New governance and experimentausm: An introduction

Wisconsin Law Review

Volumn 2010, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 227-238

  De Burca, Grainne ^a  

^a FORDHAM LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650846525     PISSN: 0043650X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (68)

1. For previous collections of work on this topic, in which the terms "new governance" and "experimentalist governance" are discussed and defined, see Special Issue, Law and New Approaches to Governance in Europe, 9 EUR L.J. 1 (2002);
2. Symposium, Narrowing the Gap? Law and New Approaches to Governance in the European Union, 13 COLUM. J. EUR. L. 513 (2007);
3. and the edited collection of essays in LAW AND NEW GOVERNANCE in THE EU AND THE US (Grainne de Burca & Joanne Scott eds., 2006).
4. This was an endeavor which had tentatively begun as a collaborative project some years earlier, culminating in the collection LAW AND NEW GOVERNANCE in THE EU AND THE US, supra note 1, but in which the comparative dimension remained under-explored.
5. This description is used by Mark Dawson in his contribution to this Symposium issue. Mark Dawson, Transforming into What? New Governance in the EU and the "Managerial Sensibility" in Modern Law, 2010 Wis. L. REV. 389.
6. See EWAN FERLIE ET AL., THE NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT in ACTION (1996) (discussing new public management);
7. DAVID OSBORNE & TED GAEBLER, REINVENTING GOVERNMENT: HOW THE ENTREPRENEURIAL SPIRIT IS TRANSFORMING THE PUBLIC SECTOR (1992) (same).
8. While the term "new governance" is applied to a broad range of processes and practices, as outlined in Orly Lobel, The Renew Deal: The Fall of Regulation and the Rise of Governance in Contemporary Legal Thought, 89 MINN. L. REV. 342 (2004), the most theoretically developed and normatively attractive model is to be found in Charles Sabel's extensive work on democratic experimentalism.
9. See, e.g., Michael C. Dorf & Charles F. Sabel, A Constitution of Democratic Experimentalism, 98 COLUM. L. REV. 267 (1998).
10. See also Charles F. Sabel & Jonathan Zeitlin, Learning from Difference: The New Architecture of Experimentalist Governance in the EU, 14 EUR. L.J. 271 (2008).
11. See, e.g., Charles Sabel et al., Beyond Backyard Environmentalism, BOSTON REV., Oct.-Nov. 1999, available at http://bostonreview.net/BR24.5/sabel.html.
12. See also Susan Sturm, The Architecture of inclusion: Advancing Workplace Equity in Higher Education, 29 HARV. J.L. & GENDER 247 (2006).
13. For a more general overview of the rise of new governance in the U.S., see Lobel, supra note 5.
14. Gunther Teubner, Substantive and Reflexive Elements in Modern Law, 17 LAW & SOC'Y REV. 239 (1983) (drawing strong parallels between strands of intellectual thought in Europe and the U.S. concerning the relationship between law and society, and the move away from autonomous "rational" law to responsive, reflexive law. Further, several of the scholars who participated in a German-American debate on critical legal thought in the 1980s drew on similar tendencies and trends on both sides of the Atlantic, particularly the move towards the proceduralization of law, which resonates strongly with aspects of new governance.
15. See CRITICAL LEGAL THOUGHT: AN AMERICAN-GERMAN DEBATE (Christian Joerges & David Trubek eds., Nomos Verlagsgesellschafter, Baden-Baden, 1989);
16. Duncan Kennedy, Comment on Rudolf Wietholter's "Materialization and Proceduralization in Modem Law," and "Proceduralization of the Category of Law," in CRITICAL LEGAL THOUGHT: AN AMERICAN-GERMAN DEBATE 511 (Christian Joerges & D. Trubek eds., Nomos Verlagsgesellschafter, Baden-Baden, 1989).
17. See, e.g., Burkard Eberlein & Dieter Kerwer, New Governance in the EU, 42 J. COMMON MKT. STUD. 121 (2004).
18. See Lisa Alexander, Afterword: Reflections on Success and Failure in New Governance and the Role of the Lawyer, 2010 WIS. L. REV. 737;
19. Wendy Bach, Governance, Accountability, and the New Poverty Agenda, 2010 WIS. L. REV. 239;
20. Lisa Blomgren Bingham, The Next Generation of Administrative Law: Building the Legal infrastructure for Collaberative Governance, 2010 Wis. L. REV. 297;
21. Edward Rubin, The Regulatizing Process and the Boundaries of New Public Governance, 2010 Wis. L. REV. 535;
22. Nan D. Hunter, Health Care, Citizenship, and the Potential of New Governance, Paper Presented at the University of Wisconsin Law Review Symposium: Transatlantic Conference on New Governance and the Transformation of Law (Nov. 20-21, 2009) (on file with author).
23. See Dawson, supra note 3; Stephanie Tai, Comparing Approaches Towards Governing Scientific Advisory Bodies on Food Safety in the United States and the European Union, 2010 Wis. L. REV. 627;
24. Diamond Ashiagbor, Complex Discrimination and New Governance in the EU, Paper Presented at the University of Wisconsin Law Review Symposium: Transatlantic Conference on New Governance and the Transformation of Law (Nov. 20-21, 2009) (on file with author);
25. Joanne Scott & William Simon, The Challenge of Regulating Carbon Offsets (in the European Union), Paper Presented at the University of Wisconsin Law Review Symposium: Transatlantic Conference on New Governance and the Transformation of Law (Nov. 20-21, 2009) (on file with author).
26. See Cristie Ford, New Governance in the Teeth of Human Frailty-Lessons from Financial Regulation, 2010 Wis. L. REV. 441;
27. Poul Kjaer, The Metamorphosis of the Functional Synthesis: A Continental European Perspective on Governance, Law, and the Political in the Transnational Space, 2010 Wis. L. REV. 489;
28. Allison Christians, Networks, Norms, and National Tax Policy, Paper Presented at the University of Wisconsin Law Review Symposium: Transatlantic Conference on New Governance and the Transformation of Law (Nov. 20-21, 2009) (on file with author).
29. See Kenneth W. Abbott & Duncan Snidal, Strengthening international Regulation Through Transnational New Governance: Overcoming the Orchestration Deficit, VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 501 (2009).
30. See, e.g., Eleanor M. Fox, Linked-In: Antitrust and the Virtues of a Virtual Network, 43 inT'L LAW. 151 (2009).
31. See also Yane Svetiev, Learning in an Antitrust Network (Brooklyn Law Sch., 2010), available at http://ssrn.com/ abstract=1564890.
32. See Forest Stewardship Council, http://www.fscus.org/ (last visited Mar. 4, 2010).
33. For an analysis, see CHRIS P. TOLLEFSON ET AL., SETTING THE STANDARD: CERTIFICATION, GOVERNANCE, AND THE FOREST STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL (2008).
34. See Ford, supra note 11.
35. Lisa Alexander, Stakeholder Participation in New Governance: Lessons from Chicago's Public Housing Reform Experiment, 16 GEO. J. on POVERTY L. & POL'Y 117 (2009).
36. See Bach, supra note 9, at 239-42.
37. See Sturm, supra note 6, at 272-86.
38. For a critical analysis of the contribution of the U.S. GBC, see David M. Hart, Don't Worry About the Government? The LEED-NC "Green Building" Rating System and Energy Efficiency in U.S. Commercial Buildings (MIT-IPC-Energy innovation Working Paper 09-001, 2009), available at http://web.mit.edu/ipc/ publications/pdf/09-001 .pdf.
39. Bradley C. Karkkainen, "New Governance" in the Great Lakes Basin: Has Its Time Arrived?, 2006 MICH. ST. L. REV. 1249, 1255-56;
40. Bradley C. Karkkainen, Post-Sovereign Environmental Governance, GLOBAL ENVTL. POL., Feb. 2004, at 72, 81-87.
41. See Dawson, supra note 3, at 418-35.
42. See Joanne Scott, From Brussels with Love: The Transatlantic Travels of European Law and the Chemistry of Regulatory Attraction, 57 AM. J. COMP. L. 897 (2009);
43. Joanne Scott & Jane Holder, Law and New Environmental Governance in the EU, in LAW AND NEW GOVERNANCE in THE EU AND THE US 211 (Grainne de Burea & Joanne Scott eds., 2004).
44. See, e.g., ROBERT A. SCHAPIRO, POLYPHONIC FEDERALISM: TOWARDS THE PROTECTION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS (2009);
45. Robert B. Ahdieh, Dialectical Regulation, 38 CONN. L. REV. 863 (discussing "intersystemic regulation").
46. See European Food Safety Authority, http://www.efsa.europa.eu/ (last visited Mar. 4, 2010);
47. Comm'n of the European Communities, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Community Macro Prudential Oversight of the Financial System and Establishing a European Systemic Risk Board, EUR. PARL. DOC. (COM 2009) 499 (2009) (proposing the European Securities and Markets Authority);
48. Comm'n of the European Communities, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Establishing a European Securities and Markets Authority, EUR. PARL. DOC. (COM 2009) 503 (same).
49. See Europa, A New Approach to Technical Harmonisation: Outline of a "New Approach Directive," http://europa.eu/legislation-summaries/ internal-market/ single-market-for-goods/technical-harmonisation/121001a-en.htm (last visited Mar. 16, 2010).
50. See, e.g., Manuele Citi & Martin Rhodes, New Modes of Governance in the EU: Common Objectives Versus National Preferences (European Governance Papers No. N-07-01, 2007), available at http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/ pdf/ egp-newgov-N-07-01 .pdf.
51. His research indicates that where a working group leader from a more mature antitrust jurisdiction triggers a benchmarking process within the ICN, this will not necessarily be responsive to the imminent needs of many other participants, in particular those from developing countries or countries without a mature antitrust system, See Svetiev, supra note 13.
52. See Ford, supra note 11.
53. See Alexander, supra note 16.
54. See Bach, supra note 9.
55. See Dawson, supra note 3.
56. See Ford, supra note 11.
57. See Dawson, supra note 3; Michael Wilkinson, Three Conceptions of Law: Towards a Jurisprudence of Democratic Experimentalism, 2010 Wis. L. REV. 673.
58. See, e.g., William E. Scheurman, Democratic Experimentalism or Capitalist Synchronization: Critical Reflections on Directly-Deliberative Polyarchy, 17 CANADIAN J.L. & JURISPRUDENCE 101 (2004);
59. David A. Super, Laboratories of Destitution: Democratic Experimentalism and the Failure of Anti-Poverty Law, 157 U. PA. L. REV. 541 (2008).
60. Scheurman, supra note 34 (criticizing this kind in relation to anti-poverty policy).
61. See Ford, supra note 11.
62. Douglas NeJaime, When New Governance Fails, 70 OHIO ST. L.J. 323 (2009).
63. Robert B. Ahdieh, The Visible Hand: Coordination Functions of the Regulatory State (Emory Univ. Sch. of Law, Emory Pub. Law Research Paper No. 09-86, Emory Law & Econ. Research Paper No. 09-50, 2009), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract= 1522127.
64. See, e.g., Alexander, supra note 16; Bach, supra note 9; Super, supra note 34.
65. See Ford, supra note 11.
66. See Amy J. Cohen, Governance Legalism: Hayek and Sabel on Reason and Rules, Organization and Law, 2010 Wis. L. REV. 357.
67. See Ford, supra note 11.
68. See Cohen, supra note 41.