This article examines current academic knowledge regarding the international relations and political science concept of 'global governance' as it has emerged in international law scholarship. The notion of 'global governance' encompasses the broad realm of political interaction aimed at global problem-solving. It includes the United Nations system, its organs and agencies, and the public and private legal institutions, regimes and networks governing relations among states and other actors across state borders.
Non-State actors (NSAs), including business and industry non-governmental organizations (NGOs), lawyers’ NGOs and executives of multinational corporations, have played important roles in shaping international law regulating legal monopolies of intangible interests as intellectual property (IP) rights (IPR). The two global IPR regimes (GIPRRs), the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) and Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs), have emphasized protection of such interests. Civil society NGOs (CS-NGOs) have increasingly engaged with these institutions, adding new dimensions to IP discourse. This paper investigates NSA involvement in developing the concept of IP and the GIPRRs themselves and contemporary NSA participatory rights and practices in both regimes. It offers a normative analysis of the future outlook of NSA influence, including potential impacts of increasing CS-NGO participation, assimilation of UN values, and influence of the history of IPR on the development and applicability of the concept of ‘public participation’ to the GIPRRs.
elsewhere. A significant contribution made by the collection, most clearly provided by David Luban, is a rejection of the argument that there is a 'trade-off' between liberty and security. 11 Moreover, as is illustrated by Neil Hicks, counter-terrorism measures not only impact on individuals living in 'liberal' States but also encourage widespread repressive policies elsewhere. 12 Two essays discuss whether the war in Iraq could be viewed as a 'humanitarian intervention' but both fail to take into account the questionable legal entitlement to take such action. 13 Nor is the fact that the human rights argument was introduced as a later rationalization of the legality of the war, as is pointed by the editor himself, satisfactorily dealt with. 14 There are many noteworthy contributions within this volume that would be of value to anyone who is interested in the subject.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.