Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction: The Discipline of International Economic Law at a Crossroads

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
New Voices and New Perspectives in International Economic Law

Part of the book series: European Yearbook of International Economic Law ((Spec. Issue))

Abstract

Old certainties are melting away. An era has drawn to a close. The foundations of the global economic system are rapidly changing. The opening of intellectual horizons that has come in the wake of these epochal shifts calls for a fundamental rethinking of the main functions and tasks of international economic law (IEL) as a disciplinary project. It also calls for a new explanation of international law’s systemic potential, power, and effectivity in the context of contemporary global governance. How does international law influence the workings of international economic governance? What are the main ways in which it can impact on the course of global economic affairs? Drawing on the traditions of legal realism, Marxism, and classical law-and-economics, this essay outlines a four-fold theory of IEL’s regulatory effectivity: IEL as a price-setting mechanism, IEL as a mechanism for the structuring of opportunities, IEL as a mechanism of ideological legitimation, and IEL as a mechanism of disciplining and interpellation. The goal of this theoretical project is to promote an intellectual recalibration of IEL’s disciplinary ambit along fundamentally functionalist lines: the discipline of IEL should study everything that pertains to how the effective legal realities of global economic governance are set up, how they operate, and how they are produced. The dreariness of the déjà vu one feels when looking at the traditional IEL scholarship would have probably felt a lot more tolerable had we somehow been able to muster the sense that the endless reproduction of the established paradigm might eventually lead to something tangibly good and positive in the external world outside our debates. But by and large, we know, that is simply not true. And so the question inevitably arises: if all of that which we have got used to practising as a scholarly community is still getting us nowhere better than where we have been before, why not try something different?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    See, e.g., Authers (2018), Sandbu (2017), Beattie (2009), Beffa and Ragot (2008), Wolf (2008).

  2. 2.

    See O’Rourke (2019), Ramiro Troitiño et al. (2018), Sampson (2017, p. 163).

  3. 3.

    See Schumacher (2018), Stille (2018).

  4. 4.

    See Amann et al. (2018); Schumacher (2017).

  5. 5.

    See Hegedüs (2019), Byrne et al (2018), Zalan (2018), Robins-Early (2018).

  6. 6.

    See Szewczyk (2019, p. 33), Barber (2019), Jones (2018), El-Erian (2018).

  7. 7.

    Cf. Moyn and Priestland (2017): ‘Since Donald Trump’s election, the United States has been gripped by tyrannophobia. Conspiracies against democracy are everywhere; truth is under siege; totalitarianism is making a comeback; “resistance” is the last refuge of citizens.’.

  8. 8.

    See Liptak (2017).

  9. 9.

    See Saeed (2017).

  10. 10.

    See Atkins and Khan (2017), Riegert (2017).

  11. 11.

    See Payosova et al. (2018); Baynes (2018).

  12. 12.

    See Burchill (2001, p. 79).

  13. 13.

    See Riegert (2017).

  14. 14.

    See Shafak (2019).

  15. 15.

    See Norris and Inglehart (2019).

  16. 16.

    See Mounk and Foa (2018).

  17. 17.

    See Barthes (2000, p. 41).

  18. 18.

    See Barthes (2000, pp. 41–42).

  19. 19.

    See Sloterdijk (1987, pp. 3–8).

  20. 20.

    See Hegel [2008, p. 85 (89)].

  21. 21.

    See Sloterdijk (1987, p. 5).

  22. 22.

    For further background, see Rasulov (2012, p. 151).

  23. 23.

    For further discussion, see Haskell and Rasulov (2018, p. 243). For illustrations, see Van den Meersche (2018), Rasulov (2018), Brabazon (2017), Krever (2011), and Mieville (2005). An important element of this process of theoretical opening is reflected in the fact that a growing body of scholarship about IEL is now produced by non-lawyers and scholars whose primary disciplinary training is in another field. See, e.g., Slobodian (2018), Moudud (2018, p. 289).

  24. 24.

    See Hobsbawm (1997, p. 354).

  25. 25.

    See Ball (2007, p. 7).

  26. 26.

    See Lesaffer [2007, p. 27 (29)].

  27. 27.

    For further discussion, see Vadi (2017, p. 311), Koskenniemi (2013, p. 215), Lesaffer (2007, p. 27).

  28. 28.

    Not all historians disagree with this view, of course. See, for example, Kalman [1997, p. 87 (114–117)].

  29. 29.

    Gilmore (1977, p. 102).

  30. 30.

    Ibid.

  31. 31.

    See, e.g., Mantilla (2017, p. 483), Alexander (2015, p. 109), Megret (2006, p. 265).

  32. 32.

    See, e.g., Martinez (2012), Moyn (2010).

  33. 33.

    See, e.g., Bowman and Kritsiotis (2018), Craven (2007).

  34. 34.

    See, e.g., Sinclair (2018, p. 841), Van Den Meersche (2018, p. 168).

  35. 35.

    See, e.g., Fitzmaurice and Tams (2013).

  36. 36.

    See, among others, St. John (2018), Howse (2016, p. 9), Miles (2013), Clavin (2013); Lang (2011).

  37. 37.

    See Koskenniemi (2004, p. 61).

  38. 38.

    For further discussion, see Rasulov [2008, pp. 243 (290–294)].

  39. 39.

    For a general background to the Law-and-Society tradition, see Feenan (2013); Cotterrell (2002, p. 632).

  40. 40.

    One can also think of this way of approaching the study of IEL as an extension of a much older socio-legal tradition, the so-called ‘social control theory’. See Gurvitch (1942, pp. 23–30).

  41. 41.

    Word like ‘empirical’ and ‘conventional’ do a lot of work here. One person’s ‘conventional judgment’, of course, is another person’s ‘entirely arbitrary opinion’. Logically, it has to be accepted, there is not much we can do about that. No amount of analytical rigour or theoretical precision can protect us against the fundamental arbitrariness of our starting definitions. The most we can do is acknowledge this fact and accept its implications pragmatically.

  42. 42.

    Althusser [1970, p. 11 (59)] (emphasis in the original).

  43. 43.

    See Cohen [1935, pp. 809 (826)].

  44. 44.

    See Arnold [1932, pp. 617 (624–631)].

  45. 45.

    See, e.g., Llewellyn (1930, pp. 82–83).

  46. 46.

    See, e.g., Holmes [1897, p. 457 (458)], Corbin [1924, pp. 501 (515–516)].

  47. 47.

    See, e.g., Hale [1935, pp. 149 (159–163, 168–170, 176–179)].

  48. 48.

    Cf. Timasheff (1939, pp. 23–24): ‘Law is a social force. Its social function is that of imposing norms of conduct or patterns of social behaviour on the individual will, and the aim of jurisprudence is to study these norms’.

  49. 49.

    On legal pluralism, see, generally, Merry (1988, p. 869), Tamanaha (2000, p. 296).

  50. 50.

    See, generally, Kelsen [1953, pp. 1 (13–32)] (acknowledging the simultaneous co-existence of multiple species of legal orders, with international law identified as a ‘primitive legal system’ and national legal orders as ‘more developed’ legal systems).

  51. 51.

    See Shaffer and Ginsburg (2012, p. 1), Franck (2008, p. 767).

  52. 52.

    See, e.g., Ascensio (2018), Lowenfeld (2008).

  53. 53.

    For further background on the studies of transnational private regulation and related topics, see Scott et al (2011, p. 1). On the importance of studying the implementational practices of national bureaucracies, see also Greer and Almagro Iniesta (2014, p. 361).

  54. 54.

    See Tarullo [1999, pp. 105 (108–109)].

  55. 55.

    See Meidinger (2007), pp. 121 (122–126).

  56. 56.

    Ibid., pp. 122–123.

  57. 57.

    See further Mercuro and Medema (1997, pp. 21–24).

  58. 58.

    See Holmes [1897, pp. 457 (459–461)].

  59. 59.

    This is a very old insight, even among international lawyers. For a classical illustration of this kind of argument in an international law context, see Henkin [1971, pp. 544 (544)].

  60. 60.

    See further Hale (1935, p. 149).

  61. 61.

    And vice versa: every regime that puts in place a system of licensing, pricing, and subsidisation of politically and economically relevant conduct, from the functionalist point of view, deserves the attention of legal scholars. Every regime that puts in place such a system in the context of the international political economy deserves the attention of IEL scholars.

  62. 62.

    See Kennedy (1997, p. 59).

  63. 63.

    See Kennedy (1993, p. 87).

  64. 64.

    See Kennedy (1993, p. 100).

  65. 65.

    See Kennedy (1997, p. 59). See also Rasulov [2008, p. 243 (291)].

  66. 66.

    See Szekely (1997, p. 234).

  67. 67.

    See Foucault (1995).

  68. 68.

    On the concept of interpellation, see further Althusser (1971, pp. 170–183).

  69. 69.

    See Mills (2011, pp. 101–104).

  70. 70.

    See Eberhardt and Olivet (2012, p. 38).

  71. 71.

    Kennedy [2003, pp. 915 (916)].

  72. 72.

    Ibid., pp. 916–917.

  73. 73.

    For typical illustrations, see Williams and Foote (2011, p. 42), Du Ming (2010, p. 1077), Mavroidis (2008).

  74. 74.

    For typical illustrations, see Brabazon (2017), Krever (2011, p. 287), Santos (2006, p. 253).

  75. 75.

    For typical illustrations, see Paparinskis (2008, p. 264), Binder (2013, p. 71), Marboe (2013, p. 229), Pauwelyn (2003). But see also Maggio (2017).

  76. 76.

    See Van Den Meersche (2018, p. 168), Tienhaara (2011, p. 606), Vranes (2009, p. 953), Schneiderman (2008), Chimni (2004, p. 1).

  77. 77.

    Mamatas and others v Greece [2016] European Court of Human Rights 63066/14.

  78. 78.

    Schneiderman (2008, p. 69).

  79. 79.

    Marcuse (2002, p. 8).

  80. 80.

    Ibid., pp. xl–xlii.

  81. 81.

    Ibid., p. 227.

  82. 82.

    For a typical illustration, see Loibl (2003, p. 689).

  83. 83.

    See Jackson [1998, pp. 1 (8–11)].

  84. 84.

    See Sinclair [2018, pp. 841 (868)].

  85. 85.

    See for further discussion, Haskell and Rasulov (2018, p. 243). See also the various contributions in Mattei and Haskell (2015) and Brabazon (2017).

  86. 86.

    See d’Aspremont (2018, pp. 47–54).

  87. 87.

    See Schlag (1998, p. 141).

  88. 88.

    Lest it be assumed that the only thing that is required for this is the ‘opening of the mind’—e.g. that which might begin with reading volumes like this one—let us also recall the most basic lesson taught to us by the sociology of knowledge: moving ‘outside the box’ intellectually is an indispensable first step, but broader imaginational and discursive patterns will be able to change only when the underlying socio-institutional logics change too. For further discussion of what sort of factors these socio-institutional logics might involve, see Barrozo (2017, p. 114), Rasulov (2017, p. 189).

References

  • Alexander A (2015) A short history of international humanitarian law. Eur J Int L 26(1):109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Althusser L (1970) From capital to Marx’s philosophy. In: Althusser L, Balibar E (eds) Reading capital. New Left Books, London, pp 11–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Althusser L (1971) Lenin and philosophy and other essays. Monthly Review Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Amann M et al (2018, 21 September) How the alternative for Germany has transformed the country. Der Spiegel

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold T (1932) The role of substantive law and procedure in the legal process. Harv L Rev 45(4):617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ascensio H (2018) Droit international économique. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkins R, Khan M (2017, 17 December) Far-right freedom party enters Austrian Government. The Financial Times

    Google Scholar 

  • Authers J (2018, 4 October) Finance, the media and a catastrophic breakdown of trust. FT Magazine

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball P (2007) The Devil’s doctor: Paracelsus and the world of renaissance magic and science. Arrow Books, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber T (2019, 8 January) Should the world care about Brexit? The Financial Times

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrozo P (2017) Institutional conditions of contemporary legal thought. In: Desautels-Stein J, Tomlins C (eds) Searching for contemporary legal thought. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 114–136

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Barthes R (2000) Mythologies. Vintage Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Baynes C (2018, 31 August) Trump threatens to pull US out of the WTO ‘If They Don’t Shape Up’. The Independent

    Google Scholar 

  • Beattie A (2009, 28 December) Era of confidence ends in trepidation. The Financial Times

    Google Scholar 

  • Beffa JL and Ragot X (2008, 22 February) The fall of the financial model of capitalism. The Financial Times

    Google Scholar 

  • Binder C (2013) An international law approach to interactions between preferential trade and investment agreements and the BIT world. In: Hoffman R, Schill S, Tams C (eds) Preferential trade and investment agreements. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 71–80

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman M, Kritsiotis D (eds) (2018) Conceptual and contextual perspectives on the modern law of treaties. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Brabazon H (2017) Neoliberal legality: understanding the role of law in the neoliberal project. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Burchill R (2001) The promotion and protection of democracy by regional organizations in Europe: the case of Austria. Eur Pub L 7(1):79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne A et al (2018, 4 January), East v West: Hungary and Poland fight together in EU clash. The Financial Times

    Google Scholar 

  • Chimni BS (2004) International institutions today: an imperial global state in the making. Eur J Int L 15(1):1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clavin P (2013) Securing the world economy: the reinvention of the league of nations, 1920–1946. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen F (1935) Transcendental nonsense and the functional approach. Col L Rev 35(6):809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin A (1924) Rights and duties. Yale Law J 33(5):501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotterrell R (2002) Subverting orthodoxy, making law central: a view of sociolegal studies. J Law Soc 29(4):632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craven M (2007) The decolonization of international law: state succession and the law of treaties. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • d’Aspremont J (2018) International law as a belief system. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Du Ming M (2010) Autonomy in setting appropriate level of protection under the WTO law: rhetoric or reality? J Int Econ Law 13(4):1077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eberhardt P, Olivet C (2012) Profiting from injustice: how law firms, arbitrators and financiers are fuelling an investment arbitration boom. Corporate Europe Observatory and the Transnational Institute, Brussels and Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Erian M (2018, 26 November) Brexit won’t affect only the UK—it has lessons for the global economy. The Guardian

    Google Scholar 

  • Feenan D (ed) (2013) Exploring the ‘Socio’ of socio-legal studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzmaurice M, Tams C (eds) (2013) Legacies of the Permanent Court of International Justice. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault M (1995) Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison. Vintage Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Franck S (2008) Empiricism and international law: insights for investment treaty dispute resolution. Va J Int Law 48(4):767

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilmore G (1977) The ages of American law. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Greer S, de Almagro Iniesta MM (2014) How bureaucracies listen to courts: bureaucratized calculations and European law. Law Soc Inq 39(2):361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurvitch G (1942) The sociology of law. Philosophical Library, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale R (1935) Force and the state: a comparison of ‘Political’ and ‘Economic’ compulsion. Columbia Law Rev 35(2):149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haskell J, Rasulov A (2018) International law and the turn to political economy. Leiden J Int Law 31(2):243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegedüs D (2019, 11 March) No end in sight for the EU’s democracy and rule of law challenges. Transatlantic Take, The German Marshall Fund of the United States

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegel GWF (2008) Philosophy of right. In: Singh A, Mohapatra R (eds) Reading Hegel: the introduction. Melbourne, pp 85–109 (Re Press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Henkin L (1971) The reports of the death of Article 2(4) are greatly exaggerated. Am J Int Law 65(3):544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobsbawm E (1997) The age of capital. Abacus, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes OW (1897) The path of the law. Harvard Law Rev 10(8):457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howse R (2016) The World Trade Organization 20 years on: global governance by judiciary. Eur J Int Law 27(1):9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson JH (1998) Global economics and international economic law. J Int Econ Law 1(1):1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones O (2018, 22 June) Hungary is making a mockery of ‘EU Values’. It’s time to kick it out. The Guardian

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalman L (1997) Border patrol: reflections on the turn to history in legal scholarship. Fordham Law Rev 66(1):88

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsen H (1953) Theorie du droit international public. Recueil des Cours 84:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy D (1993) Sexy dressing. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy D (1997) A critique of adjudication: (fin de siècle). Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy D (2003) Contestation of the outcomes and procedures of the existing legal regime. Leiden J Int L 16(4):915

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskenniemi M (2004) Why history of international law today? Rechtsgeschichte 4:61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koskenniemi M (2013) Histories of international law: significance and problems for a critical view. Temple Int Comp Law J 27(2):215

    Google Scholar 

  • Krever T (2011) The legal turn in late development theory: the rule of law and the World Bank’s development model. Harvard Int Law J 52(1):287

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang A (2011) World trade law after neoliberalism: reimagining the global economic order. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lesaffer R (2007) International law and its history: the story of an unrequited love. In: Craven M et al (eds) Time, history and international law. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 27–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Liptak A (2017, 4 December) Supreme court allows Trump travel ban to take effect. The New York Times

    Google Scholar 

  • Llewellyn KN (1930) The bramble bush: some lectures on law and its study. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Loibl G (2003) International economic law. In: Evans M (ed) International law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 689–720

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenfeld A (2008) International economic law, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Maggio AR (2017) Environmental policy, non-product related process and production methods and the law of the world trade organization. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mantilla G (2017) Conforming instrumentalists: why the USA and the United Kingdom joined the 1949 Geneva conventions. Eur J Int Law 28(2):483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marboe I (2013) Bilateral free trade and investment agreements: ‘Stumbling Blocks’ or ‘Building Blocks’ of Multilateralism? In: Hoffman R, Schill S, Tams C (eds) Preferential trade and investment agreements. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 229–241

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse H (2002) One-dimensional man, 2nd edn. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez J (2012) The slave trade and the origins of international human rights law. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mattei U, Haskell J (eds) (2015) Research handbook on political economy and law. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Mavroidis P et al (2008) The law and economics of contingent protection in the WTO. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Megret F (2006) From “Savages” to “Unlawful Combatants”: a postcolonial look at international humanitarian law’s “Other”. In: Orford A (ed) International law and its others. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 265–317

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Meidinger E (2007) Beyond Westphalia: competitive legalization in emerging transnational regulatory systems. In: Brutsch C, Lemkuhl D (eds) Law and legalization in transnational relations. Routledge, London, pp 121–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercuro N, Medema S (1997) Economics and the law: from posner to post-modernism. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Merry SE (1988) Legal pluralism. Law Soc Rev 22(5):869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mieville C (2005) Between equal rights: a marxist theory of international law. Brill, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles K (2013) The origins of international investment law: empire, environment and the safeguarding of capital. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mills A (2011) The public-private dualities of international investment law and arbitration. In: Brown C, Miles K (eds) Evolution in investment treaty law and arbitration. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 97–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Moudud J (2018) Analyzing the constitutional theory of money: governance, power, and instability. Leiden J Int Law 31(2):289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mounk Y, Foa RS (2018, 16 April) The end of the democratic century: autocracy’s global ascendance. Foreign Affairs. Available at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2018-04-16/end-democratic-century

  • Moyn S (2010) The last Utopia: human rights in history. Belknap, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Moyn S, Priestland D (2017) 11 August) Trump Isn’t a Threat to Our Democracy. Hysteria Is, The New York Times

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris P, Inglehart R (2019) Cultural backlash: Trump, Brexit, and authoritarian populism. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Rourke K (2019) A short history of Brexit: from Brentry to backstop. Pelican, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Paparinskis M (2008) Investment arbitration and the law of countermeasures. Brit Yearbook Int Law 79:264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pauwelyn J (2003) Conflict of norms in public international law: how WTO law relates to other rules of international law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Payosova T et al (2018) The dispute settlement crisis in the world trade organization: causes and cures. PIIE Policy Briefs. Available at https://piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/dispute-settlement-crisis-world-trade- organization-causes-and-cures

  • Ramiro Troitiño D et al (eds) (2018) Brexit: history, reasoning and perspectives. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasulov A (2008) ‘The nameless rapture of the struggle’: towards a Marxist class-theoretic approach to international law. Finn Year Book Int Law 19:243

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasulov A (2012) New approaches to international law: images of a genealogy. In: Beneyto JM, Kennedy D (eds) New approaches to international law. TMC Asser Press, The Hague, pp 151–191

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rasulov A (2017) What is critique? Towards a sociology of disciplinary heterodoxy in contemporary international law. In: d’Aspremont J et al (eds) International law as a profession. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 189–221

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rasulov A (2018) A Marxism for international law: a new agenda. Eur J Int Law 29(2):631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riegert B (2017, 18 December) EU unimpressed by Austria’s shift to the right. Deutsche Welle. Available at https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-eu-unimpressed-by-austrias-shift-to-the-right/a-41851094

  • Robins-Early N (2018, 28 June) How Hungary’s far-right leader fueled the current crisis in Europe. The Huffington Post

    Google Scholar 

  • Saeed S (2017, 31 August) Hungary: we built a wall and the EU should pay for it. Politico.eu. Available at https://www.politico.eu/article/hungary-we-built-a-wall-and-the-eu-should-pay-for-it/

  • Sampson T (2017) Brexit: the economics of international disintegration. J Econ Perspect 31(4):163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandbu M (2017, 15 August) From Lenin to Lehman—the big lies. The Financial Times

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos A (2006) The World Bank’s uses of the ‘Rule of Law’ promise in economic development. In: Trubek D, Santos A (eds) The new law and economic development: a critical appraisal. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 253–300

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schlag P (1998) The enchantment of reason. Duke University Press, Durham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schneiderman D (2008) Constitutionalizing economic globalization: investment rules and democracy’s promise. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumacher E (2017, 2 December) German’s far-right AfD elects leadership, provokes protest. Deutsche Welle. Available at https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-far-right-afd-elects-leadership-provokes-protests/a-41628516

  • Schumacher E (2018, 5 March) Matteo Salvini: Italy’s far-right success story. Deutsche Welle. Available at https://www.dw.com/en/matteo-salvini-italys-far-right-success-story/a-42830366

  • Scott C et al (2011) The conceptual and constitutional challenge of transnational private regulation. J Law Soc 38(1):1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafak E (2019, 6 May) From Spain to Turkey, the rise of the far right is a clash of cultures not civilisations. The Guardian

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer G, Ginsburg T (2012) The empirical turn in international legal scholarship. Am J Int Law 106(1):1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair GF (2018) Towards a postcolonial genealogy of international organizations law. Leiden J Int Law 31(4):841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slobodian Q (2018) Globalists: the end of empire and the birth of neoliberalism. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sloterdijk P (1987) Critique of cynical reason. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis

    Google Scholar 

  • St John T (2018) The rise of investor-state arbitration: politics, law, and unintended consequences. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stille A (2018, 9 August) How Matteo Salvini pulled Italy to the far right. The Guardian

    Google Scholar 

  • Szekely A (1997) A commentary on the softening of international environmental law. Am Soc Int Law Proc 91:234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szewczyk B (2019) Europe and the liberal order. Survival 61(2):33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tamanaha B (2000) A Non-essentialist version of legal pluralism. J Law Soc 27(2):296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarullo D (1999) Law and governance in a global economy. ASIL Proc 93:105

    Google Scholar 

  • Tienhaara K (2011) Regulatory chill and the threat of arbitration: a view from political science. In: Brown C, Miles K (eds) Evolution in investment treaty law and arbitration. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 606–627

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Timasheff N (1939) An introduction to the sociology of law. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Vadi V (2017) International law and its histories: methodological risks and opportunities. Harvard Int Law J 58(2):311

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Den Meersche D (2018) International organizations and the performativity of measuring states. Int Org Law Rev 15(1):168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vranes E (2009) The WTO and regulatory freedom: WTO disciplines on market access, non-discrimination and domestic regulation relating to trade in goods and services. J Int Econ Law 12(4):953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams D, Foote S (2011) Recent developments in the approach to identifying an ‘Investment’ Pursuant to Article 25(1) of the ICSID convention. In: Brown C, Miles K (eds) Evolution in investment treaty law and arbitration. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 42–64

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf M (2008, 16 September) The end of lightly regulated finance has come far closer. The Financial Times

    Google Scholar 

  • Zalan E (2018,16 October) EU ministers struggle to deal with Poland and Hungary. EU Observer. Available at euobserver.com

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

    Akbar Rasulov

Authors
  1. Akbar Rasulov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Akbar Rasulov .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

    John D. Haskell

  2. School of Law, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

    Akbar Rasulov

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rasulov, A. (2020). Introduction: The Discipline of International Economic Law at a Crossroads. In: Haskell, J., Rasulov, A. (eds) New Voices and New Perspectives in International Economic Law. European Yearbook of International Economic Law(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32512-1_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32512-1_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-32511-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-32512-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation