The Role of the State in the Exercise of Transnational Public and Private Authority over Labour Standards

J. Diller
{"title":"The Role of the State in the Exercise of Transnational Public and Private Authority over Labour Standards","authors":"J. Diller","doi":"10.1163/15723747-01701003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interdependence among States in an era of globalization exacerbates the increasing emphasis on competing claims of national interest in the global arena. Rising nationalism is a symptom of the weakness of conception of transnational governance that insufficiently coordinates public and private interactions across multiple systems of governance which overlap on matters of common interest such as labour standards. The State-centric system of world governance lacks effective structures to bridge the gap between transnational labour governance (‘TLG’) and national, interstate, and international governance. However, emerging evidence suggests that the State is capable of facilitating inclusive and consensual action with non-state bodies of collective interest at national and transnational levels that helps connect TLG with national and international governance. This review compares differing degrees and methods of State action in selected TLG prototypes and their outcomes relevant to public and private policy choices affecting decent work and equal opportunity for well-being. Particular focus is placed on the State’s role in attributing private authority to non-state bodies of collective interest, facilitating consensual decision-making and regulatory action, aligning TLG with international norms and relevant national law and institutions, and cooperating in TLG with other States, including with or through international organizations. Challenges to effective TLG, such as opting-out, competing structures, and difficulty in leveraging short-term initiatives for longer-term capacity, are examined within the context of the legitimacy and coherence of TLG systems and across phases of governance, including agenda setting, norm development, implementation, oversight, evaluation, correction and revision. Preliminary conclusions call for further theoretical and empirical research to evaluate factors that influence such innovations and the extent to which they lead to durable and effective TLG within and across States that advances decent work and equal opportunity for well-being in globalized markets.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"41-74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/15723747-01701003","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Organizations Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-01701003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Interdependence among States in an era of globalization exacerbates the increasing emphasis on competing claims of national interest in the global arena. Rising nationalism is a symptom of the weakness of conception of transnational governance that insufficiently coordinates public and private interactions across multiple systems of governance which overlap on matters of common interest such as labour standards. The State-centric system of world governance lacks effective structures to bridge the gap between transnational labour governance (‘TLG’) and national, interstate, and international governance. However, emerging evidence suggests that the State is capable of facilitating inclusive and consensual action with non-state bodies of collective interest at national and transnational levels that helps connect TLG with national and international governance. This review compares differing degrees and methods of State action in selected TLG prototypes and their outcomes relevant to public and private policy choices affecting decent work and equal opportunity for well-being. Particular focus is placed on the State’s role in attributing private authority to non-state bodies of collective interest, facilitating consensual decision-making and regulatory action, aligning TLG with international norms and relevant national law and institutions, and cooperating in TLG with other States, including with or through international organizations. Challenges to effective TLG, such as opting-out, competing structures, and difficulty in leveraging short-term initiatives for longer-term capacity, are examined within the context of the legitimacy and coherence of TLG systems and across phases of governance, including agenda setting, norm development, implementation, oversight, evaluation, correction and revision. Preliminary conclusions call for further theoretical and empirical research to evaluate factors that influence such innovations and the extent to which they lead to durable and effective TLG within and across States that advances decent work and equal opportunity for well-being in globalized markets.
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
国家在对劳工标准行使跨国公共和私人权力方面的作用
在全球化时代,各国之间的相互依存加剧了在全球舞台上日益强调国家利益的相互竞争。不断上升的民族主义是跨国治理概念薄弱的一个症状,这种概念未能充分协调跨多个治理体系的公共和私人互动,这些体系在劳工标准等共同利益问题上存在重叠。以国家为中心的世界治理体系缺乏有效的结构来弥合跨国劳工治理与国家、州际和国际治理之间的差距。然而,新出现的证据表明,国家有能力促进与具有集体利益的非国家机构在国家和跨国层面采取包容和协商一致的行动,帮助将TLG与国家和国际治理联系起来。本综述比较了选定的TLG原型中国家行动的不同程度和方法,以及与影响体面工作和平等福利机会的公共和私人政策选择相关的结果。特别侧重于国家在以下方面的作用:将私人权力赋予具有集体利益的非国家机构,促进协商一致的决策和监管行动,使TLG符合国际规范和相关的国家法律和机构,以及与其他国家,包括与国际组织或通过国际组织在TLG方面进行合作。有效的TLG面临的挑战,如选择退出、竞争结构以及利用短期倡议促进长期能力的困难,将在TLG系统的合法性和一致性以及治理的各个阶段(包括议程设置、规范制定、实施、监督、评估、纠正和修订)的背景下进行审查。初步结论要求进行进一步的理论和实证研究,以评估影响这种创新的因素,以及它们在多大程度上导致国家内部和国家之间持久和有效的TLG,从而在全球化市场中促进体面工作和平等的福祉机会。
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
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: After the Second World War in particular, the law of international organizations developed as a discipline within public international law. Separate, but not separable. The International Organizations Law Review purports to function as a discussion forum for academics and practitioners active in the field of the law of international organizations. It is based on two pillars; one is based in the world of scholarship, the other in the world of practice. In the first dimension, the Journal focuses on general developments in international institutional law.
期刊最新文献
Constructing African Union Law and Rethinking Supranationalism in African Integration: What Lessons from the European Union? The Freedom of Association as Seen by the International Administrative Tribunals Positive Duties of the Security Council Under the UN Charter and International Law Forty Years of Cooperation in South Asia: A Legal Appraisal of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (saarc) The Nordic Investment Bank: The Evolution of an International Institution
×
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