Transnational market governance and regional policy externality: why recognize foreign standards?

Nicolaïdis, Kalypso; Egan, Michelle

doi:10.1080/13501760110056068

Cited by 42 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Genschel and Plümper 1997;Mattli and Büthe 2003;Nicolaïdis and Egan 2001). The importance of regulation for financial stability makes a hard 'cut' between intra-European and extra-European policy impossible in the face of global market integration.…”

Section: The European Presence In Multi-level Financial Governancementioning

confidence: 98%

The European presence in global financial governance: a principal–agent perspective

Mügge¹

2011

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Europe is a heavyweight in global finance. But does it have a presence in global financial governance to match? This paper employs a principal -agent approach to analyse patterns of policy-making delegation in the EU to explore this question. It finds a U-shaped relationship between the extent of delegation and the 'European presence' in global financial governance: when member states either remain in control of policy or delegate extensive competencies, European stakeholders are well represented. In contrast, intermediate levels of delegation can undermine the European presence by tying member states' hands without sufficiently empowering supranational agents to fill the gap. Patterns of delegation are traced to the heterogeneity of member state interests and the pre-existence of international governance arrangements. These arguments about the origins and consequences of delegation patterns are supported by evidence from three core domains of financial governance: banking regulation; accounting standards; and capital market regulation.

show abstract

Section: The European Presence In Multi-level Financial Governancementioning

confidence: 98%

The European presence in global financial governance: a principal–agent perspective

Mügge¹

2011

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, recognition -at least as it relates to international relations (IR) -is always about granting extra-territorial jurisdiction to the acts of states (or bodies with delegated public authority), be they policies, regulations or laws and the ways in which states may help each other in enforcing these acts. The object of recognition is always embedded in a system of state practices (Nicolaïdis 1997;Nicolaïdis and Egan 2001).…”

Section: From Plumbers To Refugees: Recognition As Embeddedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It must be noted here that only by migrating from the judicial to the legislative arena is it possible to spell out the full panoply of instruments for the management of recognition, which I have described elsewhere as the attributes of recognition (Nicolaïdis 1993(Nicolaïdis , 1997(Nicolaïdis , 2005a. 1 Therefore, while it is important to analyse the role of the rulings of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the European story of mutual recognition, it is also true that all the Court could do when it came to designing this more sophisticated understanding of the principle was to provide a road map for politicians and technical experts later drafting the laws (Nicolaïdis 1993;Nicolaïdis and Egan 2001).…”

Section: Introducing Managed Mutual Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trusting the Poles? Constructing Europe through mutual recognition

Nicolaïdis¹

2007

Journal of European Public Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European integration has been and will continue to be flawed with conflicts, conflicts of interests embedded in broader conflicts of identity. I argue that these conflicts and the bargains they require exhibit similar patterns across a wide array of issues, as struggaes around 'mutual' recognition where mutuality plays a crucial role. Indeed, the challenges and perils of recognition are universal. But Europe can be seen as an experimental polity where, more formally than elsewhere, actors debate the contours of a norm which has migrated from regulatory praxis to mode of governance, and beyond, to political principle. If the 'Polish plumber' has come to serve as the emblem for the denial of recognition in the EU, mutual recognition is no less conflictual when it comes to the status of refugees, Bosnians or cartoonists. Normatively, if 'managed mutual recognition' is to serve as a blueprint beyond international political economy, we need to better analyse the relationship between recognition and trust, blind and binding trust, deferential and interventionist recognition.

show abstract

“…The EU's 'power in trade' is well known to trade experts (Meunier and Nicolaïdis, 2006). The size of the EU's internal market often leads to the adjustment of economic policies in other countries or regions (Nicolaïdis and Egan, 2001; see also Damro, 2012). For example, many countries around the world reacted to the deepening of European integration with the Single Market programme in the late 1980s and early 1990s by engaging in or deepening economic integration among themselves (Oye, 1992).…”

Section: Locating Normative Power In the World Of Diffusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

EU normative power and regionalism: Ideational diffusion and its limits

Lenz¹

2013

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ideational impact captured by Manners’s notion of normative power Europe (NPE) appears most distinct and potentially most consequential in the realm of regionalism. However, empirical research on the topic has been hampered by the focus on EU actorness and methodological difficulties. Drawing on diffusion theory, this article develops conceptual, theoretical and methodological foundations for conceiving NPE as ideational diffusion. It argues that Europe’s ideational influence on regionalism can be fruitfully understood as the largely indirect process by which the EU experience travels to other regions through socialization and emulation. Yet, as structural conditions vary across regions, EU ideational diffusion rarely leads to similar or even comparable institutional practices and outcomes. A choice-orientated approach is proposed for examining these claims empirically, which focuses on specifying the underlying counterfactual: political decisions in regionalism would have been different in the absence of the EU. The article concludes by outlining the analytical and normative promise of the proposed recasting of Manners’s original concept.

show abstract

Transnational market governance and regional policy externality: why recognize foreign standards?

Cited by 42 publications

References 6 publications

The European presence in global financial governance: a principal–agent perspective

The European presence in global financial governance: a principal–agent perspective

Trusting the Poles? Constructing Europe through mutual recognition

EU normative power and regionalism: Ideational diffusion and its limits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About