|
Abstract:
|
This final chapter draws conclusions from the second edition of Constitutionalism, Multilevel Trade
Governance and International Economic Law by discussing the diverse conceptions of international
economic regulation presented by Profs. Joerges, Stewart, Cottier and other contributors to this book.
Section I begins with methodological questions of conceptualizing and analyzing international
economic law (IEL). Section II discusses private ‘conflicts law approaches’ and criticizes their
inadequate criteria for identifying under which conditions public international law ‘deserves
recognition’. Section III gives an overview of the diverse ‘global administrative law’ (GAL)
approaches and criticizes their often inadequate methodologies for determining ‘law’ as well as their
neglect of constitutional rights. Section IV discusses the various ‘multilevel constitutional’ approaches
to analyzing IEL and their foundation in ‘constitutional pluralism’. Section V suggests that collective
supply of ‘global public goods’ – like protection of human rights, a mutually beneficial world trading
system, international rule of law and prevention of climate change – requires more systematic, legal
analysis of the collective action problems and of the interrelationships among national and
international public goods. The various private and public, constitutional, administrative, international
and cosmopolitan conceptions of international economic regulation complement each other without
addressing the most important challenge of IEL in the 21st century, i.e. how global public goods can be
collectively protected more effectively. Section VI concludes that – in citizen-driven areas like IEL
and environmental pollution - the ‘collective action problems’ impeding effective protection of ‘global
public goods’ require strengthening the ‘cosmoplitan’, rights-based foundations of IEL. The chapter
identifies research questions meriting further research in order to make IEL a more effective
instrument for promoting and protecting not only economic and human welfare, but also human rights,
international rule of law and other international public goods beneficial for all human beings. My own
‘cosmopolitan propositions’ for addressing some of the regulatory problems are summarized in Tables
1 to 4 and explained in more detail in another, forthcoming monograph. |