Epistocracy is on the rise. The chapters in this volume all document, in one way or another, the role of experts and knowledge organizations in the development of global policies and their implementation by international organizations, donor agencies, and other globally mobile policy actors. The constellations of these actors are called here ‘transnational policy commu¬nities’. They form around a specific policy problem (like refugees or ocean pollution) or alternatively around a policy sector (like global health policy or global environmental policy). Other terms have been used in this volume. Eve Fouilleux writes about the concept of a transnational ‘organizational/institu¬tional field’ that is composed of both a set of institutions, including practices, understandings, and rules as well as a network of organizations. It matters less the terminology used, and the disciplinary or conceptual frame adopted, as all the chapters point to new spaces for making global policy not only inside inter¬national organizations but also in their interactions. These transnational policy communities help fill the void of authority at the global and regional levels where there are ‘non jurisdictional spaces’ such as the oceans, the Antarctic, or global care chains.
Browse by title
Edited by David Dolowitz, Magdaléna Hadjiisky and Romuald Normand
Edited by Sakari Hänninen, Kirsi-Marja Lehtelä and Paula Saikkonen
Tawhida Ahmed and Elaine Fahey
This project has asked contributors to undertake a critical review of the ideas of justice and injustice as they relate to Brexit. The book has asked whose justice is affected by Brexit? What justice is affected by Brexit? What does a just society look like? Whether Brexit is perceived as one of justice or injustice is related strongly to our perspective of the kind of British, European and global society we want and envisage. This project has also asked how can a ‘just’ Brexit be evaluated from an intellectual and methodological perspective, in order to assess our understanding of whether and how national and global governance affect the pursuance of a just society? This has been underpinned by the unique circumstance of Brexit, which concerns the situation of withdrawal from globalisation, or more specifically, an exit of a state from an international organisation. The diverse contributions in the book have been useful in enabling the book to make some observations about the ways in which the topic of Brexit is approached, and what this may expose about our use of frameworks, concepts and methodologies of (legal) research on Brexit.
Edited by Tawhida Ahmed and Elaine Fahey
Merijn Chamon, Herwig C.H. Hofmann and Ellen Vos
More than 40 years experience with the EU decentralized agencies has made clear that the agencies are part and parcel of the EU’s institutional structure. These agencies can broadly be defined as bodies governed by European public law that are institutionally separate from the EU institutions, have their own legal personality, enjoy a certain degree of administrative and financial autonomy, and have clearly specified tasks. ‘Agencification’ of EU executive governance has thus become a fundamental feature of the EU’s institutional structure. Today there are around 40 EU decentralized agencies, which assist in the implementation of EU law and policy, provide scientific advice for both legislation and implementation, collect information, provide specific services, adopt binding acts and fulfil central roles in the coordination of national authorities. Agencies are part of a process of functional decentralization within the EU executive and operate in various policy fields, such as food and air safety, medicines, environment, telecommunications, disease prevention, border control, trademarks and banking, to name just a few.