Transnational Property Law

Common Law ◽

Property Law ◽

Economic Governance ◽

Historical Account ◽

Linear Trajectory ◽

Interdisciplinary Methods ◽

Property Regimes ◽

Transnational property law offers an account of common law property doctrines as they emerged through transnational encounters between people and legal regimes. It places property at the intersection of global economic governance, international political economy, and law by offering both a historical account of property regimes and a methodological argument for understanding property in context. It proposes that common law property regimes around land should be understood not just as compartmentalized into domestic jurisdictional realms, but rather as spaces in which different concepts, claims, and contestations of property—local, national, and transnational—are constantly in conflict with each other. Instead of tracing the development of common law property thought as a linear trajectory without regard to concrete historical and geographical circumstances, it suggests looking for answers instead by taking a closer look at the new settings in which property law regimes are grounded today through interdisciplinary methods of analysis.

Global Economic Governance After the Crisis

Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik ◽

10.1111/j.1468-2516.2012.00389.x ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 13 (Supplement) ◽

pp. 1-12 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Jeffry Frieden

Keyword(s):

International Economic ◽

Political Economy ◽

Public Goods ◽

Global Governance ◽

Great Increase ◽

National Level ◽

Economic Governance ◽

Economic Problems ◽

International Public Goods ◽

Abstract It has become common to insist that contemporary international economic problems require a great increase in the extent of “global governance” of economic affairs. This desire, understandable as it may be, confronts a series of major obstacles. First, the normative case for global governance is more difficult to justify, and more complex, than is usually recognized, and requires consideration of both economic and political-economy principles. Second, in practice, the provision of governance at the supra-national level - that is, of international public goods - depends largely on support from powerful and concentrated interests. Third, this dynamic means that the types of international public goods provided, the way they are provided, and the governance structures erected around them are biased in favor of their strongest supporters, and are therefore likely to be a source of continuing controversy.

International Organizations and Economic Governance

10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.237 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Wesley W. Widmaier

Keyword(s):

Financial Crisis ◽

International Organizations ◽

Global Financial Crisis ◽

Future Research ◽

Economic Governance ◽

Definition Of ◽

The Global Financial Crisis ◽

Global economic governance refers to efforts to organize, structure, and regulate economic interactions. In substantive terms, economic governance deals with a host of policy challenges, including the definition of basic property rights, efforts at monetary and fiscal cooperation, ando concerns for the “macroprudential regulation” of financial markets. The Global Financial Crisis has demonstrated not only the importance of macroeconomic and regulatory cooperation, but also the role of crises in redefining the purposes of economic governance itself. Debates in the fields of international relations (IR) and international political economy (IPE) over global economic governance have revolved around strategic interactions, social psychological forces, and the post-crisis emergence of new agents and international organizations. In applied IPE settings, these debates more explicitly pertain to the systemic importance of hegemonic power, multilateral interactions, or intersubjective interpretations. These views intersect with neorealist, neoliberal, and constructivist assumptions regarding systemic interactions. Over the 1990s, IR and IPE scholars would increasingly seek to move beyond both the structural materialism associated with hegemonic stability theory and the structural idealism associated with “first-generation” Wendtian constructivism. Future research should focus on broader questions of whether the Global Financial Crisis will spark renewed theoretical creativity and contribute to an enhanced policy relevance, or whether IR and IPE will continue to work to mask the role of power in limiting such possibilities.

The Domestic Politics of European Preferences Towards Global Economic Governance

New Global Studies ◽

10.1515/ngs-2018-0014 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 12 (3) ◽

pp. 303-324 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Stefan A. Schirm

Keyword(s):

Public Debt ◽

Domestic Politics ◽

Economic Governance ◽

Economic Sectors ◽

Economic Interests ◽

Eu Member States ◽

Material Interests ◽

The Government ◽

AbstractWhy is global economic governance often marked by controversies among EU member states despite their commitment to joint action? European members of the G20 diverge over public debt to stimulate growth and over global trade imbalances. These issues express differences in economic interests, such as competitiveness, as well as ideational divergences regarding deficit spending and the role of the government in steering the economy. Therefore, domestic politics theories seem to constitute a necessary complement to integration theories in explaining European governments’ preferences. In applying the societal approach, I argue that domestic value-based ideas and material interests shape governmental preferences in international political economy. In doing so, ideas prevail when fundamental economic policy issues such as public debt are at stake, while interests prevail, when governance directly affects the costs and benefits of specific economic sectors. These arguments are analysed by comparing the domestic politics of British, French, German and Italian positions towards two policy debates in the G20.

Contradictions of Formation of the Global Economic Governance System

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION ◽

10.18775/ijmsba.1849-5664-5419.2014.210.1001 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 2 (10) ◽

pp. 7-16

Author(s):

Nikolay Eletsky

Keyword(s):

Global Governance ◽

Theory And Practice ◽

Control Mechanisms ◽

Economic Governance ◽

Governance System ◽

Economic Relations ◽

World Economic ◽

And Control ◽

The reasons and the factors of the global economic governance formation became the urgent issues of modern economic theory and practice. Emerging mechanisms of global governance reflect the transitional nature of the present stage of civilization. Under modern conditions, global ownership only begins to form, which inevitably involves the use of the socio-economic shell of previous historical types of economic relations. This particularly reflected in the utilization of the worldwide ownership in private-sector interests and in the application of the mechanisms of global governance to achieve the goals of individual states, corporations, financial-oligarchic clans and other private entities. A contradiction of genesis and evolution of the global ownership and control mechanisms of the world economic system become the essential problem of the international political economy.

11. The European Union and the Global Political Economy

International Relations and the European Union ◽

10.1093/hepl/9780198737322.003.0011 ◽

2017 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Amy Verdun

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

Political Economy ◽

European Integration ◽

Sovereign Debt ◽

Financial Economic ◽

The European Union ◽

Global Political Economy ◽

Key Dimensions ◽

This chapter examines the position of the European Union in the global political economy (GPE). It also considers key dimensions of change and development as well as the EU's impact on the operation of the contemporary GPE. To this end, the chapter discusses central ideas in international political economy and relates these to the growth of the EU. Furthermore, it analyses the EU's role in the GPE in three areas: European integration, the EU's engagement in the GPE, and the EU's claims to be a major economic power. It concludes with an assessment of global economic governance, focusing in particular on the EU's role in the financial, economic, and sovereign debt crises.

French Economic Policy

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199669691.013.23 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Ben Clift

Keyword(s):

Political Economy ◽

Economic Policy ◽

Capital Mobility ◽

Future Research ◽

Economic Governance ◽

Comparative Political Economy ◽

French Case ◽

Market Relations

This chapter explores contemporary economic policy and state–market relations in France against the backdrop of comparative political economy debates about interventionism in the economy and international political economy debates about capital mobility and policy autonomy. Charting contemporary theoretical and empirical developments in the French case and beyond, the chapter explores how to situate economic policy within institutional and ideational context, and how interests can be brought into explanation. These three “i”s, it argues, represent different but not mutually exclusive ways to explore economic policy autonomy amidst international liberalization. It argues that insights from each of the three “i”s’ literatures have enhanced understandings of French economic policy, and informed its conduct to different degrees across the decades. It concludes with the potential for “post-dirigisme” to frame future research exploring the tension between the creeping influence of rules-based policymaking, co-existing and conflicting with enduring dirigiste practices and aspirations within French economic governance.