Conclusion

Regulatory disputes place significant demands on international courts and tribunals. At present the production of regulatory standards in the work of international courts and tribunals can be viewed in terms of an ordering of plural domestic and international legal orders rather than a process of constitutionalisation. Yet the new body of regulatory rubrics appearing across the jurisprudence addressed in this book and beyond marks a significant development globally. Collectively, these standards will set the terms for States’ exercise of public power with effects for populations beyond their own. However, international courts’ and tribunals’ contribution to the elaboration of global regulatory standards needs to be understood as part of a wider process involving intergovernmental negotiations and the administrative implementation of relevant norms. Public information and international engagement is essential. Meantime, transparent articulation of reasons for international adjudicatory decisions is needed, together with ongoing reflective interaction between judges, practitioners and the broader scholarly community.

Renegotiating the European Union’s free movement and social security coordination policies: Britain’s approaches and interests

The EU’s freedom of movement has increasingly been brought into question in the last few years as member states have restricted social benefits for EU migrants. Britain proposed in-work benefit restrictions for economically active EU migrants in intergovernmental negotiations leading up to the referendum on its membership to the EU. Access to social benefits is an important component of free movement. It provides EU citizens with social rights in host member states, which promotes internal migration. Restricting free movement threatens European integration because it is a fundamental EU treaty right. This article analyses Britain’s preferences towards the EU’s free movement and social security coordination policies leading up to the Brexit referendum. Britain’s identity, and conceptions of statehood and European.

El Consejo de Seguridad de Naciones Unidas y Siria: del descrédito a la renovación

A causa de la guerra en Siria se han multiplicado las llamadas que, desde hace varios años, se levantan pidiendo la reforma del Consejo de Seguridad. Algunos países y algunos dirigentes han comenzado a mostrar un desacuerdo más nítido que hace unas décadas tomando decisiones o haciendo declaraciones que afectan a dimensiones esenciales del mismo. Temas como la representatividad equitativa, el aumento del número de sus miembros o la cuestión del veto son algunos de los que llevan tiempo debatiéndose en ámbitos como el Open Ended Working Group o las Intergovernmental Negotiations. En este artículo presentamos, en una primera parte, una descripción de las propuestas de reforma, intentadas desde hace 25 años hasta el momento, en su afán de mejorar algunos aspectos del Consejo de Seguridad y ofrecemos, en una segunda parte, unas consideraciones finales que se desprenden de lo expuesto.

Exchange Politics and the Future of Health Reform

This chapter examines the four key insights from the case study states, looking at the degree to which these lessons apply elsewhere. I ask what the Obama administration should have done differently in its intergovernmental negotiations with states and whether the decision to accept or reject control of an exchange matters. In other words, what are the policy implications of this decision? A Supreme Court case in 2015 would have dramatically raised the stakes of this decision, though the Court’s ruling in favor of the Obama administration ensures that any person with a qualifying income can receive financial assistance to purchase coverage on an exchange—regardless of their state’s decision. I conclude by examining the future of health insurances in particular, and health reform and U.S. federalism more broadly.

Values as Barriers to Compromise? Ideology, Transnational Coalitions, and Distributive Bargaining in Negotiations over the Third Greek Bailout

What factors explain the brinkmanship and threats of Greece’s distributive tactics over the third bailout package in 2015? Examining negotiations between Greece and its creditors duringsyriza’s (Coalition of the Radical Left) tenure in power, I argue that the Greek government’s strong ideological fervor turned the bailout negotiations into an ideologically based dispute, which involved “sacred” value biases and uncompromising posturing. Unable to form cooperative transnational coalitions, Athens increasingly turned to distributive bargaining tactics that antagonized creditors and escalated the conflict. The article highlights how values act as barriers in bailouts and has implications for the study of intergovernmental negotiations in the European Union.