Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.1163/15723747-20010002
C. Brölmann
Against the backdrop of a recent turn to theory in the field of international organizations law this short article, part of the Special Forum on Contested Fundamentals of the Law of International Organizations, brings to the fore a characteristic of the international organization that should not be missing in the canon of fundamentals in international organizations scholarship. This is the transparency of international organizations as a legal entity and as a legal actor. ‘Transparency’ here refers to the phenomenon that member states and other institutional components are to some extent legally visible. ‘Legally visible’ means that the component parts of an organization, notably the member states, are addressed from, and involved in, the general international plane – a condition which is dynamic and context-dependent. In the words of the ila, organizations are layered creatures, ‘conducting … multilevel operations’. The article sets out how the transparency of organizations is a fundamental in two ways: as a legal-ontological claim, and as an analytical lens. Moreover the transparency of international organizations is subject to systemic and political contestation, albeit often in an implicit manner. The article concludes by arguing that the lens of transparency has lasting relevance and analytical value, as it helps to lay bare an elusive and continual dynamic in the legal manifestation of international organizations.
{"title":"Transparency as a Contested Fundamental in the Law of International Organizations","authors":"C. Brölmann","doi":"10.1163/15723747-20010002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-20010002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Against the backdrop of a recent turn to theory in the field of international organizations law this short article, part of the Special Forum on Contested Fundamentals of the Law of International Organizations, brings to the fore a characteristic of the international organization that should not be missing in the canon of fundamentals in international organizations scholarship. This is the transparency of international organizations as a legal entity and as a legal actor. ‘Transparency’ here refers to the phenomenon that member states and other institutional components are to some extent legally visible. ‘Legally visible’ means that the component parts of an organization, notably the member states, are addressed from, and involved in, the general international plane – a condition which is dynamic and context-dependent. In the words of the ila, organizations are layered creatures, ‘conducting … multilevel operations’. The article sets out how the transparency of organizations is a fundamental in two ways: as a legal-ontological claim, and as an analytical lens. Moreover the transparency of international organizations is subject to systemic and political contestation, albeit often in an implicit manner. The article concludes by arguing that the lens of transparency has lasting relevance and analytical value, as it helps to lay bare an elusive and continual dynamic in the legal manifestation of international organizations.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42745737","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.1163/15723747-20010004
M. Buscemi
The article aims to discuss the most recent practice of institutional sanctions in light of contested fundamentals of the law of International Organizations (ios). The analysis delves, in particular, into sanctions adopted by ios having technical mandates in situations of wider political disputes among members, concerning international peace and security issues, amidst the United Nations (UN) Security Council’s failure to take coercive measures under Chapter vii of the UN Charter. Of special interest is the suspension of membership rights and privileges which some technical ios have deliberated following the conflict in Syria and the undergoing war in Ukraine (para. 2). These instances offer a test bed to challenge the fundamental theoretical paradigm of the law of ios, that is functionalism, and to extract some ambiguities underlying the essence of ios, revealing the continuous oscillation between policy and technocracy, which is endemic to the institutional life of every io and is well reflected in the different attitudes of the members and the Secretariats. The article highlights, in particular, the tension between politics and law that emerges from the adoption of sanctions by ios endowed with highly technical tasks (para. 3), the invocation of the ‘politicisation’ mantra by the targeted member to oppose the application of the privative measures (para. 4), and the ambivalent use of functionalist ‘language’ within the reacting io (para. 5). The article concludes with some final remarks on the ‘strategic’ use of ios (para. 6).
{"title":"Institutional Sanctions and Functionalism: Insights from the Most Recent Practice","authors":"M. Buscemi","doi":"10.1163/15723747-20010004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-20010004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The article aims to discuss the most recent practice of institutional sanctions in light of contested fundamentals of the law of International Organizations (ios). The analysis delves, in particular, into sanctions adopted by ios having technical mandates in situations of wider political disputes among members, concerning international peace and security issues, amidst the United Nations (UN) Security Council’s failure to take coercive measures under Chapter vii of the UN Charter. Of special interest is the suspension of membership rights and privileges which some technical ios have deliberated following the conflict in Syria and the undergoing war in Ukraine (para. 2). These instances offer a test bed to challenge the fundamental theoretical paradigm of the law of ios, that is functionalism, and to extract some ambiguities underlying the essence of ios, revealing the continuous oscillation between policy and technocracy, which is endemic to the institutional life of every io and is well reflected in the different attitudes of the members and the Secretariats. The article highlights, in particular, the tension between politics and law that emerges from the adoption of sanctions by ios endowed with highly technical tasks (para. 3), the invocation of the ‘politicisation’ mantra by the targeted member to oppose the application of the privative measures (para. 4), and the ambivalent use of functionalist ‘language’ within the reacting io (para. 5). The article concludes with some final remarks on the ‘strategic’ use of ios (para. 6).","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47360502","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.1163/15723747-20010003
Richard Collins
Much of the conceptual work on international organizations situates the identity, nature or legal form of the institution between binary oppositions: ‘open’ vs ‘closed’, ‘agora’ vs ‘actor’, ‘contract’ vs ‘constitution’, etc. These oppositions are informative and revealing of tensions underpinning different aspects of international institutions: the extent to which they are vehicles for their member states versus autonomous actors in their own right; that they have limited, derivative and defined powers, but are also able to evolve and adapt to take on new competences and unforeseen powers, and so on. At the same time, insofar as many of the core doctrines of international institutional law, on e.g. personality, powers, responsibility, etc., rely most heavily on the European Union and the United Nations – arguably two of the most unique institutional structures – as evidence for these doctrinal developments, it is clear that there is something more special, unique, indeed sui generis that needs to be thrown into the conceptual mix in order to fully understand the nature and importance of international institutions in contemporary international law. In this way, I will argue, international institutions have a more complex identity and relationship with international law in which they not only exist within (closed) and as part of (open) contemporary international law, but also aim to overcome its limitations, to transform it in some way. For this reason, rather than being competing understandings of international institutions, the interplay between these kinds of binary oppositions actually only reflect back broader theoretical tensions ingrained within international law as a decentralised legal system – a condition which makes it impossible to definitely ‘pin down’ the seemingly elusive identity of the international organization. However, it is also a condition which allows for the construction of tentative hierarchies and forms of more centralised governance within international law, whilst always leaving scope (through legal form) to challenge any such pretentions to authority. This article is part of the iolr Special Forum on ‘Contested Fundamentals of the Law of International Organizations’.
{"title":"Beyond Binary Oppositions? The Elusive Identity of the International Organization in Contemporary International Law","authors":"Richard Collins","doi":"10.1163/15723747-20010003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-20010003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Much of the conceptual work on international organizations situates the identity, nature or legal form of the institution between binary oppositions: ‘open’ vs ‘closed’, ‘agora’ vs ‘actor’, ‘contract’ vs ‘constitution’, etc. These oppositions are informative and revealing of tensions underpinning different aspects of international institutions: the extent to which they are vehicles for their member states versus autonomous actors in their own right; that they have limited, derivative and defined powers, but are also able to evolve and adapt to take on new competences and unforeseen powers, and so on. At the same time, insofar as many of the core doctrines of international institutional law, on e.g. personality, powers, responsibility, etc., rely most heavily on the European Union and the United Nations – arguably two of the most unique institutional structures – as evidence for these doctrinal developments, it is clear that there is something more special, unique, indeed sui generis that needs to be thrown into the conceptual mix in order to fully understand the nature and importance of international institutions in contemporary international law. In this way, I will argue, international institutions have a more complex identity and relationship with international law in which they not only exist within (closed) and as part of (open) contemporary international law, but also aim to overcome its limitations, to transform it in some way. For this reason, rather than being competing understandings of international institutions, the interplay between these kinds of binary oppositions actually only reflect back broader theoretical tensions ingrained within international law as a decentralised legal system – a condition which makes it impossible to definitely ‘pin down’ the seemingly elusive identity of the international organization. However, it is also a condition which allows for the construction of tentative hierarchies and forms of more centralised governance within international law, whilst always leaving scope (through legal form) to challenge any such pretentions to authority. This article is part of the iolr Special Forum on ‘Contested Fundamentals of the Law of International Organizations’.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43798958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-13DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19030002
Negar Mansouri
In 2013, the International Law Commission (ilc) embarked on a codification project on identification of customary international law, including the role that international organizations (ios) might play in the formation of customary norms. Parallel discussions in the international law academy surrounding the role of ios reflected similar disciplinary anxieties as older debates on ios and law making. In this piece, I argue that the path to understanding ios’ governance passes neither doctrines of ios’ powers nor restrictive categories such as law making. A shift to ‘worldmaking practices’ and alternative approaches can help us diversify our subjects of enquiry and the ways in which we understand the ‘institutional’ dimension of international law. Here, I specifically focus on International Relations constructivism, Foucauldian ‘governmentality’, and critical political economy approaches. I then conclude with a discussion of international institutional law, interdisciplinarity and critique.
{"title":"International Organizations and World Making Practices: Some Notes on Method","authors":"Negar Mansouri","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19030002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19030002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In 2013, the International Law Commission (ilc) embarked on a codification project on identification of customary international law, including the role that international organizations (ios) might play in the formation of customary norms. Parallel discussions in the international law academy surrounding the role of ios reflected similar disciplinary anxieties as older debates on ios and law making. In this piece, I argue that the path to understanding ios’ governance passes neither doctrines of ios’ powers nor restrictive categories such as law making. A shift to ‘worldmaking practices’ and alternative approaches can help us diversify our subjects of enquiry and the ways in which we understand the ‘institutional’ dimension of international law. Here, I specifically focus on International Relations constructivism, Foucauldian ‘governmentality’, and critical political economy approaches. I then conclude with a discussion of international institutional law, interdisciplinarity and critique.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41775740","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-13DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19030001
S. Besson
International organizations (ios) have become key institutions in contemporary international law-making. Their increase in authority has, however, come together with a decrease in politicization. This has led, when the question of their control arose, to largely distracting discussions about ‘good governance’ and ‘accountability’. This article focuses on one of the central dimensions of what could amount instead to ‘good government’ by ios, including their democratic legitimacy, and explains how ios could be designed so as to ensure sufficient democratic representation. It argues that ios’ institutional specificities actually make them pivotal to the realization of multiple international representation. As public, universal and external international institutions, they could and should contribute to implementing a system of international representation that approaches multiple public and private institutions claiming to represent peoples as a part of an institutional continuum. This is true with respect to the organization of the correctives to the democratic shortcomings of each representative institution in the system, as much as to the mutual compensation of their respective deficits.
{"title":"Democratic Representation within International Organizations","authors":"S. Besson","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19030001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19030001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 International organizations (ios) have become key institutions in contemporary international law-making. Their increase in authority has, however, come together with a decrease in politicization. This has led, when the question of their control arose, to largely distracting discussions about ‘good governance’ and ‘accountability’. This article focuses on one of the central dimensions of what could amount instead to ‘good government’ by ios, including their democratic legitimacy, and explains how ios could be designed so as to ensure sufficient democratic representation. It argues that ios’ institutional specificities actually make them pivotal to the realization of multiple international representation. As public, universal and external international institutions, they could and should contribute to implementing a system of international representation that approaches multiple public and private institutions claiming to represent peoples as a part of an institutional continuum. This is true with respect to the organization of the correctives to the democratic shortcomings of each representative institution in the system, as much as to the mutual compensation of their respective deficits.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":"54 16","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41245909","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-13DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19030003
Hans Peter Kunz-Hallstein
States compete in seeking to host international institutions. To this end Germany recently adopted a national host state act offering interested institutions and their organizational units an extensive catalogue of privileges and immunities. This piece presents the act and addresses the question of its applicability to organizations and any subsidiaries hosted under earlier international instruments.
{"title":"The New German Host State Act","authors":"Hans Peter Kunz-Hallstein","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19030003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19030003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 States compete in seeking to host international institutions. To this end Germany recently adopted a national host state act offering interested institutions and their organizational units an extensive catalogue of privileges and immunities. This piece presents the act and addresses the question of its applicability to organizations and any subsidiaries hosted under earlier international instruments.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49496283","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-22DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19020004
Gail C. Lythgoe
Implicit spatial assumptions inform the law of international organisations, including the very concept of an international organization. In this paper, I argue that the reproduction of a physicalized and stato-centric notion of territory informs the idea that international organizations are functional entities without territories because ‘territory’ – as it has been long been conceptualised – has already been apportioned among states. While other disciplines underwent major epistemic change in their conceptualization of space, law retained reified assumptions of its spaces, especially so of territory. As a result, international lawyers have long assumed only states can be territorial actors. Yet with a reconceptualisation of territory, inspired by thinkers such as Lefebvre, we might instead think of the spaces of international organisations as their territories, constituted through their social practices exercising control. Moreover, this territory is distinct from the territories of member states and is not simply the aggregate of member states’ territories.
{"title":"Distinct Persons; Distinct Territories: Rethinking the Spaces of International Organizations","authors":"Gail C. Lythgoe","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19020004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19020004","url":null,"abstract":"Implicit spatial assumptions inform the law of international organisations, including the very concept of an international organization. In this paper, I argue that the reproduction of a physicalized and stato-centric notion of territory informs the idea that international organizations are functional entities without territories because ‘territory’ – as it has been long been conceptualised – has already been apportioned among states. While other disciplines underwent major epistemic change in their conceptualization of space, law retained reified assumptions of its spaces, especially so of territory. As a result, international lawyers have long assumed only states can be territorial actors. Yet with a reconceptualisation of territory, inspired by thinkers such as Lefebvre, we might instead think of the spaces of international organisations as their territories, constituted through their social practices exercising control. Moreover, this territory is distinct from the territories of member states and is not simply the aggregate of member states’ territories.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":"1146 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138515734","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-17DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19020006
Baine P. Kerr
The International Maritime Organization’s member states are considering a range of measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from shipping, including a fuel oil levy to fund low and zero carbon technology research and development. This article evaluates whether the International Maritime Organization is legally bound by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea—in particular its Articles 203 and 278—despite the organization not being a party to the Convention and not having expressly accepted the obligations it imposes. The article critically analyses and applies the pacta tertiis principle and examines whether the relevant portions of the Convention constitute an ‘objective regime.’ It then considers what viewing the Convention as binding would mean for the imo’s implementation of the proposed levy and its other climate measures, and how doing so could help unify the climate and maritime legal regimes.
{"title":"Binding the International Maritime Organization to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea","authors":"Baine P. Kerr","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19020006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19020006","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The International Maritime Organization’s member states are considering a range of measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from shipping, including a fuel oil levy to fund low and zero carbon technology research and development. This article evaluates whether the International Maritime Organization is legally bound by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea—in particular its Articles 203 and 278—despite the organization not being a party to the Convention and not having expressly accepted the obligations it imposes. The article critically analyses and applies the pacta tertiis principle and examines whether the relevant portions of the Convention constitute an ‘objective regime.’ It then considers what viewing the Convention as binding would mean for the imo’s implementation of the proposed levy and its other climate measures, and how doing so could help unify the climate and maritime legal regimes.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49569785","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-17DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19020005
H. Aust, Prisca Feihle
The article explores the creation of the who Foundation, an independent legal entity aiming at the mobilisation of flexible funds for who’s budget. This development provides the basis for a more general reflection on the importance of funding issues for the study of international organizations (ios) from an international legal perspective. A comparison reveals that, in some crucial aspects, the who Foundation differs from other non-traditional mechanisms of funding of and alongside ios. These peculiarities render questions as to its impact on the legitimacy of the who all the more pertinent. On the one hand, the innovative funding model has the potential to re-strengthen multilateral decision-making and to allow the who to better deliver on its mandate in attaining global health. On the other hand, it might loosen the ties between the who and its member states and substantially reduce the transparency of the funding process.
{"title":"The who Foundation and the Law of International Organizations: Towards Better Funding for Global Health?","authors":"H. Aust, Prisca Feihle","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19020005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19020005","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The article explores the creation of the who Foundation, an independent legal entity aiming at the mobilisation of flexible funds for who’s budget. This development provides the basis for a more general reflection on the importance of funding issues for the study of international organizations (ios) from an international legal perspective. A comparison reveals that, in some crucial aspects, the who Foundation differs from other non-traditional mechanisms of funding of and alongside ios. These peculiarities render questions as to its impact on the legitimacy of the who all the more pertinent. On the one hand, the innovative funding model has the potential to re-strengthen multilateral decision-making and to allow the who to better deliver on its mandate in attaining global health. On the other hand, it might loosen the ties between the who and its member states and substantially reduce the transparency of the funding process.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42097969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-25DOI: 10.1163/15723747-20220003
N. Bonucci, G. Marceau, André-Philippe Ouellet, R. Walker
This article aims at reviewing the practice of ‘initiatives’ by Intergovernmental Organizations (igo s) when responding to crises or the unforeseen needs of their respective memberships. It forms part of a broader research project on the role of igo s in international law where more than 100 initiatives were identified so far, focusing on 14 igo s. The notion of an igo’s initiative, conceptualised as activities of the Executive Heads and the secretariat’s staff that enhance the remit of an organization beyond those functions initially or formally envisaged by its constituent instrument, is examined. A descriptive analysis of over 30 initiatives indicate that they may be successful in addressing modern unforeseen challenges, whether they stem from international emergencies, climate change, dynamic technological advancements, or global health crises such as the covid-19 pandemic- especially when such initiatives are accepted and supported by igo s’ members.
{"title":"igo s’ Initiatives as a Response to Crises and Unforeseen Needs","authors":"N. Bonucci, G. Marceau, André-Philippe Ouellet, R. Walker","doi":"10.1163/15723747-20220003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-20220003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article aims at reviewing the practice of ‘initiatives’ by Intergovernmental Organizations (igo s) when responding to crises or the unforeseen needs of their respective memberships. It forms part of a broader research project on the role of igo s in international law where more than 100 initiatives were identified so far, focusing on 14 igo s. The notion of an igo’s initiative, conceptualised as activities of the Executive Heads and the secretariat’s staff that enhance the remit of an organization beyond those functions initially or formally envisaged by its constituent instrument, is examined. A descriptive analysis of over 30 initiatives indicate that they may be successful in addressing modern unforeseen challenges, whether they stem from international emergencies, climate change, dynamic technological advancements, or global health crises such as the covid-19 pandemic- especially when such initiatives are accepted and supported by igo s’ members.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42391386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：