Regulating information flows: States, private actors, and e-commerce

Annual Review of Political Science

Volumn 9, Issue , 2006, Pages 353-374

  Farrell, Henry ^a  

^a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Globalization; Governance; International political economy; Internet

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745771365     PISSN: 10942939     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.9.060804.162744     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Barlow JP. 1996. A declaration of the independence of Cyberspace, http://homes.eff.org/~barlow/Declaration-Final.html (accessed July 28, 2005)
2. Benkler Y. 2000. Internet regulation: a case study in the problem of multilateralism. Ear. J. Int. Law 11:171-85
3. Berger S. 2000. Globalization and politics. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 3:43-62
4. Birnhack M, Elkin-Koren N. 2003. The invisible handshake: the reemergence of the state in the digital environment. Virginia J. Law Technol. 8(2). http://www.vjolt.net/vol8/issue2/v8i2_a06-Birnhack-Elkin-Koren.pdf
5. Crouch C, Menon A. 1997. Organised interests and the state. In Developments in West European Politics, ed. M Rhodes, P Heywood, V Wright, pp. 151-68. New York: St. Martin's
6. Cutler AC. 2003. Private Power and Global Authority: Transnational Merchant Law in the Global Political Economy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
7. Cutler AC, Haufler V, Porter T, eds. 1999. Private Authority in International Affairs. Albany, NY: SUNY Press
8. Drezner DW. 2004. The global governance of the Internet: bringing the state back in. Polit. Sci. Q. 119:477-98
9. Farrell H. 2003a. Constructing the international foundations of e-commerce: the EU-US Safe Harbor Arrangement. Int. Org. 57:277-306
10. Farrell H. 2003b. Regulating information flows: domestic sources of state power and the role of state-private actor relations. Presented at Annu. Meet. Am. Polit. Sci. Assoc., Philadelphia, Aug. 27-30
11. Froomkin AM. 1997. The Internet as a source of regulatory arbitrage. In Borders in Cyberspace, ed. B Kahin, C Nesson, pp. 129-63. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
12. Frydman B, Rorive I. 2002. Regulating Internet content through intermediaries in Europe and the USA. Zeitschrift Rechtssoziol. 23:41-59
13. Geist M. 2001. Is there a there there? Towards greater certainty for Internet jurisdiction. Berkeley Technol. Law J. 16:1345-406
14. Geist M. 2003. Cyberlaw 2.0. Boston Coll. Law Rev. 44:323-58
15. Goldsmith J. 2000. Unilateral regulation of the Internet: a modest defence. Eur. J. Int. Law 11:135-48
16. Goodman JB, Pauly LW. 1993. The obsolescence of capital controls? Economic management in an age of global markets. World Polit. 46:50-82
17. Grande E, Pauly LW. 2005. Complex sovereignty and the emergence of transnational authority. In Complex Sovereignty: Reconstituting Political Authority in the Twenty-First Century, ed. E Grande, LW Pauly, pp. 3-21. Toronto: Univ. Toronto
18. Hall R, Biersteker TJ, eds. 2002. The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press
19. Johnson DR, Post D. 1996. Law and borders: the rise of law in Cyberspace. Stanford Law Rev. 48:1369-76
20. Kahler M, Lake DA. 2003. Globalization and governance. In Governance in a Global Economy. Political Authority in Transition, ed. M Kahler, DA Lake, pp. 1-32. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
21. Keck ME, Sikkink K. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
22. Keohane RO. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
23. Keohane RO, Nye JS. 1971. Transnational relations and world politics: an introduction. Int. Org. 25:329-49
24. Keohane RO, Ooms VD. 1975. The Multinational Firm and International Regulation. Int. Org. 29:169-209
25. Knight J. 1992. Institutions and Social Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press
26. Kobrin SJ. 1998. Back to the future: neomedievalism and the postmodern digital economy. J. Int. Aff. 51:361-86
27. Krasner SD. 1991. Global communications and national power: life on the Pareto frontier. World Polit. 43:336-66
28. Lehmkuhl D. 2003. Structuring dispute resolution in transnational trade: competition and co-evolution of public and private institutions. In Globalization and Institutions: Redefining the Rules of the Economic Game, ed. ML Djelic, S Quack, pp. 278-301. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
29. Lessig L. 1999. Code, and Other Laws of Cyberspace. New York: Basic Books
30. Lutz S. 2003. Governance in der Politischen Ökonomie. Cologne: Max-Planck Inst.
31. Manter G. 2003. The pending determination of the legality of Internet gambling in the United States. Duke Law Technol. Rev. http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dltr/articles/2003dltr0016.html
32. Mattli W, Büthe T. 2003. Setting international standards: technological rationality or primacy of power? World Polit. 56:1-42
33. Mattli W, Büthe T. 2005. Accountability in accounting? The politics of private rule-making in the public interest. Governance 18:399-429
34. Mattli W, Büthe T. 2006. Global private governance: lessons from a national model of setting standards in accounting. Law Contemp. Prob. 68
35. Mayntz R. 1998. New Challenges to Governance Theory. Jean Monnet Chair Pap. 50, Robert Schuman Cent., Eur. Univ. Inst., Badia Fiesolana
36. Molina O, Rhodes, M. 2002. Corporatism: the past, present and future of a concept. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 5:305-31
37. Moravcsik A. 1997. Taking preferences seriously: a liberal theory of international politics. Int. Org. 51:513-53
38. Newman A, Bach D. 2004. Self-regulatory trajectories in the shadow of public power: resolving digital dilemmas in Europe and the United States. Governance 17:387-413
39. Newman A, Posner E. 2005. International interdependence and regulatory power. Presented at Annu. Meet. Am. Polit. Sci. Assoc., Washington, DC
40. OECD. 2003. Are the current treaty rules for taxing business profits appropriate for e-commerce?: Public discussion draft. Paris, OECD Tech. Advis. Group Monitoring Application of Existing Treaty Norms for Taxing Business Profits
41. O'Neill K, Balsiger J, VanDeveer S. 2004. Actors, norms and impacts: international cooperation and the influence of the agent-structure debate. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 7:149-75
42. Paris R. 2003. The globalization of taxation? Electronic commerce and the transformation of the state. Int. Stud. Q. 47:153-82
43. Reidenberg J. 2002. Yahoo! and democracy on the Internet. Jurimetrics 42:261-80
44. Reidenberg J. 2004. States and Internet enforcement. Univ. Ottawa Law Technol. J. 1:213-30
45. Risse-Kappen (Risse) T. 1995. Bringing Transnational Relations Back In: Non-State Actors, Domestic Structures and International Institutions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
46. Rodman KA. 1994. Public and private sanctions against South Africa. Polit. Sci. Q. 109:313-34
47. Sanders R. 2004. Antigua's Impudence: Challenging the US in the WTO. London, Antigua and Barbados High Commission
48. Schmitter P. 1979. Still the century of corporatism? In Trends Towards Corporatist Intermediation, ed. P Schmitter, G Lehmbruch, pp. 7-43. New York: Sage
49. Schmitter P. 1981. Interest intermediation and regime governability in contemporary Western Europe and North America. In Organizing Interests in Western Europe, pp. 285-327. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
50. Sell S. 2003. Private Power, Public Law: The Globalization of Intellectual Property Rights. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
51. Shambaugh G. 1996. Dominance, dependence and political power: tethering technology in the 1980s and today. Int. Stud. Q. 40:559-88
52. Simon LD. 2000. Netpolicy.com: Public Agenda for a Digital World. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Press
53. Spar D. 1999. Lost in (Cyber)space: The private rules of online commerce. In Private Authority in International Affairs, ed. AC Cutler, V Haufler, T Porter, pp. 31-51. Albany: SUNY Press
54. Spar D. 2001. Ruling the Waves: Cycles of Discovery, Chaos and Wealth from the Compass to the Internet. New York: Harcourt Brace
55. Stone-Sweet A. 2004. Islands of transnational governance. In Restructuring Territoriality: Europe and the United States Compared, ed. CK Ansell, G di Palma. pp. 122-44. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
56. Strange S. 1996. The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
57. Streeck W, Schmitter PC. 1991. From national corporatism to transnational pluralism: organized interests in the single European market. Polit. Soc. 19:133-64
58. Swire P. 1998. Of elephants, mice and privacy: international choice of law and the Internet. Int. Lawyer 32:991-1025
59. Swire PP, Litan RE. 1998. None of Your Business: World Data Flows, Electronic Commerce, and the European Privacy Directive. Washington, DC: Brookings Inst.
60. Thayer JD. 2004. The trade of cross-border gambling and betting: the WTO dispute between Antigua and the United States. Duke Law Technol. Rev. http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dltr/articles/2004dltr0013.html
61. Wapner P. 1995. Politics beyond the state: environmental activism and world civic politics. World Polit. 47:311-40
62. White House. 1997. Framework for Global Electronic Commerce. Washington, DC: White House
63. Zittrain J. 2003. Internet points of control. Boston Coll. Law Rev. 44:653-88