional Law Review, 5 (2009), pp. 237–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Bogdandy, A., and Schill, S., ‘Overcoming Absolute Primacy: Respect for National Identity under the Lisbon Treaty’, Common Market Law Review, 48 (2011), pp. 1417–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohman, J., Democracy across Borders: From Dêmos to Dêmoi (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brauch, J. A., ‘The Margin of Appreciation and the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights: Threat to the Rule of Law’, Columbia Journal of European Law, 11 (2005), pp. 113–50.Google Scholar
Buergenthal, T., ‘The Evolving International Human Rights System’, American Journal of International Law, 100 (2006), pp. 783–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke-White, W. W., ‘Proactive Complementarity: The International Criminal Court and National Courts in the Rome System of International Justice’, Harvard International Law Journal, 49 (2008), pp. 53–108.Google Scholar
Calliess, G.-P., ‘Transnational Civil Regimes: Economic Globalisation and the Evolution of Commercial Law’ in Gessner, V. (ed.), Contractual Certainty in International Trade: Empirical Studies and Theoretical Debates on Institutional Support for Global Economic Exchanges (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2009), pp. 215–38.Google Scholar
Carozza, P. G., ‘Subsidiarity as a Structural Principle of International Human Rights Law’, American Journal of International Law, 97 (2003), pp. 38–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cass, D. Z., The Constitutionalization of the World Trade Organization: Legitimacy, Democracy, and Community in the International Trading System (Oxford University Press, 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassese, S., I tribunali di Babele: i giudici alla ricerca di un nuovo ordine globale (Rome: Donzelli, 2009).Google Scholar
Charnovitz, S., ‘Free Trade, Fair Trade, Green Trade: Defogging the Debate’, Cornell International Law Journal, 27 (1994), pp. 459–525.Google Scholar
Crawford, S. P., ‘The ICANN Experiment’, Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law, 12 (2004), pp. 409–48.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A., ‘Can International Organizations Be Democratic? A Sceptic’s View’ in Shapiro, I. and Hacker-Cordón, C. (eds.), Democracy’s Edges (Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delmas-Marty, M., Ordering Pluralism: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding the Transnational Legal World, Norberg, N. trans. (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2009).Google Scholar
Dinwoodie, G. B., ‘A New Copyright Order: Why National Courts Should Create Global Norms’, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 149 (2000), pp. 469–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodge, W. S., ‘The Public-Private Distinction in the Conflict of Laws’, Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law, 18 (2008), pp. 371–94.Google Scholar
El Zeidy, M. M., ‘The Principle of Complementarity: A New Machinery to Implement International Criminal Law’, Michigan Journal of International Law, 23 (2002), pp. 869–975.Google Scholar
Eleftheriadis, P., ‘Pluralism and Integrity’, Ratio Juris, 23 (2010), pp. 365–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eriksen, E. O., The Unfinished Democratization of Europe (Oxford University Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falk, R. A., ‘The Pathways of Global Constitutionalism’, in Falk, R. A., Johansen, R. C. and Kim, S. S. (eds.), The Constitutional Foundations of World Peace (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993), pp. 13–38.Google Scholar
Fassbender, B., ‘The United Nations Charter as Constitution of the International Community’, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 36 (1998), pp. 529–619.Google Scholar
Fischer-Lescano, A., and Teubner, G., ‘Regime-Collisions: The Vain Search for Legal Unity in the Fragmentation of Global Law’, Michigan Journal of International Law, 25 (2004), pp. 999–1046.Google Scholar
Føllesdal, A., ‘The Principle of Subsidiarity as a Constitutional Principle in International Law’, Global Constitutionalism, 2 (2013), pp. 37–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Froomkin, A. M., ‘Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA and the Constitution’, Duke Law Journal, 50 (2000), pp. 17–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Froomkin, A. M., ‘ICANN’s “Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy”: Causes and (Partial) Cures’, Brooklyn Law Review, 67 (2002), pp. 605–718.Google Scholar
Gaja, G., ‘The Review by the European Court of Human Rights of Member States’ Acts Implementing European Union Law: “Solange” Yet Again?’ in Dupuy, P.-M. et al. (eds.), Common Values in International Law: Essays in Honour of Christian Tomuschat (Kehl: Engel, 2006), pp. 517–26.Google Scholar
Garlicki, L., ‘Cooperation of Courts: The Role of Supranational Jurisdictions in Europe’, International Journal of Constitutional Law, 6 (2008), pp. 509–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerards, J., ‘Pluralism, Deference and the Margin of Appreciation Doctrine’, European Law Journal, 17 (2011), pp. 80–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Gierke, O., Political Theories of the Middle Age, Maitland, F. W. trans. (Cambridge University Press, 1900).Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. L., and Posner, E. A., The Limits of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, J., ‘What Is Legal Pluralism?’, Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 24 (1986), pp. 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimm, D., ‘The Achievement of Constitutionalism and Its Prospects in a Changed World’ in Dobner, P. and Loughlin, M. (eds.), The Twilight of Constitutionalism? (Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Günther, K., ‘Legal Pluralism or Uniform Concept of Law? Globalisation as a Problem of Legal Theory’, No Foundations, 5 (2008), pp. 5–21.Google Scholar
Guzman, A. T., How International Law Works: A Rational Choice Theory (Oxford University Press, 2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, J., Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, Rehg, W. trans. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, J., ‘A Political Constitution for the Pluralist World Society?’ in Habermas, J., Between Naturalism and Religion: Philosophical Essays, Cronin, C. trans. (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2008), pp. 312–52.Google Scholar
Hafner, G., ‘Pros and Cons Ensuing from Fragmentation of International Law’, Michigan Journal of International Law, 25 (2004), pp. 849–63.Google Scholar
Halberstam, D., ‘Local, Global and Plural Constitutionalism: Europe Meets the World’ in de Búrca, G. and Weiler, J. H. H. (eds.), The Worlds of European Constitutionalism (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 150–202.Google Scholar
Halberstam, D., and Stein, E., ‘The United Nations, the European Union, and the King of Sweden: Economic Sanctions and Individual Rights in a Plural World Order’, Common Market Law Review, 46 (2009), pp. 13–72.Google Scholar
Hamilton, A., ‘The Federalist No. 9’ in Cooke, J. E. (ed.), The Federalist (Middletown: Wesleyan University Press, 1961), pp. 50–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauriou, M., ‘La théorie de l’institution et de la fondation: essai de vitalisme social’, Cahiers de la nouvelle journée, 4 (1925), pp. 1–45.Google Scholar
Held, D., Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995).Google Scholar
Helfer, L. R., and Dinwoodie, G. B., ‘Designing Non-National Systems: The Case of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy’, William and Mary Law Review, 43 (2001), pp. 141–274.Google Scholar
Hooker, M. B., Legal Pluralism: An Introduction to Colonial and Neo-Colonial Laws (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975).Google Scholar
Jackson, J. H., Sovereignty, the WTO, and Changing Fundamentals of International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, V. C., Constitutional Engagement in a Transnational Era (Oxford University Press, 2010).Google Scholar
Jacqué, J.-P., ‘L’arrêt Bosphorus, une jurisprudence “Solange II” de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme?’, Revue trimestrielle de droit européen, 41 (2005), pp. 756–67.Google Scholar
Jellinek, G., Die rechtliche Natur der Staatenverträge: Ein Beitrag zur juristischen Construction des Völkerrechts (Vienna: Hölder, 1880).Google Scholar
Joerges, C., ‘A New Type of Conflicts Law as the Legal Paradigm of the Postnational Constellation’ in Joerges, C. and Falke, J. (eds.), Karl Polanyi, Globalisation and the Potential of Law in Transnational Markets (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2011), pp. 465–501.Google Scholar
Joerges, C., and Neyer, J., ‘From Intergovernmental Bargaining to Deliberative Political Processes: The Constitutionalisation of Comitology’, European Law Journal, 3 (1997), pp. 273–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelsen, H., Das Problem der Souveränität und die Theorie des Völkerrechts: Beitrag zu einer reinen Rechtslehre, 2nd edn (Tübingen: Mohr, 1928).Google Scholar
Kennedy, D., ‘One, Two, Three, Many Legal Orders: Legal Pluralism and the Cosmopolitan Dream’, New York University Review of Law and Social Change, 31 (2007), pp. 641–59.Google Scholar
Knop, K., Michaels, R., and Riles, A., ‘International Law in Domestic Courts: A Conflict of Laws Approach’, American Society of International Law Proceedings, 103 (2009), pp. 269–74.Google Scholar
Knop, K., Michaels, R., and Riles, A., ‘From Multiculturalism to Technique: Feminism, Culture, and the Conflict of Laws Style’, Stanford Law Review, 64 (2012), pp. 589–656.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, M., and Leino, P., ‘Fragmentation of International Law? Postmodern Anxieties’, Leiden Journal of International Law, 15 (2002), pp. 553–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krisch, N., ‘The Open Architecture of European Human Rights Law’, Modern Law Review, 71 (2008), pp. 183–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krisch, N., Beyond Constitutionalism: The Pluralist Structure of Postnational Law (Oxford University Press, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krisch, N., ‘Who Is Afraid of Radical Pluralism? Legal Order and Political Stability in the Postnational Space’, Ratio Juris, 24 (2011), pp. 386–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumm, M., ‘The Cosmopolitan Turn in Constitutionalism: On the Relationship between Constitutionalism in and beyond the State’ in Dunoff, J. L. and Trachtman, J. P. (eds.), Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law, and Global Governance (Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 258–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumm, M., ‘The Cosmopolitan Turn in Constitutionalism: An Integrated Conception of Public Law’, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 20 (2013), pp. 605–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laband, P., Das Staatsrecht des Deutschen Reiches, 5th edn, 4 vols. (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1911–1914).Google Scholar
Ladeur, K.-H., ‘Globalization and the Conversion of Democracy to Polycentric Networks: Can Democracy Survive the End of the Nation-State?’ in Ladeur, K.-H. (ed.), Public Governance in the Age of Globalization (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004), pp. 89–118.Google Scholar
Lanier, E. R., ‘Solange, Farewell: The Federal German Constitutional Court and the Recognition of the Court of Justice of the European Communities as Lawful Judge’, Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 11 (1988), pp. 1–29.Google Scholar
Laski, H. J., ‘The Personality of Associations’, Harvard Law Review, 29 (1916), pp. 404–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laski, H. J., ‘The Sovereignty of the State’, Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, 13 (1916), pp. 85–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavranos, N., ‘The Solange-Method as a Tool for Regulating Competing Jurisdictions among International Courts and Tribunals’, Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review, 30 (2008), pp. 275–334.Google Scholar
Legg, A., The Margin of Appreciation in International Human Rights Law: Deference and Proportionality (Oxford University Press, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Letsas, G., ‘Two Concepts of the Margin of Appreciation’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 26 (2006), pp. 705–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Letsas, G., ‘Harmonic Law: The Case Against Pluralism’ in Dickson, J. and Eleftheriadis, P. (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of European Union Law (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 77–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovric, D., ‘A Constitution Friendly to International Law: Germany and Its Völerrechtsfreundlichkeit’, Australian Yearbook of International Law, 25 (2006), pp. 75–104.Google Scholar
Lowenfeld, A. F., ‘Public Law in the International Arena: Conflict of Laws, International Law, and Some Suggestions for Their Interaction’, Recueil des cours de l’Académie de droit international, 163 (1979-II), pp. 311–445.Google Scholar
Lübbe-Wolff, G., ‘How Can the European Court of Human Rights Reinforce the Role of National Courts in the Convention System?’, Human Rights Law Journal, 32 (2012), pp. 11–15.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N., A Sociological Theory of Law, King, E. and Albrow, M. trans. (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1985).Google Scholar
Luhmann, N., ‘Some Problems with “Reflexive Law”’ in Teubner, G. and Febbrajo, A. (eds.), State, Law, and Economy as Autopoietic Systems: Regulation and Autonomy in a New Perspective (Milan: Giuffrè, 1992), pp. 389–415.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N., Law as a Social System, Ziegert, K. A. trans. (Oxford University Press, 2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luhmann, N., Theory of Society, Barrett, R. trans., 2 vols. (Stanford University Press, 2012).Google Scholar
Macaulay, S., ‘Private Government’ in Lipson, L. and Wheeler, S. (eds.), Law and the Social Sciences (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1986), pp. 445–518.Google Scholar
MacCormick, N., ‘Risking Constitutional Collision in Europe?’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 18 (1998), pp. 517–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madison, J., ‘The Federalist No. 39’ in Cooke, J. E. (ed.), The Federalist (Middletown: Wesleyan University Press, 1961), pp. 250–7.Google Scholar
McGoldrick, D., The Human Rights Committee: Its Role in the Development of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Mehren, A. T., ‘Special Substantive Rules for Multistate Problems: Their Role and Significance in Contemporary Choice of Law Methodology’, Harvard Law Review, 88 (1974), pp. 347–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelman, F. I., ‘W(h)ither the Constitution?’, Cardozo Law Review, 21 (2000), pp. 1063–83.Google Scholar
Nollkaemper, A., National Courts and the International Rule of Law (Oxford University Press, 2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nonet, P., and Selznick, P., Law and Society in Transition: Toward Responsive Law (New York: Harper and Row, 1978).Google Scholar
Nye, J. S. Jr., The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone (Oxford University Press, 2002).Google Scholar
Pastor Ridruejo, J. A., ‘Le principe de subsidiarité dans la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme’ in Bröhmer, J. et al. (eds.), Internationale Gemeinschaft und Menschenrechte: Festschrift für Georg Ress zum 70. Geburtstag (Cologne: Heymanns, 2005), pp. 1077–83.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J., Conflict of Norms in Public International Law: How WTO Law Relates to Other Rules of International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pernice, I., ‘The Global Dimension of Multilevel Constitutionalism: A Legal Response to the Challenges of Globalisation’ in Dupuy, P.-M. et al. (eds.), Common Values in International Law: Essays in Honour of Christian Tomuschat (Kehl: Engel, 2006), pp. 973–1005.Google Scholar
Peters, A., ‘The Merits of Global Constitutionalism’, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 16 (2009), pp. 397–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersmann, E.-U., ‘Time for a United Nations “Global Compact” for Integrating Human Rights into the Law of Worldwide Organizations: Lessons from European Integration’, European Journal of International Law, 13 (2002), pp. 621–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petzold, H., ‘The Convention and the Principle of Subsidiarity’ in Macdonald, R. St. J., Matscher, F. and Petzold, H. (eds.), The European System for the Protection of Human Rights (Dordrecht: Nijhoff, 1993), pp. 41–62.Google Scholar
Poiares Maduro, M., ‘Three Claims of Constitutional Pluralism’ in Avbelj, M. and Komárek, J. (eds.), Constitutional Pluralism in the European Union and Beyond (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2012), pp. 67–84.Google Scholar
Pospíšil, L., Anthropology of Law: A Comparative Theory (New York: Harper and Row, 1971).Google Scholar
Rabkin, J. A., Law without Nations? Why Constitutional Government Requires Sovereign States (Princeton University Press, 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romano, C. P. R., ‘The Proliferation of International Judicial Bodies: The Pieces of the Puzzle’, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 31 (1999), pp. 709–51.Google Scholar
Romano, S., L’ordinamento giuridico: studi sul concetto, le fonti e i caratteri del diritto (Pisa: Spoerri, 1918).Google Scholar
Rubenfeld, J., ‘Unilateralism and Constitutionalism’, New York University Law Review, 79 (2004), pp. 1971–2028.Google Scholar
von Savigny, F. C., System des heutigen Römischen Rechts, 8 vols. (Berlin: Veit, 1849).Google Scholar
Scelle, G., Précis de droit des gens: principes et systématique, 2 vols. (Paris: Sirey, 1932–1934).Google Scholar
Schmitt, C., Constitutional Theory, J. Seitzer trans. (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2008).Google Scholar
Schultz, T., ‘Secondary Rules of Recognition and Relative Legality in Transnational Regimes’, American Journal of Jurisprudence, 56 (2011), pp. 59–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selznick, P., Law, Society, and Industrial Justice (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1969).Google Scholar
Shany, Y., ‘Toward a General Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in International Law?’, European Journal of International Law, 16 (2005), pp. 907–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shelton, D., ‘Subsidiarity and Human Rights Law’, Human Rights Law Journal, 27 (2006), pp. 4–11.Google Scholar
Simma, B., ‘From Bilateralism to Community Interest in International Law’, Recueil des cours de l’Académie de droit international, 250 (1994-VI), pp. 217–384.Google Scholar
Simma, B., and Pulkowski, D., ‘Of Planets and the Universe: Self-Contained Regimes in International Law’, European Journal of International Law, 17 (2006), pp. 483–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slaughter, A.-M., ‘A Global Community of Courts’, Harvard International Law Journal, 44 (2003), pp. 191–219.Google Scholar
de Sousa Santos, B., Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation, 2nd edn (London: Butterworths, 2002).Google Scholar
Stein, E., ‘Lawyers, Judges, and the Making of a Transnational Constitution’, American Journal of International Law, 75 (1981), pp. 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Story, J., Commentaries on the Conflict of Laws, Foreign and Domestic: In Regard to Contracts, Rights, and Remedies, and Especially in Regard to Marriages, Divorces, Wills, Successions, and Judgments (Boston: Hilliard, Gray and Company, 1834).Google Scholar
Sweeney, J. A., ‘A “Margin of Appreciation” in the Internal Market: Lessons from the European Court of Human Rights’, Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 34 (2007), pp. 27–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teubner, G., ‘Substantive and Reflexive Elements in Modern Law’, Law and Society Review, 17 (1983), pp. 239–85.Google Scholar
Teubner, G., ‘Global Bukowina: Legal Pluralism in the World Society’ in Teubner, G. (ed.), Global Law without a State (Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1997), pp. 3–28.Google Scholar
Teubner, G., ‘Global Private Regimes: Neo-Spontaneous Law and Dual Constitution of Autonomous Sectors?’ in Ladeur, K.-H. (ed.), Public Governance in the Age of Globalization (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004), pp. 71–87.Google Scholar
Teubner, G., ‘The Anonymous Matrix: Human Rights Violations by “Private” Transnational Actors’, Modern Law Review, 69 (2006), pp. 327–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teubner, G., Constitutional Fragments: Societal Constitutionalism and Globalization (Oxford University Press, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teubner, G., and Karavas, V., ‘www.CompanyNameSucks.com: The Horizontal Effect of Fundamental Rights on “Private Parties” within Autonomous Internet Law’, Constellations, 12 (2005), pp. 262–82.Google Scholar
Teubner, G., and Korth, P., ‘Two Kinds of Legal Pluralism: Collision of Transnational Regimes in the Double Fragmentation of World Society’ in Young, M. A. (ed.), Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 23–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Tocqueville, A., Democracy in America, H. C. Mansfield and D. Winthrop trans. (University of Chicago Press, 2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trachtman, J. P., The Future of International Law: Global Government (Cambridge University Press, 2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tzanakopoulos, A., ‘Judicial Dialogue in Multi-Level Governance: The Impact of the Solange Argument’ in Fauchald, O. K. and Nollkaemper, A. (eds.), The Practice of International and National Courts and the (De-)Fragmentation of International Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2012), pp. 185–215.Google Scholar
Viellechner, L., ‘The Constitution of Transnational Governance Arrangements: Karl Polanyi’s Double Movement in the Transformation of Law’ in Joerges, C. and Falke, J. (eds.), Karl Polanyi, Globalisation and the Potential of Law in Transnational Markets (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2011), pp. 435–64.Google Scholar
Voßkuhle, A., ‘Multilevel Cooperation of the European Constitutional Courts: Der Europäische Verfassungsgerichtsverbund’, European Constitutional Law Review, 6 (2010), pp. 175–98.Google Scholar
Waitz, G., ‘Das Wesen des Bundesstaates’, Allgemeine Monatsschrift für Wissenschaft und Literatur, 4 (1853), pp. 494–530.Google Scholar
Walker, N., ‘The Idea of Constitutional Pluralism’, Modern Law Review, 65 (2002), pp. 317–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiler, J. H. H., ‘The Transformation of Europe’, Yale Law Journal, 100 (1991), pp. 2403–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wellens, K. C., ‘Diversity in Secondary Rules and the Unity of International Law: Some Reflections on Current Trends’, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, 25 (1994), pp. 3–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willke, H., ‘Societal Guidance through Law?’ in Teubner, G. and Febbrajo, A. (eds.), State, Law, and Economy as Autopoietic Systems: Regulation and Autonomy in a New Perspective (Milan: Giuffrè, 1992), pp. 353–88.Google Scholar
Yntema, H. E., ‘The Comity Doctrine’, Michigan Law Review, 65 (1966), pp. 9–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziller, J., ‘The German Constitutional Court’s Friendliness towards European Law: On the Judgment of Bundesverfassungsgericht over the Ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon’, European Public Law, 16 (2010), pp. 53–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar