Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T16:47:35.578Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Says who?’ liquid authority and interpretive control in transnational regulatory regimes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2017

Julia Black
Julia Black*
Affiliation:
Professor of Law, Law Department, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
*
E-mail: j.black@lse.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The article explores the notion of liquid authority by examining the ways in which the central organizations in three transnational regulatory-governance regimes do or do not attempt to establish interpretive control over the norms that they issue: the International Accounting Standards Board, the International Organisation of Standardisation, and the Forest Stewardship Council. The need to ‘solidify’ their authority ranges across all of their regulatory functions; this article focusses on just one of those functions: interpretation. In focussing on how these regulators seek to exercise interpretive control, the article seeks to show how liquid authority can crystallize. Further, the article develops the notion of liquid authority by arguing that the establishment, exercise, and continual maintenance of authority in transnational regulatory regimes, which are characterized by liquid authority as they lack a formal, legal base, are fundamentally linked to the issue of legitimacy. It argues in turn that legitimacy, and thus authority, is endogenously produced, a fact which exogenous, normative assessments of legitimacy can overlook. The article argues that regulators play an active role in their own legitimation – in creating, exercising, and maintaining their legitimacy, and in turn their authority, and that their success or otherwise in doing so is linked in part to their functional effectiveness, but that transnational regulators face a legitimacy paradox: they depend in part on such effectiveness for their legitimacy. The article supplements the ‘anatomical’ analysis of liquid authority with an understanding of the physiology of legitimation.

Keywords

transnational regulationauthoritylegitimacyrule interpretationtransnational standard setters
Type
Symposium: Liquid Authority in Global Governance
Information
International Theory , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , July 2017 , pp. 286 - 310
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2017 

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.)

Footnotes

*

A previous version of this paper was presented to the Transnational Legal Theory group at the University of Amsterdam, 2014.

References

Abbott, K., and Snidal, D.. 2010. “International Regulation Without International Government: Improving IO Performance Through Orchestration.” Review of International Organisations 5(3):315–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alali, F., and Cao, L.. 2010. “International Financial Reporting Standards – Credible and Reliable? An Overview.” Advances in Accounting 21(1):79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ASI. 2008. Annual Report, available at http://www.accreditation-services.com/resources/document-library Google Scholar
Auld, G., and Bull, G.. 2003. “The Institutional Design of Forest Certification Standards Initiatives and Its Influence on the Role of Science: The Case of Forest Genetic Resources.” Journal of Environmental Management 69(1):47–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Auld, G., Rencken, S., and Cashore, B.. 2015. “Transnational Private Governance: Between the Logics of Empowerment and Control.” Regulation and Governance 9(2):108–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, R. 1991. “Why Rules Don’t Work.” Modern Law Review 53(3):321–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, R., and Black, J.. 2008. “Really Responsive Regulation.” Modern Law Review 71(1):59–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartley, T. 2011. “Transnational Governance as the Layering of Rules: Intersections of Public and Private Standards.” Theoretical Inquiries in Law 12(2):517–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beetham, D. 1991. The Legitimation of Power. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtsson, E. 2011. “Repoliticisation of Accounting Standard Setting – The IASB, the EU and the Global Financial Crisis.” Critical Perspectives on Accounting 4:567–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, S., and Cashore, B.. 2007. “Can Non State Global Governance be Legitimate? An Analytical Framework.” Regulation and Governance 1:347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhimani, A. 2008. “The Role of Crisis in Reshaping the Role of Accounting.” Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 27(6):464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. 1997. Rules and Regulators. Oxford: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. 1998. “Talking About Regulation.” Public Law 77–105.Google Scholar
Black, J. 2001. “Decentring Regulation: Understanding the Role of Regulation and Self Regulation in a ‘Post-Regulatory’ World.” Current Legal Problems 54:103–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. 2002. “Mapping the Contours of Contemporary Financial Services Regulation.” Journal of Corporate Law Studies 2(2):253–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. 2008. “Constructing and Contesting Legitimacy and Accountability in Polycentric Regulatory Regimes.” Regulation and Governance 2(1):137–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. 2009. Legitimacy and the Competition for Regulatory Share. LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Papers 14/2009, available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1424654.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, J. 2002. “Rules and Principles: A Theory of Legal Certainty.” Australian Journal Legal Philosophy 27:47–82.Google Scholar
Burland, A., and Colasse, B.. 2011. “International Accounting Standards: Is Politics Back?” Accounting in Europe 8(1):23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Büthe, T., and Mattli, W.. 2011. The New Global Rulers: The Privatization of Regulation in the World Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP.Google Scholar
Camfferman, K., and Zeff, S. A.. 2007. Financial Reporting and Global Capital Markets: A History of the International Accounting Standards Committee, 1973–2000. Oxford: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cashore, B. 2002. “Legitimacy and the Privatization of Environmental Governance: How Non-State Market-Driven (NSMD) Governance Systems Gain Rule-Making Authority.” Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 15:503–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cashore, B., Auld, G., and Newsom, D.. 2004. Governing Through Markets. Forest Certification and the Emergence of Non-State Authority. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Cau, X., and Prakash, A.. 2011. “Growing Exports by Signaling Product Quality: Trade Competition and the Cross-National diffusion of ISO 9000 Quality Standards.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 30(1):111–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Counsell, S., and Loraas, K. T.. 2002. Trading in Credibility. The Myth and Reality of the Forest Stewardship Council. London: The Rainforest Foundation.Google Scholar
Diver, C. S. 1983. “The Optimal Precision of Administrative Rules.” Yale Law Journal 93(1):65–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberlein, B., Abbott, K., Black, J., Meidinger, E. and Wood, S.. 2014. “Transnational Business Governance Interactions: Conceptualization and Framework for Analysis.” Regulation and Governance 8(1):1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eden, S. 2008. “Being Fieldworthy: Environmental Knowledge Practices and the Space of the Field in Forest Certification.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 26:1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FSC. 2003. Response to the Rainforest Foundation Report ‘Trading in Credibility’. Bonn: FSC International Centre.Google Scholar
FSC. 2006. The Plantations Review Policy Working Group – Final Report (FSC 2006). Bonn: FSC International Centre.Google Scholar
FSC. 2009. FSC Impacts and Outcomes – Extracts From the Literature Review. Bonn: FSC International Centre.Google Scholar
FSC. 2009. Structure, Content and Local Adaptation of Generic Forest Stewardship Standards FSC-STD-20-002 (V3-0) EN. Bonn: FSC International Centre.Google Scholar
FSC. 2010. FSC Forest Stewardship Standards: Structure, Content and Suggested Indicators, FSC-GUI-60-004 (V1-0) EN. Bonn: FSC International Centre.Google Scholar
FSC. 2011. Global FSC Certificates – Type and Distribution. Bonn: FSC International Centre.Google Scholar
FSC. 2012. FSC Principles and Criteria for Forest Stewardship FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0 D5-0 EN. Bonn: FSC International Centre.Google Scholar
FSC. undated. FSC, Response to Frequently Asked Question: ‘Why Should I Buy FSC’: https://ic.fsc.org/en/certification/types-of-certification. Accessed January 2, 2017.Google Scholar
G20. 2008. Declaration on the Summit of Financial Markets and the World Economy, Including the Action Plan to Implement Principles for Reform. Washington: G20.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. 2007. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Gulbrandsen, L. H. 2004. “Overlapping Public and Private Governance: Can Forest Certification Fill the Gaps in the Global Forest Regime?” Global Environmental Politics 4:75–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haufler, V. 2003. “New Forms of Governance: Certification Regimes as Social Regulations of the Global Market.” In Social and Political Dimensions of Forest Certification, edited by Meidinger E. E., C. Elliott, and G. Oesten, 237–247. Remagen: Verlag Kessel.Google Scholar
Huber, N. 2011. ‘The Concentration Battle’, International Accounting Bulletin, May.Google Scholar
Hurd, I. 1999. “Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics.” International Organization 53(2):379–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISO. 1994. ISO/IEC Guide 59 Code of good practice for standardization.Google Scholar
ISO. 2004. ISO 9000:2000 series user feedback survey and interpretations service go online. http://www.iso.org/iso/home/news_index/news_archive/news.htm?refid=Ref900.Google Scholar
ISO. 2008. Implementation Guidance for ISO 9001:2008 ISO/TC 176/SC 2/N 836.Google Scholar
ISO. Undated. Conformity Assessment.Google Scholar
Kooster, D. 2010. “Standardizing Sustainable Development? The Forest Stewardship Council’s Plantation Policy Review Process as Neoliberal Environmental Governance.” Geoforum 41(1):117–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krisch, N. (this issue). “Liquid Authority in Transnational Regimes.” International Theory. 9.Google Scholar
Maletz, O., and Tysiachniouk, M.. 2009. “The Effect of Expertise on the Quality of Forest Standards Implementation: The Case of FSC Forest Certification in Russia.” Forest Policy and Economics 11(5–6):422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marx, A., and Cuypers, D.. 2010. “Forest Certification as a Global Environmental Governance Tool: What is the Macro-Effectiveness of the Forest Stewardship Council?” Regulation and Governance 4:408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. W., and Rowan, B.. 1977. “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony.” American Journal of Sociology 83:340–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nobes, C. 2008. “Accounting Classification in the IFRS Era.” Australian Accounting Review 18(3):191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pattberg, P. 2005. “The Forest Stewardship Council: Risk and Potential of Private Forest Governance.” The Journal of Environment Development 14:35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perez, O. 2011. “Private Environmental Governance as Ensemble Regulation: A Critical Exploration of Sustainability Indexes and the New Ensemble Politics.” Theoretical Inquiries in Law 12:543–579.Google Scholar
Perry, J., and Nölke, A.. 2006. “The Political Economy of International Accounting Standards.” Review of International Political Economy 13(4):559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raz, J. 1979. The Authority of Law: Essays on Laws and Morality. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Sacho, Y., and Oberholster, J.. 2008. “Factors Impacting on the Future of the IASB.” Meditari Accountancy Research 16(1):117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schauer, F. 1991. Playing by the Rules: A Philosophical Examination of Rule-Based Decision-Making in Law and in Life. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Seawright, J., and Gerring, J.. 2008. “Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options.” Political Research Quarterly 61:294.Google Scholar
Street, D. 2006. “The G4’s Role in the Evolution of the International Accounting Standard Setting Process and Partnership With the IASB.” Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation 15(1):109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suchman, M. 1995. “Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches.” Academy of Management Review 20(3):571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, W. R. 2001. Institutions and Organizations, 2nd ed. California: Sage.Google Scholar
Weber, M. 1948. “Bureaucracy.” In Max Weber, Essays in Sociology, edited by Gerth H. H., and C. Wright Mills. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
WTO. 1994. Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement. Annex 3. Code of Good Practice for the Preparation, Adoption and Application of Standards.Google Scholar
Zucker, L. G. 1987. “Institutional Theory of Organizations.” Annual Review of Sociology 13:443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar