A theory of emerging order within institutional complexes: How competition among regulatory international institutions leads to institutional adaptation and division of labor

Review of International Organizations

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 471-498

  Gehring, Thomas ^a   Faude, Benjamin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BAMBERG   (Germany)

^b WZB BERLIN SOCIAL SCIENCE CENTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cartagena Protocol; Institutional complexes; Institutional fragmentation; International institutions; Regime complexes; World Trade Organization

Indexed keywords

EID: 84939897806     PISSN: 15597431     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11558-014-9197-1     Document Type: Article

References (118)

1. Abbott, F. M. (1997). The future of the multilateral trading system in the context of TRIPS. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, 20, 661–682.
2. Abbott, F. M. (2000). Distributed governance at the WTO-WIPO: An evolving model for open-architecture integrated governance. Journal of International Economic Law, 3(1), 63–81.
3. Abbott, F. M., & Reichmann, J. H. (2007). The Doha Round’s public health legacy. Strategies for the production and diffusion of patented medicines under the amended TRIPS provisions. Journal of International Economic Law, 10(4), 921–987.
4. Abbott, K. W., Green, J. F., & Keohane, R. O. (2013). Organizational ecology and organizational strategies in world politics. Discussion Paper 2013–57. Cambridge: Harvard Project on Climate Agreements.
5. Afonso, M. (2002). The relationship with other agreements. An EU perspective. In C. Bail, R. Falkner, & H. Marquard (Eds.), The Cartagena Protocol on biosafety: reconciling trade in biotechnology with environment and development? (pp. 423–436). London: RIIA/Earthscan.
6. Aggarwal, V. K. (1998). Reconciling multiple institutions: Bargaining, linkages, and nesting. In V. K. Aggarwal (Ed.), Institutional designs for a complex world: Bargaining, linkages, and nesting (pp. 1–31). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
7. Alcock, F. (2011). UNCLOS, property rights, and effective fisheries management. The dynamics of vertical interplay. In S. Oberthür & O. S. Stokke (Eds.), Managing institutional complexity. Regime interplay and global environmental change (pp. 255–283). Cambridge: MIT Press.
8. Aldrich, H. (1999). Organizations evolving. London: Sage.
9. Alter, K. J., & Meunier, S. (2009). The politics of regime complexity. Perspectives on Politics, 7(1), 13–24.
10. Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.
11. Axelrod, R. (1997). The complexity of cooperation: Agent-based models of cooperation and competition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
12. Bail, C., Falkner, R., & Marquard, H. (Eds.). (2002). The Cartagena Protocol on biosafety: Reconciling trade in biotechnology with environment and development? London: RIIA/Earthscan.
13. Bartels, L., & Ortino, F. (Eds.). (2006). Regional trade agreements and the WTO legal system. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Baum, J. A. C., & Amburgey, T. L. (2002). Organizational ecology. In J. A. C. Baum (Ed.), Blackwell companion to organizations (pp. 304–326). Malden: Blackwell Publishers.
15. Benvenisti, E., & Downs, G. W. (2007). The empire’s new clothes. Political economy and the fragmentation of international law. Stanford Law Review, 60(2), 595–631.
16. Biermann, F., Padberg, P., van Asselt, H., & Zelli, F. (2009). The fragmentation of global governance architectures. A framework for analysis. Global Environmental Politics, 9(4), 14–40.
17. Braithwaite, J., & Drahos, P. (2000). Global business regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Busch, M. L. (2007). Overlapping institutions, forum shopping, and dispute settlement in international trade. International Organization, 61(4), 735–761.
19. Buzan, B., & Albert, M. (2010). Differentiation. A sociological approach to international relations theory. European Journal of International Relations, 16(3), 315–337.
20. Caron, D. (1995). The International Whaling Commission and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission: the institutional risks of coercion for consensual structures. American Journal of international Law, 89(1), 154–174.
21. Carroll, G. R., & Hannan, M. T. (1989). Density dependence in the evolution of populations of newspaper organizations. American Sociological Review, 54(4), 524–541.
22. Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University.
23. Colgan, J., Keohane, R. O., & van de Graaf, T. (2012). Punctuated equilibrium in the energy regime complex. Review of International Organizations, 7(2), 117–143.
24. Davis, C. L. (2003). Food fights over free trade. How international institutions promote agricultural trade liberalization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
25. Davis, C. L. (2009). Overlapping institutions in trade policy. Perspectives on Politics, 7(1), 25–31.
26. Drahos, P. (2001). BITs and BIPs. Bilateralism in intellectual property. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 4(6), 791–808.
27. Drahos, P. (2002). Developing countries and international intellectual property standard-setting. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 5(5), 765–789.
28. Drezner, D. (2007). All politics is global. Explaining international regulatory regimes. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
29. Drezner, D. (2008). Two challenges to institutionalism. In A. S. Alexandroff (Ed.), Can the world be governed? Possibilities for effective multilateralism (pp. 139–159). Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
30. Drezner, D. (2009). The power and peril of international regime complexity. Perspectives on Politics, 7(1), 65–70.
31. Drezner, D. (2013). The tragedy of the global institutional commons. In M. Finnemore, J. Goldstein, & J. Goldstein (Eds.), Back to Basics. State power in a contemporary world (pp. 280–310). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32. Eckersley, R. (2004). The big chill: The WTO and multilateral environmental agreements. Global Environmental Politics, 4(2), 24–50.
33. Eggers, B., & Mackenzie, R. (2000). The Cartagena Protocol on biosafety. Journal of International Economic Law, 3(3), 525–543.
34. Enright, C. A. (2002). United States. In C. Bail, R. Falkner, & H. Marquard (Eds.), The Cartagena Protocol on biosafety: Reconciling trade in biotechnology with environment and development? (pp. 95–104). London: RIIA/Earthscan.
35. Falkner, R. (2000). Regulating biotech trade: The Cartagena Protocol on biosafety. International Affairs, 76(2), 299–313.
36. Falkner, R. (2002). Negotiating the biosafety protocol: The international process. In C. Bail, R. Falkner, & H. Marquard (Eds.), The Cartagena Protocol on biosafety: Reconciling trade in biotechnology with environment and development? (pp. 3–22). London: RIIA/Earthscan.
37. Falkner, R., & Gupta, A. (2009). The limits of regulatory convergence: Globalization and GMO politics in the south. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 9(2), 113–133.
38. Frey, B. S. (2008). Outside and inside competition for international organizations—from analysis to innovations. Review of International Organizations, 3(4), 335–350.
39. Gehring, T. (1994). Dynamic international regimes. Institutions for international environmental governance. Frankfurt/M: Lang.
40. Gehring, T. (2011). The emerging governance structure on trade and the environment: From disruption to division of labor. In S. Oberthür & O. S. Stokke (Eds.), Managing institutional complexity. Regime interplay and global environmental change (pp. 227–244). Cambridge: MIT Press.
41. Gehring, T., & Faude, B. (2013). The dynamics of regime complexes. Microfoundations and systemic effects. Global Governance, 19(1), 119–130.
42. Gehring, T., & Oberthür, S. (2009). The causal mechanisms of interaction between international institutions. European Journal of International Relations, 15(1), 125–156.
43. Gupta, A. (2008). Global biosafety governance: Emergence and evolution. In O. R. Young (Ed.), Institutional interplay: Biosafety and trade (pp. 19–46). Tokyo: United Nations University.
44. Gupta, A., & Falkner, R. (2006). The influence of the Cartagena Protocol on biosafety: Comparing Mexico, China and South Africa. Global Environmental Politics, 6(4), 23–55.
45. Hannan, M. T., & Carroll, G. R. (1992). Dynamics of organizational populations. New York: Oxford University Press.
46. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1989). Organizational ecology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
47. Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (2006). Delegation and Agency in International Organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
48. Helfer, L. R. (2004). Regime shifting: The TRIPS agreement and new dynamics of international intellectual property lawmaking. Yale Journal of International Law, 29(1), 1–83.
49. Helfer, L. R. (2009). Regime shifting in the international intellectual property system. Perspectives on Politics, 7(01), 39–44.
50. Heupel, M. (2009). Multilateral sanctions against terror suspects and the violation of due process standards. International Affairs, 85(2), 307–321.
51. Hofmann, S. (2009). Overlapping institutions in the realm of international security: The case of NATO and ESDP. Perspectives on Politics, 7(1), 45–52.
52. Hofmann, S. C. (2011). Why institutional overlap matters: CSDP in the European security architecture. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 49(1), 101–120.
53. Howse, R. L., & Horn, H. (2009). European communities–measures affecting the approval and marketing of biotech products. World Trade Review, 8(1), 49–83.
54. Jacquemont, F., & Caparrós, A. (2002). The convention on biological diversity and the climate change convention 10 years after Rio: Towards a synergy of the two regimes. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, 11(2), 139–180.
55. Johnson, T., & Urpelainen, J. (2012). A strategic theory of regime integration and separation. International Organization, 66(4), 645–677.
56. Jupille, J., Mattli, W., & Snidal, D. (2013). Institutional choice and global commerce. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
57. Keohane, R. O. (1984). After Hegemony. Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
58. Keohane, R. O., & Victor, D. G. (2011). The regime complex for climate change. Perspectives on Politics, 9(1), 7–23.
59. Koremenos, B., Lipson, C. H., & Snidal, D. (2001). The rational design of international institutions. International Organization, 55(4), 761–799.
60. Krasner, S. D. (1982). Structural causes and regime consequences: Regimes as intervening variables. International Organization, 36(2), 185–205.
61. Lieberman, S., & Gray, T. (2008). The World Trade Organization’s report on the EU’s moratorium on biotech products: The wisdom of the US challenge to the EU in the WTO. Global Environmental Politics, 8(1), 33–52.
62. Matthews, D. (2004). WTO decision on implementation of paragraph 6 of the Doha declaration on the TRIPS agreement and public health: A solution to the access to medicines problem? Journal of International Economic Law, 7(1), 73–107.
63. Mattli, W., & Büthe, T. (2003). Setting international standards: technological rationality or primacy of power. World Politics, 56(1), 1–42.
64. Morin, J. F. (2009). Multilateralizing TRIPs-Plus agreements: is the US strategy a failure? Journal of World Intellectual Property, 12(4), 175–197.
65. Morin, J. F., & Gold, R. E. (2010). Consensus-seeking, distrust and rhetorical entrapment. The WTO decision on access to medicines. European Journal of International Relations, 16(4), 563–587.
66. Morin, J. F., & Orsini, A. (2014). Policy coherency and regime complexes. The case of genetic resources. Review of International Studies, 40(2), 303–324.
67. Morse, J. C. & Keohane, R. O. (2014). Contested multilateralism. The Review of International Organizations, Published online: 23 March 2014.
68. Muzaka, V. (2011). Linkages, contests and overlaps in the global intellectual property rights regime. European Journal of International Relations, 17(4), 755–776.
69. Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (2003). Delegation to international organizations: agency theory and world bank environmental reform. International Organization, 57(2), 241–276.
70. Oberthür, S. (2003). Institutional interaction to address greenhouse gas emissions from international transport: ICAO, IMO and the Kyoto Protocol. Climate Policy, 3(3), 191–205.
71. Oberthür, S., & Gehring, T. (2006). Institutional interaction in global environmental governance: The case of the Cartagena Protocol and the World Trade Organization. Global Environmental Politics, 6(2), 1–31.
72. Oberthür, S., & Pozarowska, J. (2013). Managing institutional complexity and fragmentation: The Nagoya protocol and the global governance of genetic resources. Global Environmental Politics, 13(3), 100–118.
73. Oberthür, S., & Stokke, O. S. (2011). Institutional interaction and global environmental change: Interplay management and institutional complexes. Cambridge: MIT Press.
74. Oberthür, S., Dupont, C., & Matsumoto, Y. (2011). Managing policy contradictions between the Montreal and Kyoto protocols: The case of fluorinated greenhouse gases. In S. Oberthür & O. Schram Stokke (Eds.), Managing institutional complexity: Regime interplay and global environmental change (pp. 115–141). Cambridge: MIT Press.
75. Odell, J. S., & Sell, S. K. (2006). Reframing the issue. The WTO coalition on intellectual property and public health, 2001. In J. S. Odell (Ed.), Negotiating trade. Developing countries in the WTO and NAFTA (pp. 85–113). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
76. Orsini, A. (2013). Multi-forum non-state actors: Navigating the regime complexes for forestry and genetic resources. Global Environmental Politics, 13(3), 34–55.
77. Orsini, A., Morin, J. F., & Young, O. R. (2013). Regime complexes. A buzz, a boom, or a boost for global governance. Global Governance, 19(1), 27–39.
78. Pollack, M. A., & Shaffer, G. S. (2009). When cooperation fails: The international law and politics of genetically modified foods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
79. Princen, S. (2006). Govering through multiple forums. The global safety regulation of genetically modified crops and foods. In M. Koenig-Archibugi & M. Zürn (Eds.), New modes of governance in the global system: Exploring publicness, delegation and inclusiveness (pp. 52–76). Houndsmill: Palgrave.
80. Raustiala, K. (2013). Institutional proliferation and the international legal order. In J. L. Dunoff & M. A. Pollack (Eds.), Interdisciplinary perspectives on international law and international relations: The state of the art (pp. 293–320). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
81. Raustiala, K., & Victor, D. G. (2004). The regime complex for plant genetic resources. International Organization, 58(2), 277–309.
82. Rhinard, M., & Kaeding, M. (2006). The international bargaining power of the European Union in “mixed” competence negotiations: the case of the 2000 Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. Journal of Common Market Studies, 44(5), 1024–1050.
83. Rosendal, K. (2001). Impacts of overlapping international regimes: The case of biodiversity. Global Governance, 7(1), 95–117.
84. Safrin, S. (2002). Treaties in collision? The biosafety protocol and the World Trade Organization agreements. American Journal of International Law, 96(3), 606–628.
85. Sand, P. H. (1997). Commodity or taboo? International regulation of trade in endangered species. Green Globe Yearbook of International Co-operation and Development, 4, 19–36.
86. Schelling, T. C. (1960). The strategy of conflict. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
87. Schneider, C. J., & Urpelainen, J. (2013). Distributional conflict between powerful states and international treaty ratification. International Studies Quarterly, 57(1), 13–27.
88. Schroeder, H. (2008). Analysing biosafety and trade through the lens of institutional interplay. In O. R. Young, L. A. King, & H. Schroeder (Eds.), Institutions and Environmental Change. Principal Findings, Applications, and Research Frontiers (pp. 49–70). Cambridge: MIT Press.
89. Sell, S. K. (1998). Power and ideas. North–south politics of intellectual property and antitrust. Albany: State University of New York Press.
90. Sell, S. K. (2003). Private power, public law. The globalization of intellectual property rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
91. Shadlen, K. C. (2007). The political economy of aids treatment: Intellectual property and the transformation of generic supply. International Studies Quarterly, 51(3), 559–581.
92. Smith, A. (1964). The wealth of nations (Vol. 1). New York: Every Man’s Library.
93. Snidal, D. (1985). Coordination versus prisoners’ dilemma: Implications for international cooperation and regimes. American Political Science Review, 79(4), 932–942.
94. Struett, M. J., Nance, M. T., & Armstrong, D. (2013). Navigating the maritime piracy regime complex. Global Governance, 19(1), 93–104.
95. Sugden, R. (1989). Spontaneous order. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3(4), 85–97.
96. Sun, H. (2004). The road to Doha and beyond: Some reflections on the TRIPS Agreement and public health. European Journal of International Law, 15(1), 123–150.
97. t’Hoen, E.F.M. (2003). TRIPS, pharmaceutical patents and access to essential medicines: Seattle, Doha and beyond. In J. P. Moatti, B. Coriat, Y. Souteyrand, T. Barnett, J. Dumoulin & Y. Flori (Eds.), Economics of AIDS and access to HIV-Care. Issues and challenges for developing countries (pp. 40–68). Lyon: Editions de l’ANRS.
98. Tsebelis, G. (1990). Nested games. Rational choice in comparative politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
99. Underdal, A., & Young, O. R. (2004). Research strategies for the future. In A. Underdal & O. R. Young (Eds.), Regime consequences: Methodological challenges and research strategies (pp. 361–380). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
100. van de Graaf, T. (2013). Fragmentation in global energy governance. Explaining the creation of Irena. Global Environmental Politics, 13(3), 14–33.
101. Victor, D. G. (2000). The sanitary and phytosanitary agreement of the World Trade Organization: An assessment after five years. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 32(4), 865–937.
102. Vogel, D. (2003). The hare and the tortoise revisited: The new politics of consumer and environmental regulation in Europe. British Journal of Political Science, 33(04), 557–580.
103. WHO (2001). Globalization, TRIPS and access to pharmaceuticals. WHO Policy Perspectives on Medicines, 3.
104. Winham, G. (2003). International regime conflict in trade and environment: The biosafety protocol and the WTO. World Trade Review, 2(2), 131–155.
105. Wirth, D. (1998). Trade implications of the Basel convention amendment banning north–south trade in hazardous wastes. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, 7(3), 237–248.
106. Wolfrum, R., & Matz, N. (2003). Conflicts in international environmental law. Berlin: Springer.
107. WTO (2000). Dispute panel report on United States—Section 110(5) of the U.S. Copyright Act. WTO Doc. WT/DS160/R.
108. WTO (2001). Declaration on the TRIPS agreement and public health. WTO-Doc. WT/MIN(01)/DEC 2.
109. WTO (2003). Implementation of paragraph 6 of the Doha declaration on the TRIPS agreement and public health. WTO-Doc. WT/L/540.
110. WTO (2005). Amendment of the TRIPS Agreement. WTO-Doc. WT/L/641.
111. WTO (2006). Panel Report. European Communities – Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products. September 29. WTO-Doc. WT/DS291/R.
112. Young, O. R. (1996). Institutional linkages in international society: Polar perspectives. Global Governance, 2(1), 1–24.
113. Young, Z. (2002). A new green order? The World Bank and the politics of the Global Environment Facility. London: Pluto Press.
114. Zarilli, S. (2005). International trade in GMOs and GM products: National and multilateral legal frameworks. Policy Issues in Trade and Commodities Studies Series No. 29. New York and Geneva: United Nations.
115. Zelli, F. (2007). The World Trade Organization. Free trade and its environmental impacts. In K. V. Thai, D. Rahm, & J. D. Coggburn (Eds.), Handbook of globalization and the environment (pp. 174–216). New York: CRC Press.
116. Zelli, F., & van Asselt, H. (2013). Introduction: The institutional fragmentation of global environmental governance – causes, consequences and responses. Global Environmental Politics, 13(3), 1–13.
117. Zelli, F., Gupta, A., & van Asselt, H. (2013). Institutional interactions at the crossroads of trade and environment: The dominance of liberal environmentalism? Global Governance, 19(1), 105–118.
118. Zürn, M. (2010). Global governance as multi-level governance. In H. Enderlein, S. Wälti, & M. Zürn (Eds.), Handbook on multi-level governance (pp. 80–99). Celtenham: Edward Elgar.