Global Governance and the Creative Economy: The Developing Versus Developed Country Dichotomy Revisited

R. Neuwirth
{"title":"Global Governance and the Creative Economy: The Developing Versus Developed Country Dichotomy Revisited","authors":"R. Neuwirth","doi":"10.3968/J.FLR.1929663020130101.179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The past century has seen drastic changes, and the pace with which these changes occur still appears to be accelerating. It is not only us as individuals who have difficulties in following these perceptual processes and in finding the appropriate conceptual responses and actions. The international legal and institutional framework put in place by previous generations equally seems no longer to be capable of providing the efficient responses needed to tackle the imminent global challenges and to secure a sustainable development in the future. Put briefly and more generally, the gap between our perceptual processes and the corresponding conceptual responses is widening. As a result, it appears that the perennial paradoxical struggle between continuity and change, which underlies the fundamental problem of preserving the integrity of the law, has reached a new level. As a paradox, it is in view of the absence of a global platform on which a truly global debate on the future of our societies can unfold that we need first to find a commonly shared vocabulary of concepts. Such shared vocabulary helps both to establish a global forum and to frame the debate, because the procedural aspects and the substantive arguments are intrinsically linked. This also means a twofold task, namely to coin new concepts that better encompass our present perceptions, and to abandon those which no longer suit them. In positive terms, the present article therefore advocates the joint use of the novel concepts of “global governance” and the “creative economy” while, in negative terms, calls for the abandonment of the widely used “developed versus developing country” dichotomy. Global governance and the creative economy are chosen for their special features related to paradoxical modes of thinking, better to encompass change and the accelerating modes of the perception of that change. They both seem to be better suited to the complex realities that we draw up through the perceptions generated by our various sensory instruments. By contrast, the “developed versus developing country” dichotomy serves as an example of the outdated mode of [a] Mag. iur. (University of Graz), LL.M. (McGill), Ph.D. (EUI), Associate Professor, Faculty of Law,","PeriodicalId":375754,"journal":{"name":"Public International Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public International Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3968/J.FLR.1929663020130101.179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

The past century has seen drastic changes, and the pace with which these changes occur still appears to be accelerating. It is not only us as individuals who have difficulties in following these perceptual processes and in finding the appropriate conceptual responses and actions. The international legal and institutional framework put in place by previous generations equally seems no longer to be capable of providing the efficient responses needed to tackle the imminent global challenges and to secure a sustainable development in the future. Put briefly and more generally, the gap between our perceptual processes and the corresponding conceptual responses is widening. As a result, it appears that the perennial paradoxical struggle between continuity and change, which underlies the fundamental problem of preserving the integrity of the law, has reached a new level. As a paradox, it is in view of the absence of a global platform on which a truly global debate on the future of our societies can unfold that we need first to find a commonly shared vocabulary of concepts. Such shared vocabulary helps both to establish a global forum and to frame the debate, because the procedural aspects and the substantive arguments are intrinsically linked. This also means a twofold task, namely to coin new concepts that better encompass our present perceptions, and to abandon those which no longer suit them. In positive terms, the present article therefore advocates the joint use of the novel concepts of “global governance” and the “creative economy” while, in negative terms, calls for the abandonment of the widely used “developed versus developing country” dichotomy. Global governance and the creative economy are chosen for their special features related to paradoxical modes of thinking, better to encompass change and the accelerating modes of the perception of that change. They both seem to be better suited to the complex realities that we draw up through the perceptions generated by our various sensory instruments. By contrast, the “developed versus developing country” dichotomy serves as an example of the outdated mode of [a] Mag. iur. (University of Graz), LL.M. (McGill), Ph.D. (EUI), Associate Professor, Faculty of Law,
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
全球治理与创意经济:发展中国家与发达国家的二分法重新审视
过去的一个世纪发生了巨大的变化,而且这些变化的速度似乎还在加快。不仅仅是我们个人在遵循这些知觉过程和找到适当的概念反应和行动方面有困难。前几代人所建立的国际法律和体制框架似乎同样不再能够提供应付迫在眉睫的全球挑战和确保未来可持续发展所需的有效反应。简而言之,我们的感知过程和相应的概念反应之间的差距正在扩大。结果,作为维护法律完整性这一根本问题的基础的持续与变化之间的长期矛盾斗争似乎达到了一个新的水平。作为一个悖论,鉴于缺乏一个全球平台,在这个平台上可以展开关于我们社会未来的真正全球辩论,我们首先需要找到一个共同的概念词汇。这种共同的词汇既有助于建立一个全球论坛,也有助于形成辩论的框架,因为程序方面和实质性论点是内在联系的。这也意味着一项双重任务,即创造更好地包含我们当前感知的新概念,并抛弃那些不再适合我们的概念。因此,从积极的角度来看,本文提倡联合使用“全球治理”和“创意经济”的新概念,而从消极的角度来看,则呼吁放弃广泛使用的“发达国家与发展中国家”的二分法。之所以选择全球治理和创意经济,是因为它们与矛盾的思维模式相关的特点,更好地涵盖了变化和对这种变化的感知的加速模式。它们似乎都更适合于我们通过各种感官工具产生的感知来描绘的复杂现实。相比之下,“发达国家与发展中国家”的二分法是[a] magiur的过时模式的一个例子。(格拉茨大学),法学硕士(麦吉尔大学),博士(欧盟大学),法学院副教授,
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Dual‐Nature Thesis: Which Dualism? Legality and the Legal Relation Soldiers as Public Officials: A Moral Justification for Combatant Immunity A Pragmatic Reconstruction of Law's Claim to Authority Ownership, Use, and Exclusivity: The Kantian Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1