Patterns of Legitimation in Hybrid Transnational Regimes: The Controversy Surrounding the Lex Sportiva

This article addresses concerns that the growth in global governance may be bringing with it a decline in the significance of democratic sources of political legitimacy. One approach in evaluating such concerns is to ask whether the respective patterns of legitimation for private and public authority differ or whether they refer to a similar set of normative standards. Private transnational governance regimes provide useful contexts in which to assess the presumed democratic erosion. They seem, almost of themselves, to make the case for such a decline: in them regulatory authority is exercised by non-state actors who, by their very nature, lack the kind of authorization afforded by the democratic procedures that legitimize state-based regulation; in addition, they are intrinsically linked to the notion of politics as a form of problem-solving rather than as the exercise of power. Given these characteristics, when governance arrangements of this kind are subjected to criticism, one would expect justificatory responses to relate primarily to performance, with normative criteria such as fundamental individual rights and the imperative for democratic procedure playing only a minor role. On the basis of a qualitative content analysis, the study tests three ideal-type patterns of legitimation for plausibility. The case selected for examination is the recent controversy surrounding the hybrid governance regime that operates to prevent the use of performance-enhancing drugs in sport. The debate offers the possibility of a ‘nutshell’ comparison of the respective patterns of legitimation used in criticizing and justifying state and non-state regulatory authority. This comparison yields two findings. The first is that the values used to appraise the state-based components of the sporting world’s hybrid regulatory regime do not differ systematically from those used to appraise the private elements: contestation and justification in both cases are founded on normative criteria relating to fundamental individual rights and democratic procedure and not just on performance-related considerations. The second finding is that justificatory grounds of the first type do not appear to be diminishing in importance vis-à-vis those of the second

From meltdown to showdown? Challenges and options for governance in the Arctic

"For several years now climate change, the hunger for raw materials, and geostrategic interests have once again moved the allocation of sovereignty and exploitation rights in the Arctic back to the foreground. In this PRIF report the authors present in search of a promising political organizational model for the Arctic region, various scenarios for how Arctic governance might look one day. The authors favor a model of integrated multi-level governance and present measures demonstrating how this model could be implemented." (author's abstract)"Klimawandel, der Hunger nach Rohstoffen und geostrategische Interessen rücken die Frage nach der Aufteilung der Souveränitäts- und Nutzungsrechte in der Arktis seit einigen Jahren wieder in den Vordergrund. Auf der Suche nach einem zukunftsträchtigen politischen Ordnungsmodell für die arktische Region präsentieren die Autoren in diesem PRIF Report verschiedene Szenarien, wie arktisches Regieren in Zukunft aussehen könnte. Sie votieren für das Modell eines integrierten Mehrebenenregierens und stellen Maßnahmen vor, wie es verwirklicht werden könnte." (Autorenreferat

Transformation of an order through reversal of a norm-hierarchy: the protection of intellectual property and the right ot health

"For years the pharmaceutical industry succeeded in massively restricting the production of generic medicines and thus also impeding access to urgently needed treatments - particularly for people in the Third World. As justification, it cited the protection of intellectual property, detailed rules for which were laid down in the TRIPS agreement of 1994. However, rising states, working with civil-society allies, managed gradually to bring about an easing of patent-protection rights in favour of increased regard for the right to health, thus effecting a complete reversal in the norm hierarchy. The authors analyse this development and formulate a number of corresponding recommendations as to how changes in norms and orders might be successfully brought about in future." (author's abstract

Patterns of Legitimation in Hybrid Transnational Regimes: The Controversy Surrounding the Lex Sportiva

This article addresses concerns that the growth in global governance may be bringing with it a decline in the significance of democratic sources of political legitimacy. One approach in evaluating such concerns is to ask whether the respective patterns of legitimation for private and public authority differ or whether they refer to a similar set of normative standards. Private transnational governance regimes provide useful contexts in which to assess the presumed democratic erosion. They seem, almost of themselves, to make the case for such a decline: in them regulatory authority is exercised by non-state actors who, by their very nature, lack the kind of authorization afforded by the democratic procedures that legitimize state-based regulation; in addition, they are intrinsically linked to the notion of politics as a form of problem-solving rather than as the exercise of power. Given these characteristics, when governance arrangements of this kind are subjected to criticism, one would expect justificatory responses to relate primarily to performance, with normative criteria such as fundamental individual rights and the imperative for democratic procedure playing only a minor role. On the basis of a qualitative content analysis, the study tests three ideal-type patterns of legitimation for plausibility. The case selected for examination is the recent controversy surrounding the hybrid governance regime that operates to prevent the use of performance-enhancing drugs in sport. The debate offers the possibility of a ‘nutshell’ comparison of the respective patterns of legitimation used in criticizing and justifying state and non-state regulatory authority. This comparison yields two findings. The first is that the values used to appraise the state-based components of the sporting world’s hybrid regulatory regime do not differ systematically from those used to appraise the private elements: contestation and justification in both cases are founded on normative criteria relating to fundamental individual rights and democratic procedure and not just on performance-related considerations. The second finding is that justificatory grounds of the first type do not appear to be diminishing in importance vis-à-vis those of the second

Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Selbststeuerung als gemeinwohlverträglicher politischer Steuerungsform

"In Abwesenheit eines weltstaatlichen Regulators übernehmen Wirtschaftsunternehmen immer häufiger auch grenzüberschreitend Normsetzungs- und Normdurchsetzungsfunktionen. Der Beitrag nimmt eine politikwissenschaftliche Einordnung privatwirtschaftlicher Selbstregulierungsinitiativen vor und geht der Frage nach, inwieweit es sich dabei um eine belastbare und normativ anspruchsvolle Form der politischen Steuerung im Rahmen von Global Governance handelt." (Autorenreferat)"The emergence of new forms of public-private governance patterns or even private self-regulation reflects a process of political modernisation. Private self-regulation can lighten the burdens of government overload and of the ungovernability of a complex world society. But in fulfilling these functions it will have to rest on a functional division of labour between the private and the public sector. The part to be played by the public sector will be less substantial policy-making but will rather consist of fulfilling 'meta-governance' functions in order to safeguard the conditions under which private actors can interact autonomously. In the light of these meta-governance functions, which only the public sector can fulfil, private self-regulation will always have to be 'embedded self-regulation', in which public actors, private corporations and civil society are involved in different arenas and functions." (author's abstract

Editorial to the Issue on Legitimization of Private and Public Regulation: Past and Present

This thematic issue brings together research from political science and legal history about legitimacy discourses covering different forms of public-private co-regulation and private self-regulation, domestic and transnational, past and present. These forms of governance highlight the important role of non-state actors in exercising public authority. There has been a growing debate about the legitimacy of non-state actors setting and enforcing norms and providing public goods and services. However, the focus of this thematic issue is not on developing abstract criteria of legitimacy. Rather, the authors analyze legitimacy discourses around different cases of privatized or partly privatized forms of governance from the early 20th century until today. Legitimacy is subject to empirical and not normative analysis. Legitimacy discourses are analyzed in order to shed light on the legitimacy conceptions that actors hold, what they consider as legitimate institutions, and based on what criteria. The particular focus of this thematic issue is to examine whether the significance of democratic legitimacy is decreasing as the importance of regulation exercised by private actors is increasing

Vom Business Case zum Public Case? Der Beitrag privater Selbstregulierung zu Global Governance

"Unternehmen sind immer häufiger an grenzüberschreitenden Normsetzungs- und Normdurchsetzungsprozessen beteiligt. Die beiden Autoren untersuchen Bedingungen für das Auftreten privatwirtschaftlicher Governance-Beiträge und gehen der Frage nach, unter welchen Voraussetzungen sie wünschbare Beiträge zu Global Governance leisten können. Dabei werden Legitimationsanforderungen und das Selbstlegitimierungspotential transnationaler privater Selbstregulierung betrachtet und Perspektiven für deren Einbettung in eine institutionelle Gesamtarchitektur erörtert." (Autorenreferat)"In new forms of public private or even private governance arrangements beyond the state the functional division of labor between the private and the public sector is blurred. Companies have taken on authoritative roles and regulatory functions in processes of norm setting and norm development. This corporate behavior is a new type of norm-entrepreneurship. In order to prevent corporate governance contributions from losing sight of the public interest, they have to meet contextualized normative criteria of legitimacy. Therefore, we argue that they must be embedded in an overarching institutional architecture of global governance in which public institutions can safeguard the conditions under which private self-regulation can make meaningful contributions to governance beyond the state." (author's abstract

Ordnungswandel durch Umkehrung einer Normenhierarchie: der Schutz geistigen Eigentums und das Recht auf Gesundheit

"Jahrelang konnte die Pharmaindustrie erfolgreich die Herstellung von Generika massiv erschweren und damit den Zugang vor allem für Menschen in der Dritten Welt zu dringend benötigten Arzneimitteln behindern. Sie berief sich dabei auf den Schutz geistigen Eigentums, der im TRIPS-Abkommen von 1994 umfassend geregelt ist. Doch aufstrebenden Nationen gelang es, zusammen mit zivilgesellschaftlichen Bündnispartnern, auf eine Lockerung der Patentschutzrechte zugunsten des Rechts auf Gesundheit hinzuwirken und damit eine komplette Umkehrung der Normenhierarchie herbeizuführen. Die Autoren analysieren diese Entwicklung und leiten daraus Empfehlungen ab, wie in Zukunft Norm- und Ordnungswandel erfolgreich herbeigeführt werden kann." (Autorenreferat