scholarly journals Jane Kelsey, Serving Whose Interests? The Political Economy of Trade in Services Agreements

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 244
Author(s):  
Maureen Irish

Serving Whose Interests is an examination of the General Agreement on Trade in Services [GATS] since its inception in 1995, with several case studies that discuss services trade in specific applications around the world. The scholarship i s extensive and detailed. Jane Kelsey, law professor at the University of Auckland, has criticized the pro-market services trade regime i n her role as a political activist. In this book, her goals are to make the technicalities of trade rules accessible and to show their effects on people and communities.

2020 ◽  
pp. 030582982093706
Author(s):  
Isaac Kamola

Why does IR scholarship seem so resistant to travel into other disciplinary spaces? To answer this question, I look at the tendency for scholars within our discipline to talk to the discipline, about the discipline, and for the discipline. We obsess over ‘IR’ and, in doing so, reify IR as a thing. I turn towards Edward Said’s arguments about the worldliness of texts, and how reification shapes how ideas travel. I then provide two illustrations of how scholars have reified IR as a thing: Robert Cox’s approach to critical theory and Amitav Acharya’s call for a ‘Global IR’. In both cases, contrary to expectation, the authors reify IR as a thing, portraying the discipline as distinct from the world. IR is treated as something with agency, ignoring how disciplinary knowledge is produced within worldly institutions. I conclude by looking at three strategies for studying worldly relations in ways that refuse to reify the discipline: showing disloyalty to the discipline, engaging the political economy of higher education, and seeking to decolonise the university. Rather than reifying IR, these strategies help us to engage our scholarly work in a way that prioritises worldly critical engagements within our disciplinary community, and the world.


Author(s):  
Karen J. Alter

In 1989, when the Cold War ended, there were six permanent international courts. Today there are more than two dozen that have collectively issued over thirty-seven thousand binding legal rulings. This book charts the developments and trends in the creation and role of international courts, and explains how the delegation of authority to international judicial institutions influences global and domestic politics. The book presents an in-depth look at the scope and powers of international courts operating around the world. Focusing on dispute resolution, enforcement, administrative review, and constitutional review, the book argues that international courts alter politics by providing legal, symbolic, and leverage resources that shift the political balance in favor of domestic and international actors who prefer policies more consistent with international law objectives. International courts name violations of the law and perhaps specify remedies. The book explains how this limited power—the power to speak the law—translates into political influence, and it considers eighteen case studies, showing how international courts change state behavior. The case studies, spanning issue areas and regions of the world, collectively elucidate the political factors that often intervene to limit whether or not international courts are invoked and whether international judges dare to demand significant changes in state practices.


1996 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 140
Author(s):  
Richard N. Cooper ◽  
Bernard Hoekman ◽  
Michel Kostecki

2014 ◽  
Vol 05 (01) ◽  
pp. 1440006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre Sauvé

This paper addresses a number of policy challenges arising from ongoing attempts to negotiate a plurilateral Trade in Services Agreement (TISA), a recently launched plurilateral negotiating initiative coexisting uneasily alongside the World Trade Organisation's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), particularly in the context of the ongoing Doha Development Agenda. While the TISA offers scope for imparting much needed forward movement to a policy area of central economy-wide and trade importance, such progress, even if realized within the narrower confines of a preferential trade agreement made possible under the GATS, poses a number of systemic risks to the multilateral order extending beyond services trade.


Author(s):  
M. Safa Saraçoglu

This chapter focuses on the official correspondence between Vidin’s administrative council and the provincial capital, Ruse. These reports pertaining to events in Vidin County were a part of the political procedures of the local judicio-administrative sphere. As such, politics of local administration influenced the official correspondence and our understanding of the events in Vidin County. The writing of reports and petitions and other provincial administrative/judicial practices (such as interrogations) constituted a significant part of Ottoman governmentality. Those who could shape how the official correspondence was constructed gained advantage in local political economy. Such correspondence was an essential component of how provincial Ottoman government functioned; therefore, reports, petitions, false accusations, and interrogations became important tools for agents and groups who were engaged in hegemonic negotiations. Both elite and non-elite agents were able to utilize Ottoman governance to pursue their own strategies against other local agents or imperial government. People who refused to use these bureaucratic tools in making claims and negotiating were presented in this correspondence as defiant stubborn and violent. This perspective is critical of the state–society divide, as the case studies reveal a more complex singular government of state and society.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document