Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:40:51.760Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2022

Isabel Lischewski
Isabel Lischewski
Affiliation:
Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Germany
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Lawful by Design
Measuring Procedural Justice in Global Governance
 , pp. 179 - 186
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

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.)

References

Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D. and Zangl, B., “Two Logics of Indirect Governance: Delegation and Orchestration,” British Journal of Political Science 46 (2015), 719–29.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W., Keohane, R., Moravcsik, A., Slaughter, A.-M. and Snidal, D., “The Concept of Legalization,” International Organization 54 (2000), 401–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, K. W. and Snidal, D., “Why States Act through Formal International Organizations,” The Journal of Conflict Resolution 42 (1998), 3–32.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W. and Snidal, D., “Hard and Soft Law in International Governance,” International Organization 54 (2000), 421–56.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W. and Snidal, D., “Values and Interests: International Legalization in the Fight against Corruption,” The Journal of Legal Studies 31 (2002), 141–78.Google Scholar
Abbott, K. W. and Snidal, D., “The Governance Triangle: Regulatory Standards Institutions and the Shadow of the State” in Mattli, W. and Woods, N. (eds.), The Politics of Global Regulation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009), pp. 44–88.Google Scholar
Adams, D., The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (Oxford: Pan Books, 1979).Google Scholar
Allison, A. L., “Meeting the Challenges of Change: The Reform of the International Telecommunication Union,” Federal Communications Law Journal 45 (1993), 491–539.Google Scholar
Alvarez, J. E., International Organizations as Law-makers (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).Google Scholar
Archer, C., International Organizations, 4th edn. (London/New York: Routledge, 2015).Google Scholar
Bailer, S., “Bargaining Success in the European Union,” European Union Politics 1 (2004), 99–123.Google Scholar
Baker, S., “The Good News about John Bolton,” Lawfare, March 24, 2018.Google Scholar
Banbury, A., “I Love the U.N., but It Is Failing,” The New York Times, May 18, 2016.Google Scholar
Battini, S., Amministrazioni senza Stato: Profili di diritto amministrativo internazionale (Milan: Giuffrè Editore, 2003).Google Scholar
Bayerlein, L., Knill, C. and Steinebach, Y., A Matter of Style?: Organizational Agency in Global Public Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benvenisti, E., The Law of Global Governance (The Hague: Pocketbooks of The Hague Academy of International Law, 2014).Google Scholar
Benvenisti, E., “EJIL Foreword: Upholding Democracy Amid the Challenges of New Technology: What Role for the Law of Global Governance?,” Global Trust Working Papers (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benvenisti, E., “The WHO–Destined to Fail?: Political Cooperation and the COVID-19 Pandemic,” University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series (2020).Google Scholar
Benvenisti, E. and Lustig, D., “Taming Democracy: Codifying the Laws of War to Restore the European Order,” University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 28/2017 (August 30, 2017).Google Scholar
Blake, D. and Lockwood Payton, A., “Balancing Design Objectives: Analyzing New Data on Voting Rules in Intergovernmental Organizations,” The Review of International Organizations 10 (2015), 377–402.Google Scholar
Boffey, D., “EU Threatens to Crack down on Facebook over Hate Speech,” The Guardian, April 11, 2018.Google Scholar
Bogdandy, A. v., Dann, P. and Goldmann, M., “Developing the Publicness of Public International Law: Towards a Legal Framework for Global Governance Activities” in Bogdandy, A. v., Wolfrum, R., Bernstorff, J. v., Dann, P. and Goldmann, M.(eds.), The Exercise of Public Authority by International Institutions (Berlin: Springer, 2008), pp. 1375–400.Google Scholar
Bogdandy, A. v., Wolfrum, R., Bernstorff, J. v., Dann, P. and Goldmann, M. (eds.), The Exercise of Public Authority by International Institutions (Berlin: Springer, 2008), vol. 9.Google Scholar
Bowers, S., “Amazon: The Obscure Subsidiary at the Heart of US and EU Tax Disputes,” The Guardian, February 18, 2016.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, S., DeNardis, L., Hampson, F. O., Jardine, E. and Raymond, M., “The Emergence of Contention in Global Internet Governance,” Global Commission on Internet Governance Paper Series (2015), 1–15.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, J. and Fisse, B., “Self-Regulation and the Control of Corporate Crime” in Shearing, C. D. and Stenning, P. C. (eds.), Private Policing (London: Sage, 1987), pp. 221–46.Google Scholar
Brittan, L., Speech at the Forum Europe Conference on Advertising in Europe (European Commission, 1991).Google Scholar
“Bundestag verabschiedet umstrittenes Facebook-Gesetz,” Spiegel Online, June 30, 2017.Google Scholar
Büthe, T., “Engineering Uncontestedness?: The Origins and Institutional Development of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC),” Business and Politics 12 (2010), 1–62.Google Scholar
Búzás, Z. I. and Graham, E. R., “Emergent Flexibility in Institutional Development: How International Rules Really Change,” International Studies Quarterly 64 (2020), 821–33.Google Scholar
Caralle, K., “Mark Zuckerberg Faces UK Subpoena Threat,” Washington Examiner, May 1, 2018.Google Scholar
Casini, L., “Global Administrative Law Scholarship” in Cassese, S. (ed.), Research Handbook on Global Administrative Law, 3rd edn. (Cheltenham, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016), pp. 548–67.Google Scholar
Casini, L., “The Expansion of the Material Scope of Global Law” in Cassese, S. (ed.), Research Handbook on Global Administrative Law, 3rd edn. (Cheltenham, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016), pp. 25–42.Google Scholar
Cassese, S., Carotti, B., Casini, L., Cavalieri, E. and MacDonald, E. (eds.), Global Administrative Law: The Casebook, 3rd edn. (New York: Institute for International Law and Justice, 2012).Google Scholar
Chimni, B. S., “Cooption and Resistance: Two Faces of Global Administrative Law,” International Law and Politics (2006), 799–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coase, R. H., “The Nature of the Firm,” Economica 4 (1937), 386–405.Google Scholar
Crisp, B. R., Swerissen, H. and Duckett, S. J., “Four Approaches to Capacity Building in Health: Consequences for Measurement and Accountability,” Health Promotion International 15 (2000), 99–107.Google Scholar
Dann, P. and Engelhardt, M. v., “Legal Approaches to Global Governance and Authority: Informal Lawmaking, International Public Authority, and Global Administrative Law Compared” in Pauwelyn, J., Wessel, R. A. and Wouters, J. (eds.), Informal International Lawmaking (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 106–21.Google Scholar
Davis, K. E., Kingsbury, B. and Engle Merry, S., “Indicators as a Technology of Global Governance,” Law & Society Review 46 (2012), 71–104.Google Scholar
Dudley, S. E., “Red Tape In Retreat?,” Forbes, October 11, 2017.Google Scholar
Dunoff, J. L. and Trachtmann, J. P., “A Functional Approach to International Constitutionalization” in Dunoff, J. L. and Trachtmann, J. P. (eds.), Ruling the World?: Constitutionalism, International Law, and Global Governance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 3–36.Google Scholar
Embury-Dennis, T., “Facebook Set to be Fined Maximum £500,000 by UK Privacy Watchdog after Breaking Data Laws,” The Independent, July 11, 2018.Google Scholar
Etzioni, A., “Tomorrow’s Institution Today - The Promise of the Proliferation Security Initiative,” Foreign Affairs 88 (2009), 7–11.Google Scholar
Feig, C. and Shah, S., “Setting the Record Straight on WHO Funding,” Foreign Affairs, November 18, 2011.Google Scholar
Finnemore, M., National Interests in International Society (Ithaca, London: Cornell University Press, 1996).Google Scholar
Fuchs, D., Kalfagianni, A. and Havinga, T., “Actors in Private Food Governance: The Legitimacy of Retail Standards and Multistakeholder Initiatives with Civil Society Participation,” Agriculture and Human Values 28 (2011), 353–67.Google Scholar
Giustiniani, F. Z., “WHO’s to Blame for the Coronavirus Pandemic?: A Tentative Assessment of WHO’s Role in the Crisis,” Federalismi.it (2020), 255–71.Google Scholar
Glazer, J. H., “The Law-Making Treaties of the International Telecommunication Union through Time and in Space,” Michigan Law Review 60 (1962), 269–316.Google Scholar
Goodin, R. E., ‘Institutions and Their Design’ in Goodin, R. E. (ed.), The Theory of Institutional Design (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 1–53.Google Scholar
Griffin, A., “UK Parliament Could Issue Mark Zuckerberg with Formal Summons if He Ever Comes to Britain,” The Independent, May 1, 2018.Google Scholar
Gunningham, N. and Rees, J., “Industry Self-Regulation: An Institutional Perspective,” Law & Policy 19 (1997), 363–414.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, E. M., Mansfield, E. and Pevehouse, J., “Human Rights Institutions, Sovereignty Costs, and Democratization,” British Journal of Political Science 45 (2013), 1–27.Google Scholar
Haggard, S. and Simmons, B. A., “Theories of International Regimes,” International Organization 41 (1987), 491–517.Google Scholar
Hanrieder, T., “Priorities, Partners, Politics: The WHO’s Mandate beyond the Crisis,” Global Governance 26 (2020), 534–43.Google Scholar
Harlow, C., “Global Administrative Law: The Quest for Principles and Values,” European Journal of International Law 17 (2006), 187–214.Google Scholar
Harten, G. Van Den and Loughlin, M., “Investment Treaty Arbitration as a Species of Global Administrative Law,” European Journal of International Law 17 (2006), 121–50.Google Scholar
Hatanaka, M. and Busch, L., “Third-Party Certification in the Global Agrifood System: An Objective or Socially Mediated Governance Mechanism?,” Sociologia Ruralis 48 (2008), 73–91.Google Scholar
Hirschman, A. O., Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organization, and States (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970).Google Scholar
Hooghe, L., Lenz, T. and Marks, G., A Theory of International Organization (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019).Google Scholar
Hurd, I., “Constructivism” in Reus-Smit, C and Snidal, D (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 299–316.Google Scholar
Isaac, M., “Facebook Said to Create Censorship Tool to Get Back Into China,” The New York Times, November 22, 2016.Google Scholar
Iyengar, R., “WhatsApp Names New India Head to Grow Its Biggest Market,” CNN, November 22, 2018.Google Scholar
Johnson, E. J. and Goldstein, D., “Do Defaults Save Lives?,” Science 302 (2003), 1338–9.Google Scholar
Jonsson, S., Kurzban, I. and Lindstrom, B., “UN Accountability for Haiti’s Cholera Epidemic,” AJIL Unbound (2014), 17–21.Google Scholar
Joseph, J., “The Proliferation Security Initiative: Can Interdiction Stop Proliferation?,” Arms Control association, June 1, 2004.Google Scholar
Joyner, D. H., “The Proliferation Security Initiative: Nonproliferation, Counter proliferation, and International Law,” Yale Journal of International Law (2005), 507–48.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L. and Thaler, R. H., “Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 5 (1991), 193–206.Google Scholar
Keohane, R., “The Demand for International Regimes,” International Organization 36 (1982), 325–55.Google Scholar
Keohane, R., After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984).Google Scholar
Keohane, R. and Nye, J. S., “Transgovernmental Relations and International Organizations,” World Politics 27 (1974), 39–62.Google Scholar
Kerin, R. A., Varadarajan, P. R. and Peterson, R. A., “First-Mover Advantage: Synthesis, Conceptual Framework, and Research Propositions,” Journal of Marketing 56 (1992), 33–52.Google Scholar
Kingsbury, B., “International Law as Inter-Public Law,” Nomos (2009), 167–204.Google Scholar
Kingsbury, B., “The Concept of Law in Global Administrative Law,” European Journal of International Law 20 (2009), 23–57.Google Scholar
Kingsbury, B., “Global Administrative Law in the Institutional Practice of Global Regulatory Governance,” World Bank Legal Review 3 (2011), 3–33.Google Scholar
Kingsbury, B., “Three Models of ‘distributed administration’: Canopy, Baobab, and Symbiote,” International Journal of Constitutional Law 13 (2015), 478–81.Google Scholar
Kingsbury, B. and Donaldson, M., “Global Administrative Law” in Max Planck Foundation for International Peace and the Rule of Law (ed.), Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Heidelberg: Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, 2011), pp. 1–17.Google Scholar
Kingsbury, B., Krisch, N. and Stewart, R. B., “The Emergence of Global Administrative Law,” Law and Contemporary Problems 68 (2005), 15–61.Google Scholar
Klugman, J., Rodriguez, F. and Choi, H.-J., “The HDI 2010: New Controversies, Old Critiques,” Human Development Research Paper (2011), 1–45.Google Scholar
Kontoleon, A. and Yabe, M., “Assessing the Impacts of Alternative ‘Opt-out’ Formats in Choice Experiment Studies: Consumer Preferences for Genetically Modified Content and Production Information in Food,” International Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research 5 (2003), 1–43.Google Scholar
Koremenos, B., “Loosening the Ties That Bind: A Learning Model of Agreement Flexibility,” International Organization 55 (2001), 289–325.Google Scholar
Koremenos, B., “Contracting around International Uncertainty,” The American Political Science Review 99 (2005), 549–65.Google Scholar
Koremenos, B., “If Only Half of International Agreements Have Dispute Resolution Provisions, Which Half Needs Explaining?,” Journal of Legal Studies 36 (2007), 189–212.Google Scholar
Koremenos, B., The Continent of International Law: Explaining Agreement Design (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016).Google Scholar
Koremenos, B., Lipson, C. and Snidal, D., “Rational Design: Looking Back to Move Forward,” International Organization 55 (2001), 1051–82.Google Scholar
Koremenos, B., Lipson, C. and Snidal, D., “The Rational Design of International Institutions,” International Organization 55 (2001), 761–99.Google Scholar
Krasner, S. D., “Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables,” International Organization 36 (1982), 185–205.Google Scholar
Krech, M. B., “To Be a Woman in the World of Sport: Global Regulation of the Gender Binary in Elite Athletics,” Berkeley Journal of International Law 35 (2017), 262–94.Google Scholar
Krisch, N., “The Decay of Consent: International Law in the Age of Global Public Goods,” The American Journal of International Law 108 (2014).Google Scholar
Kumm, M., “The Cosmopolitan Turn in Constitutionalism: On the Relationship between Constitutionalism in and beyond the State” in Dunoff, J. L. and Trachtmann, J. P. (eds.), Ruling the World?: Constitutionalism, International Law, and Global Governance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 258–325.Google Scholar
Kuo, M.-S., “Taming Governance with Legality: Critical Reflections upon Global Administrative Law as Small-C Global Constitutionalism,” New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 44 (2011), 55–102.Google Scholar
Labonte, R. and Laverack, G., “Capacity Building in Health Promotion: Part 1: For Whom? And for What Purpose?,” Critical Public Health 11 (2001), 111–27.Google Scholar
Lapin, T., “Red Tape is Killing Pets Sent to the City’s Adoption Hub: Advocates,” New York Post, April 23, 2018.Google Scholar
Lee, K. and Piper, J., “The WHO and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Less Reform, More Innovation,” Global Governance 26 (2020), 523–33.Google Scholar
Lockwood Payton, A., “Consensus Procedures in International Organizations,” EUI Working Papers Max Weber Program (2010), 1–20.Google Scholar
Lomas, N., “Google Fined $2.7BN for EU Antitrust Violations over Shopping Searches,” Techcrunch, June 27, 2017.Google Scholar
Lorenzo, J. A., “To Sue or Not to Sue: Enforcing the Obligation to Notify under the International Health Regulations,” Völkerrechtsblog, June 4, 2020.Google Scholar
Martha, R. S. J., The Legal Foundations of INTERPOL (Oxford: Hart, 2010).Google Scholar
Martha, R. S. J., “Challenging Acts of INTERPOL in Domestic Courts” in Reinisch, A. (ed.), Challenging Acts of International Organizations Before National Courts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), pp. 206–38.Google Scholar
Mattli, W., “Private Justice in a Global Economy: From Litigation to Arbitration,” International Organization 55 (2001), 919–47.Google Scholar
Mayer, F. C., “Internationalisierung des Verwaltungsrechts?: Weiße Flecken auf der Landkarte des Verwaltungsrechts und wie man sie findet. Zugleich ein Kommentar zu Philipp Dann” in Möllers, C., Voßkuhle, A. and Walter, C. (eds.), Internationales Verwaltungsrecht: Eine Analyse anhand von Referenzgebieten (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), pp. 49–71.Google Scholar
Mayer, O., Deutsches Verwaltungsrecht (Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot, 1895).Google Scholar
McCubbins, M. D., Noll, R. D. and Weingast, B. R., “Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control,” Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization 3 (1987), 243–77.Google Scholar
McGreal, C., “Seventy Years and Half a Trillion Dollars Later: What Has the UN Achieved?,” The Guardian, September 7, 2015.Google Scholar
Meidinger, E., “The Administrative Law of Global Private-Public Regulation: The Case of Forestry,” European Journal of International Law 17 (2006), 47–87.Google Scholar
Miller, G. P. and Barr, M. S., “Global Administrative Law: The View from Basel,” European Journal of International Law 17 (2006), 15–46.Google Scholar
Möllers, C., “Ten Years of Global Administrative Law,” International Journal of Constitutional Law 13 (2015), 469–72.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A., “The Origins of Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in Postwar Europe,” International Organization 54 (2000), 217–52.Google Scholar
Morgan, B., “Turning Off the Tap: Urban Water Service Delivery and the Social Construction of Global Administrative Law,” European Journal of International Law 17 (2006), 215–46.Google Scholar
Oye, K. A., “Explaining Cooperation under Anarchy: Hypotheses and Strategies,” World Politics 38 (1985), 1–24.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J., “Informal International Lawmaking: Framing the Concept and Research Questions” in Pauwelyn, J., Wessel, R. A. and Wouters, J. (eds.), Informal International Lawmaking (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 13–34.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J., Wessel, R. A. and Wouters, J., “An Introduction to Informal International Lawmaking” in Pauwelyn, J., Wessel, R. A. and Wouters, J. (eds.), Informal International Lawmaking (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
Peters, A. and Armingeon, K., “Introduction: Global Constitutionalism from an Interdisciplinary Perspective,” Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 16 (2009), 385–95.Google Scholar
Pettit, P., “Institutional Design and Rational Choice” in Goodin, R. E. (ed.), The Theory of Institutional Design (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 54–90.Google Scholar
Pobije, E., Covid-19 as a Threat to International Peace and Security: The Role of the UN Security Council in Addressing the Pandemic.Google Scholar
Richards, J. E., “Institutions for Flying: How States Built a Market in International Aviation Services,” International Organization 55 (2001), 993–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roger, C. B., The Origins of Informality: Why the Legal Foundations of Global Governance are Shifting, and Why It Matters (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020).Google Scholar
Romm, T., “Facebook’s Zuckerberg Just Survived 10 hours of Questioning by Congress,” The Washington Post, April 11, 2018.Google Scholar
Ronit, K. and Schneider, V., “Global Governance through Private Organizations,” Governance 12 (1999), 243–66.Google Scholar
Rosenau, J. N., “Governance in the Twenty-first Century,” Global Governance 1 (1995), 13–43.Google Scholar
Rosendorff, B. P. and Milner, H. V., “The Optimal Design of International Trade Institutions: Uncertainty and Escape,” International Organization 55 (2001), 829–57.Google Scholar
Sanger, D. E., “U.S. Said to Turn Back North Korea Missile Shipment,” The New York Times, June 12, 2011.Google Scholar
Sanger, D. E. and Shanker, T., “Threats and Responses: War Matériel; Reluctant U.S. Gives Assent For Missiles to Go to Yemen,” The New York Times, December 12, 2002.Google Scholar
Savino, M., “Global Administrative Law Meets Soft Powers: The Uncomfortable Case of Interpol Red Notices,” International Law and Politics 43 (2011), 263–336.Google Scholar
Savino, M., “What If Global Administrative Law is a Normative Project?,” International Journal of Constitutional Law 13 (2015), 492–8.Google Scholar
Schreuer, C., “Secondment of United Nations Officials from National Civil Service,” German Yearbook of International Law 34 (1991), 307–53.Google Scholar
Scott, C., Cafaggi, F. and Senden, L., “The Conceptual and Constitutional Challenge of Transnational Private Regulation,” Journal of Law and Society 38 (2011), 1–19.Google Scholar
Seitz, K. and Martens, J., “Philanthrolateralism: Private Funding and Corporate Influence in the United Nations,” Global Policy Forum 8 (2017), 46–50.Google Scholar
Senden, L., “Soft Law, Self-Regulation and Co-Regulation in European Law: Where Do They Meet?,” Electronic Journal of Comparative Law 9 (2005), 1–27.Google Scholar
Shamir, H., “Anti-trafficking in Israel: Neo-abolitionist Feminists, Markets, Borders, and the State” in Halley, J., Kotiswaran, P., Rebouché, R. and Shamir, H. (eds.), Governance Feminism: An Introduction (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2018), pp. 149–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shulman, M. R., “The Proliferation Security Initiative and the Evolution of the Law on the Use of Force,” Houston Journal of International Law 28 (2008), 771–828.Google Scholar
Slaughter, A.-M., A New World Order (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004).Google Scholar
Slaughter, A.-M., The Chessboard and the Web: Strategies of Connection in a Networked World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017).Google Scholar
State of the Union 2017: A Framework for the Free Flow of Non-personal Data in the EU (Brussels, 2017).Google Scholar
Staten, M. E. and Cate, F. H., “The Impact of Opt-in Privacy Rules on Retail Credit Markets: A Case Study of MBNA,” Duke Law Journal 52 (2003), 745–86.Google Scholar
Stephenson, S. M., Standards, Conformity Assessment and Developing Countries (1997).Google Scholar
Stewart, R. B., “Remedying Disregard in Global Regulatory Governance: Accountability, Participation, and Responsiveness,” The American Journal of International Law 108 (2014), 211–70.Google Scholar
Stewart, R. B., “The Normative Dimensions and Performance of Global Administrative Law,” International Journal of Constitutional Law 13 (2015), 499–506.Google Scholar
Stewart, R. B., “Global Standards for National Societies” in Cassese, S. (ed.), Research Handbook on Global Administrative Law, 3rd edn. (Cheltenham, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016), pp. 175–93.Google Scholar
Teubner, G., Constitutional Fragments: Societal Constitutionalism in Globalization (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).Google Scholar
Third World Network, “WHO: Unease over Seconded Philanthropic Foundation Staff to Top Management,” TWN Info Service on Health Issues, December 5, 2015.Google Scholar
Tir, J. and Stinnett, D. M., “The Institutional Design of Riparian Treaties: The Role of River Issues,” The Journal of Conflict Resolution 55 (2011), 606–31.Google Scholar
Tzeng, P., “Taking China to the International Court of Justice over COVID-19,” EJIL Talk, April 2, 2020.Google Scholar
Union of International Associations (ed.), Yearbook of International Organizations 2016-2016: Volume 5: Statistics, Visualizations and Patterns (Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV, 2015).Google Scholar
Villarreal, P. A., “Pandemic Declarations of the World Health Organization as an Exercise of International Public Authority: The Possible Legal Answers to Frictions Between Legitimacies,” Göttingen Journal of International Law 7 (2016), 95–129.Google Scholar
Wendt, A., “Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics,” International Organization 46 (1992), 391–425.Google Scholar
Wendt, A., “Driving with the Rearview Mirror: On the Rational Science of Institutional Design,” International Organization 55 (2001), 1019–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werner, F., “Verwaltungsrecht als konkretisiertes Verfassungsrecht,” DVBl (1959), 527–33.Google Scholar
“WhatsApp to Set up New Office in India before Official Launch of Payments Service,” Business Today India, August 1, 2018.Google Scholar
White, H. M. and Lauria, R., “The Impact of New Communication Technologies on International Telecommunication Law and Policy: Cyberspace and the Restructuring of the International Telecommunication Union,” California Western Law Review 32 (1995), 1–30.Google Scholar
Wiener, A., Lang, A. F. Jr., Tully, J., Maduro, M. P. and Kumm, M., “Global Constitutionalism: Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law,” Global Constitutionalism 1 (2012), 1–15.Google Scholar
Wohlforth, W. C., “Realism” in Reus-Smit, C. and Snidal, D. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 131–49.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Bibliography
  • Isabel Lischewski, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Germany
  • Book: Lawful by Design
  • Online publication: 13 January 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009039529.007
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Bibliography
  • Isabel Lischewski, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Germany
  • Book: Lawful by Design
  • Online publication: 13 January 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009039529.007
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Bibliography
  • Isabel Lischewski, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Germany
  • Book: Lawful by Design
  • Online publication: 13 January 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009039529.007
Available formats
×