WIPO-WTO relations and the future of global intellectual property norms

Netherlands Yearbook of International Law

Volumn 39, Issue , 2008, Pages 69-125

  Okediji, Ruth L ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875317736     PISSN: 01676768     EISSN: 15740951     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S016767680800069X     Document Type: Article

References (166)

1. E. Rosenthal, ‘Both Sides Cite Science to Address Altered Corn’, New York Times, 26 December 2007 at C1
2. S. Charnovitz, ‘The World Trade Organization and Social Issues’, 28 Journal of World Trade (1994) p. 17 at p. 33
3. F. Weiss, ‘The WTO and the progressive development of International Trade Law’, 29 NYIL (1998) p. 71 at p. 75
4. P. Lamy, ‘The Place of the WTO and Its Law in the International Legal Order’, 17 EJIL (2006) p. 969 at p. 982
5. J. Pauwelyn, ‘The Role of Public International Law in the WTO: How Far Can We Go?’, 95 AJIL (2001) p. 535.
6. A.D. Mitchell, ‘The Legal Basis for Using Principles in WTO Disputes’, 10 Journal of International Economic Law (2007) p. 795 at p. 799.
7. G. Marceau, ‘WTO Dispute Settlement and Human Rights’, 13 EJIL (2002) p. 753 at pp. 755-756
8. C.R. Kelly, ‘Power, Linkage and Accommodation: The WTO as an International Actor and Its Influence on Other Actors and Regimes’, 24 Berkeley JIL (2006) p. 79 at pp. 86-87.
9. V. Mosoti, ‘Institutional Cooperation and Norm Creation in International Organizations’, in T. Cottier et al., eds., Human Rights and International Trade (New York, OUP 2005) p. 165 at p. 168
10. R. Helfer, Mediating Interactions in an Expanding International Intellectual Property Regime, in T. Cottier et al., Human Rights and International Trade (New York, OUP 2005), p. 180
11. J.L. Dunoff, ‘Constitutional Conceits: The WTO’s “Constitution” and the Discipline of International Law’, 17 EJIL (2006) p. 647 at p. 667
12. D. Held and A. McGrew, ‘Political Globalization: Trends and Choices’, in I. Kaul et al., eds., Providing Global Public Goods: Managing Globalization (New York, OUP 2003) p. 185 at pp. 186-187
13. 33 ILM 81 (1994)
14. Trb. 1999 No. 235 p. 337.
15. L.R. Helfer, ‘Regime Shifting: The TRIPS Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking’, 29 Yale JIL (2004) p. 1.
16. F. Abbott, ‘Distributed Governance at the WTO-WIPO: An Evolving Model for Open-Architecture Integrated Governance’, 3 Journal of International Economic Law (2000) p. 63
17. N. Khlestov, ‘WTO-WIPO Co-operation: Does It Have a Future?’, 10 European Intellectual Property Review (1997) p. 560 at p. 561
18. P. Passell, ‘Loading the Trade Agenda with Diverse Issues Could Backfire’, New York Times, 9 October 1997 at D2
19. World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization, A Fair Globalization: Creating Opportunities for All (March 2004), at
20. UN Doc. A/CN.4/L.682 (13 April 2006), at
21. UST 1749, 828 UNTS 3, Trb. 1969 No. 145
22. World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization, 22 December 1995, 35 ILM 754 (1996)
23. A. Kapczynski, ‘The Access to Knowledge Mobilization and the New Politics of Intellectual Property’, 117 Yale LJ (2008) p. 804.
24. R.L. Okediji, ‘Back to Bilateralism? Pendulum Swings in International Intellectual Property Agreements’, 1 University of Ottawa Law and Technology Journal (2003-2004) p. 125.
25. Stockholm Revision Conference, 14 July 1967, 21 UST 1583
26. 828 UNTS 303, Trb. 1969 No. 144
27. UST 1341, 1161 UNTS 30, Trb. 1972 No. 157
28. Trb. 1980 No. 39
29. S. Ricketson, The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works: 1886-1986 (London, Kluwer 1987) p. 150
30. S.P. Ladas, The International Protection of Industrial Property (Cambridge, Harvard UP 1930) p. 117.
31. A. Krieger, ‘A New International Organization for Intellectual Property? Efforts to Modify the Structure of the Paris and Berne Unions’, 5(2) Industrial Property (1966) p. 37 at p. 37
32. 25 UST 1341, TIAS 7868, 1 Basic Documents of International Economic Law 813, 943 UNTS 193, Trb. 1972 No. 114
33. J. Secretan, ‘Structural Evolution of the International Unions for the Protection of Intellectual Property’, 7 Industrial Property (1962) p. 170 at p. 173
34. BIRPI, ‘Synopsis of the Proposed Administrative and Structural Reform of BIRPI’, 5 Industrial Property (1966) p. 183 at p. 183.
35. R.L. Okediji, ‘History Lessons for the WIPO Development Agenda’, in N.W. Netanel, ed., The Development Agenda: Global Intellectual Property and Developing Countries (Oxford, OUP forthcoming 2008).
36. Stockholm on 14 July 1967, 828 UNTS 222
37. BIRPI, ‘Note by BIRPI’, 7 Industrial Property (1967) p. 153 at p. 154.
38. 14 Industrial Property (1975) p. 3
39. R.L. Okediji, ‘The International Relations of Intellectual Property: Narratives of Developing Country Participation in the Global Intellectual Property System’, 7 Singapore Journal of International and Comparative Law (2003) p. 315 at pp. 329-331.
40. M.N. Barnett and M. Finnemore, ‘The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations’, 53 International Organization (1999) p. 699 at p. 703
41. WIPO General Assembly, Proposal by Argentina and Brazil for the Establishment of a Development Agenda for WIPO, 27 August 2004, WIPO Doc. WO/GA/31/11, at
42. WIPO General Assembly, Decision on a Development Agenda, 4 October 2004, at
43. WIPO, The 45 Adopted Recommendations under the WIPO Development Agenda, at
44. F. Weitsman, ‘TRIPS, Access to Medicines and the “North-South” Conflict After Doha: The End or the Beginning?’, 6 Asper Review of International Business and Trade Law (2006) p. 67 at pp. 72-73
45. Kristen Riemenschneider, ‘Philosophy, Trade, and AIDS: Current Failures to Obtain a Substantive Patent Law Treaty’, 11/5 Virginia Journal of Law and Technology (2006) p. 5.
46. R.L. Okediji, ‘Welfare and Digital Copyright in International Perspective’, in J. H. Reichman and K. Maskus, eds., International Public Goods and Transfer of Technology under a Globalized Intellectual Property Regime (Cambridge, CUP 2005) p. 142.
47. BIRPI, ‘The Evolution of the United International Bureaux’, 76 Le Droit d’Auteur (1963) p. 91 at pp. 94-95
48. Working Agreement between BIRPI and the United Nations, reprinted in 3 Industrial Property (1964) p. 207.
49. D.W. Leebron, ‘Linkages’, 96 AJIL (2002) p. 5 at p. 12
50. J. Boyle, ‘A Manifesto on WIPO and the Future of Intellectual Property’, 2004 Duke Law and Technology Review (2004) p. 9
51. K.E. Maskus and J.H. Reichman, ‘The Globalization of Private Knowledge Goods and the Privatization of Global Public Goods’, 7 Journal of International Economic Law (2004) p. 279 at. 294
52. R.L. Gana, ‘Prospects for Developing Countries Under the TRIPS Agreement’, 29 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (1996) p. 735
53. J.H. Reichman, ‘Richard Lillich Memorial Lecture: Nurturing a Transnational System of Innovation’, 16 Journal of Transnational Law and Policy (2007) p. 143 at p. 165
54. 36 ILM 5 (1997)
55. S. Treaty Doc. No. 105-17 (1997), 36 ILM 76 (1997)
56. J.H. Reichman and P.F. Uhlir, ‘A Contractually Reconstructed Research Commons for Scientific Data in a Highly Protectionist Intellectual Property Environment’, 66 Law and Contemporary Problems (2003) p. 315.
57. M.L. Cordray, ‘GATT v. WIPO’, 76 Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society (1994) p. 121 at p. 122
58. M. Leaffer, Understanding Copyright Law, 2nd edn. (New York, Matthew Bender 1995) p. 372.
59. For a list of UN bodies involved with IP activities, including norm-setting, see .
60. See e.g., Convention on Biological Diversity, Decision VI/20 on Cooperation with Other Organizations, Initiatives and Conventions, at .
61. See e.g., World Customs Organization (WCO), Strategic Plan: Customs Environment, at .
62. WIPO/OMPI Advertisement for a Director, Global Challenges Division, The Economist, 15-21 November 2008) at p. 26
63. WIPO/OMPI Advertisement for a Chief Economist, The Economist, 15-21 November 2008) at p. 26
64. J.H. Reichman and P.F. Uhlir, ‘Global Trends to Restrict Access to Scientific Data from Government Funded Research’, paper presented to the Yale University Conference on Global Information Flows, 2-4 April 2005
65. ‘Identifying and Addressing Global Trends to Restrict Access to Scientific Data from Government Funded Research’, in J.M. Balkin and E. Katz, eds., The Global Flow of Infromation (New Haven, Yale University Press) (forthcoming).
66. WHO, Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property Rights, Report of the Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Public Health (2006), at .
67. D. Gervais, The TRIPS Agreement: Drafting History and Analysis (London, Sweet & Maxwell 2001) p. 9.
68. R.L. Okediji, ‘TRIPS Dispute Settlement and the Sources of (International) Copyright Law’, 49 Journal of the Copyright Society (2002) p. 585 at p. 587 n. 11.
69. WTO Doc. WT/MIN(01)/DEC/2, 41 ILM 755 (2002)
70. R.G. Tarasofsky, ‘The Relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity: Towards a Pragmatic Approach’, 6 Review of European Community and International Environmental Law (1997) p. 148 at p. 148
71. L.R. Helfer, ‘Human Rights and Intellectual Property: Conflict or Coexistence?’, 5 Minnesota Intellectual Property Review (2003) p.
72. N. Helberger and P.B. Hugenholtz, ‘No Place Like Home for Making a Copy: Private Copying in European Copyright Law and Consumer Law’, 22 Berkeley Technology Law Journal (2007) p. 1061, at pp. 1068, 1083
73. A.A. Latif, Inside Views: Linkages Between the WIPO Development Agenda and the TRIPS Council, IP-Watch, March 13, 2008, at
74. R.L. Okediji, ‘Securing Intellectual Property Objectives: New Approaches to Human Rights Considerations’, in M.E. Salomon et al., eds., Casting the Net Wider: Human Rights, Development and New Duty-Bearers (Antwerp, Intersentia 2007).
75. L. Helfer, ‘The New Innovation Frontier? Intellectual Property and the European Court of Human Rights’, 49 Harvard ILJ (2008) p. 1
76. P.B. Hugenholtz and R.L. Okediji, ‘Conceiving an International Instrument on Limitations and Exceptions to Copyright - Final Report’, a study sponsored by the Open Society Institute (6 March 2008), at .
77. P. Drahos, ‘Intellectual Property and Human Rights’, 3 Intellectual Property Quarterly (1999) p. 349 at p. 367
78. P. Drahos, ‘An Alternative Framework for the Global Regulation of Intellectual Property Rights’, 21(4) Journal für Entwicklungspolitik (2005) p. 44.
79. J. Band, ‘Israel Now Has the Right Copyright Law’, Jerusalem Post, 26 March 2008, at
80. Israel Copyright Act of 2007, 2007 Law Statutes of Israel, Issue 2199, p. 34, 25 November 2007), at §19 (Fair Use)
81. Y. Akada, ‘Fair Use Stipulation Planned for Intellectual Property’, Asahi Shimbun, 28 May 2008, at .
82. R. Okediji, ‘Toward an International Fair Use Doctrine’, 39 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law (2000) p. 75 at pp. 114-115, 119-121.
83. E. Kwakwa, ‘Some Comments on Rulemaking at the World Intellectual Property Organization’, 12 Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law (2002) p. 179.
84. K. Mara, ‘WTO IP Negotiations Lengthen As New Questions Put On Table’, IP-Watch, 5 December 2008, at http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=1347
85. K. Mara, ‘WTO: Progress On IP At Last; Consensus Still Uncertain’, IP-Watch, 5 December 2008, at .
86. M. Barnett and M. Finnemore, Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics (Ithaca, Cornell UP 2004) pp. 1-2
87. J.E. Alvarez, International Organizations as Lawmakers (Oxford, OUP 2005) p. 3
88. M. Edwards and S. Zadek, ‘Governing the Provision of Global Public Goods: The Role and Legitimacy of Nonstate Actors’, in I. Kaul et al., eds., Providing Global Public Goods (New York, OUP 2003) p. 200.
89. R.L. Okediji, ‘Public Welfare and the Role of the WTO: Reconsidering the TRIPS Agreement’, 17 Emory International Law Review (2003) p. 819 at pp. 844-848
90. S.K. Sell, Private Power, Public Law: The Globalization of Intellectual Property Rights (Cambridge, CUP 2003) pp. 100-109.
91. R.O. Keohane, ‘The Demand for International Regimes’, 36 International Organization (1982) p. 325 at pp. 332-334
92. W.E. Holder, ‘International Organizations: Accountability and Responsibility’, 97 American Society of International Law: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (2003) p. 231 at p. 231
93. D.L. Nielson and M.J. Tierney, ‘Delegation to International Organizations: Agency Theory and World Bank Environmental Reform’, 57 International Organization (2003) p. 241 at pp. 243-245
94. B. Koremenos et al., ‘The Rational Design of International Institutions’, 55 International Organization (2001) p. 761.
95. P.M. Haas and E.B. Haas, ‘Learning to Learn: Some Thoughts on Improving International Governance of the Global Problematique, in Commission on Global Governance’, in Issues in Global Governance: Papers Written for the Commission on Global Governance (The Hague, Kluwer Law International 1995) p. 295 at pp. 300-306
96. J.H. Jackson et al., Legal Problems of International Economic Relations: Cases, Materials, and Text on the National and International Regulation of Transnational Economic Relations, 3rd edn. (St. Paul, West Publishing 1995) p. 289.
97. WTO, TRIPS and Public Health, at .
98. WHO and WTO, WTO Agreements and Public Health: A Joint Study by the WHO and the WTO Secretariat (2002), at .
99. WTO, International Intergovernmental Organizations Granted Observer Status to WTO Bodies, at .
100. D.D. Bradlow and C. Grossman, ‘Limited Mandates and Intertwined Problems: A New Challenge for the World Bank and the IMF’, 17 Human Rights Quarterly (1995) p. 411
101. T. Gutner, ‘Explaining the Gaps between Mandate and Performance: Agency Theory and World Bank Environmental Reform’, 5 Global Environmental Politics (2005) p. 10
102. WIPO, Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP), at .
103. UNESCO, Copyright, at
104. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Res. 3/2001, Adoption of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture and Interim Arrangements for Its Implementation (adopted 3 November 2001), at
105. WHO Doc. WHA61.21 (24 May 2008), at
106. WIPO, WIPO-Administered Treaties, at .
107. P.S. Berman, ‘The Globalization of Jurisdiction’, 151 Univ. PA LR (2002) p. 311 at pp. 397-398
108. J.E. Alvarez and S. Charnovitz, ‘Triangulating the World Trade Organization’, 96 AJIL (2002) p. 28.
109. J.E. Alvarez, ‘Institutional Linkage: Transcending “Trade and …”’, 96 AJIL (2002) p. 77
110. T.P. Stewart and D.S. Johanson, ‘The SPS Agreement of the World Trade Organization and International Organizations: The Roles of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the International Plant Protection Convention, and the International Office of Epizootics’, 26 Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce (1998) p. 27 at pp. 8-30
111. N. Netanel, ‘The Next Round: The Impact of the WIPO Copyright Treaty on TRIPS Dispute Settlement’, 37 Virginia JIL (1997) p. 441.
112. See International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), ‘As Antigua Considers Cross-Retaliation against US, WIPO Official Creates Stir’, 23 January 2003, at .
113. M.M. El Zeidy, ‘Critical Thoughts on Article 59(2) of the ICC Statute’, 4 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2006) p. 448 at p. 460
114. J. March, Decisions and Organizations (London, Basil Blackwell 1988)
115. J. March, ‘Understanding How Decisions Happen in Organizations’, in J. March, ed., The Pursuit of Organizational Intelligence (Oxford, Basil Blackwell 1999) ch. 2.
116. ICTSD, TRIPS Council: Divided We Stand, November 2006, at .
117. Monika Ermert, ACTA: Negotiations Advance behind the Curtain; Many Concerns, IP-Watch, 2 August 2008, at
118. Monika Ermert, G8 Governments Want ACTA Finalized This Year, SPLT Talks Accelerated, IP-Watch, 9 July 2008, at
119. Monika Ermert, Speculation Persists on ACTA As First Official Meeting Concludes, IP-Watch, June 5, 2008, at .
120. P. Samuelson, ‘The U.S. Digital Agenda at WIPO’, 37 Virginia JIL (1997) p. 369
121. See . 166.
122. E. Vranes, ‘The Definition of “Norm Conflict” in International Law and Legal Theory’, 7 EJIL (2006) p. 395 at p. 398
123. G.B. Dinwoodie, ‘The Development and Incorporation of International Norms in the Formation of Copyright Law’, in P.S. Berman, ed., The Globalization of International Law (Ashgate, Aldershot & Burlington 2005) p. 421
124. P. Weil, ‘Towards Relative Normativity in International Law?’, 77 AJIL (1983) p. 413.
125. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Art. 53, 23 May 1969, 1155 UNTS 331, 8 ILM 679 (1969)
126. Trb. 1972 No. 51
127. WIPO-WTO colloquia for teachers of intellectual property from developing countries and countries in transition, at .
128. WIPO, WIPO Intellectual Property Handbook: Policy, Law and Use (WIPO Publication No. 489, 2nd edn., 2004) pp. 359-360, at .
129. WIPO, Traditional Knowledge, Genetic Resources and Traditional Cultural Expressions/Folklore, at .
130. For background information and a series of proposals presented to the Council, see .
131. T.M. Franck, The Power of Legitimacy among Nations (New York, Oxford UP 1990).
132. A.T. Guzman, ‘International Tribunals: A Rational Choice Analysis’, 157 Univ. PA LR (2008) pp. 171-236, at
133. L.R. Helfer and A.M. Slaughter, ‘Toward a Theory of Effective Supranational Adjudication’, 107 Yale LJ (1997) p. 273 at p. 276
134. E.A. Posner and J.C. Yoo, ‘Judicial Independence in International Tribunals’, 93 Calif. LR (2005) p. 1 at pp. 8, 27
135. L.R. Helfer and A.M. Slaughter, ‘Why States Create International Tribunals: A Response to Professors Posner and Yoo’, 93 Calif. LR (2005) p. 899.
136. A.A. Caviedes, ‘International Copyright Law: Should the European Union Dictate Its Development’, 16 Boston Univ. ILJ (1998) p. 165 at p. 172
137. R. Dreyfuss and A. Lowenfeld, ‘The Achievements of the Uruguay Round: Putting TRIPS and Dispute Settlement Together’, 37 Virginia JIL(1997) p. 295.
138. Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, Art. 13, 15 April 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 2, Legal Instruments - Results of the Uruguay Round, 33 ILM 1125 (1994)
139. WIPO and the WTO appears limited to technical assistance offered with respect to the TRIPS Agreement. WIPO lists a total of 17 such workshops/colloquia and symposia. See WIPO, Meetings by Topic - Intellectual Property, at .
140. WTO, TRIPS Council Progress Report on ‘Work Programme on Electronic Commerce’, WTO Doc. IP/C/18 (30 July 1999), at
141. See .
142. K. Kaiser, ‘WIPO’s International Registration of Trademarks: An International Administrative Act Subject to Examination by the Designated Contracting Parties’, 9 German LJ (2008) p. 1597.
143. WIPO states, for example, that ‘IP is an important tool for the economic, social and cultural development of all countries.’ See WIPO, What Is WIPO, at .
144. H.D. Heavin, ‘The Biosafety Protocol and the SPS Agreement: Conflicts and Dispute Resolution’, 12 Journal of Environmental Law and Practice (2003) p. 373 at p. 374
145. Z. Tyler, ‘Saving Fisheries on the High Seas: The Use of Trade Sanctions to Force Compliance with Multilateral Fisheries Agreements’, 20 Tulane Environmental Law Journal (2006) p. 43.
146. R.L. Okediji, ‘Copyright and Public Welfare in Global Perspective’, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies (1999) p. 117 at pp. 133-134
147. J. Kokott and P. Egli, ‘International Decision’, 94 AJIL (2000) p. 386 at p. 388
148. S. Sell, ‘Intellectual Property and Public Policy in Historical Perspective: Contestation and Settlement’, 38 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (2004) p. 267 at pp. 288-89
149. J.H. Reichman, ‘From Free-Riders to Fair Followers: Global Competition under the TRIPS Agreement’, 29 NY Univ. JIL & Pol. (1997) p. 11.
150. H. Rosen, ‘Free Trade Agreements as Foreign Policy Tools: The US-Israel and US-Jordan FTAs’, in J.J. Schott, ed., Free Trade Agreements: US Strategies and Priorities (Washington DC, Institute for International Economics 2004) p. 51 at p. 75
151. S.G. Esserman, ‘Session 1: Canada and U.S. Approaches to Free Trade Agreements’, 31 Canada-United States Law Journal (2005) p. 11 at p. 16
152. H. Walker, Jr., ‘Modern Treaties of Friendship, Commerce & Navigation’, 42 Minnesota LR (1958) p. 805 at p. 805
153. J.H. Reichman, ‘GATT/WTO Universal Minimum Standards of Intellectual Property Protection under the TRIPS Component of the WTO Agreement’, 29 International Lawyer (1995) p. 345, at p. 388
154. Deere, The Implementation Game: The TRIPS Agreement and the Global Politics of Intellectual Property Reform in Developing Countries (Oxford, OUP 2008) pp. 177-179, 264-265
155. H. Bardehle, ‘A New Approach to Worldwide Harmonization of Patent Law’, 29 International Review of Industrial Property and Copyright Law (1998) p. 876 at pp. 877-878
156. T.W. Blakely, Comment, ‘Beyond the International Harmonization of Trademark Law: The Community Trade Mark as a Model of Unitary Transnational Trademark Protection’, 149 Univ. PA LR (2000) p. 309 at p. 350, fn. 239
157. WCO, Responsibilities: The WCO Strategy, at
158. UNCITRAL, Colloquium on Security Interests in Intellectual Property (Vienna, 18-19 January 2007), at .
159. For a list of UN bodies that deal with IP, see .
160. WHO, Global Strategy and Plan of Action on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property, para. 15, WHO Doc. WHA61.21 (24 May 2008), at
161. R.B. Keiter, ‘Public Lands and Law Reform: Putting Theory, Policy, and Practice in Perspective’, 4 Utah LR (2005) p. 1127 at p. 1211
162. M.C. Dorf and C.F. Sabel, ‘A Constitution of Democratic Experimentalism’, 98 Columbia LR (1998) p. 267 at p. 354
163. W. Kovacic, ‘Antitrust after Microsoft: Upgrading Public Competition Policy Institutions for the New Economy’, 32 University of West Los Angeles Law Review (2001) p. 51 at p. 58.
164. D.C. Esty, ‘Toward Optimal Environmental Governance’, 74 NY Univ. LR (1999) p. 1495 at pp. 1557-1561
165. D.C. Esty and D. Geradin, ‘Regulatory Co-Opetition’, 3 Journal of International Economic Law (2000) p. 235
166. J.P. Trachtman, ‘The Theory of the Firm and the Theory of the International Economic Organization: Toward Comparative Institutional Analysis’, 17 Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business (1996-97) p. 470 at p. 512.