International regimes have been a major focus of research in international relations for over a decade. Three schools of thought have shaped the discussion: realism, which treats power relations as its key variable; neoliberalism, which bases its analysis on constellations of interests; and cognitivism, which emphasizes knowledge dynamics, communication, and identities. Each school articulates distinct views on the origins, robustness, and consequences of international regimes. This book examines each of these contributions to the debate, taking stock of, and seeking to advance, one of the most dynamic research agendas in contemporary international relations. While the differences between realist, neoliberal and cognitivist arguments about regimes are acknowledged and explored, the authors argue that there is substantial scope for progress toward an inter-paradigmatic synthesis.

In this volume, fourteen distinguished specialists in international political economy thoroughly explore the concept of international regimes--the implicit and explicit principles, norms, rules, and procedures that guide international behavior. In the first section, the authors develop several theoretical views of regimes. In the following section, the theories are applied to specific issues in international relations, including the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and on the still-enduring postwar regimes for money and security.

This book examines how regimes influence the behavior of their members and those associated with them.

How legitimate are outcomes, outputs and impacts of global environmental regimes? Can non-state actors contribute to improve the output- and input-oriented legitimacy of global environmental governance? Helmut Breitmeier responds to these questions, balancing the volume with both theoretical and empirical chapters. The theoretical and conceptual chapters illustrate the relevance and meaning of legitimacy as well as the impact of non-state actors on environmental governance. They also describe various methodological issues involved with the coding of 23 environmental regimes. The empirical chapters are based on the findings of the International Regimes Database (IRD). They explore whether problem-solving in international regimes is effective and equitable and the influence of a regime's contribution to how states comply with international norms. These chapters also analyze whether non-state actors can improve the output- and input-oriented legitimacy of global governance systems.

The past sixty years have seen an expansion of international human rights conventions and supervisory organs, not least in Europe. While these international legal instruments have enlarged their mandate, they have also faced opposition and criticism from political actors at the state level, even in well-functioning democracies. Against the backdrop of such contestations, this book brings together prominent scholars in law, political philosophy and international relations in order to address the legitimacy of international human rights regimes as a theoretically challenging and politically salient case of international authority. It provides a unique and thorough overview of the legitimacy problems involved in the global governance of human rights.

This major extension of existing scholarship on the fragmentation of international law utilises the concept of 'regimes' from international law and international relations literature to define functional areas such as human rights or trade law. Responding to existing approaches, which focus on the resolution of conflicting norms between regimes, it contains a variety of critical, sociological and doctrinal perspectives on regime interaction. Leading international law scholars and practitioners reflect on how, in situations of diversity and concurrent activity, such interaction shapes and controls knowledge and norms in often hegemonic ways. The contributors draw on topical examples of interacting regimes, including climate, trade and investment regimes, to argue for new methods of regime interaction. Together, the essays combine approaches from international, transnational and comparative constitutional law to provide important insights into an issue that continues to challenge international legal theory and practice.

Has globalization diluted the power of national governments to regulate their own economies? Are international governmental and nongovernmental organizations weakening the hold of nation-states on global regulatory agendas? Many observers think so. But in All Politics Is Global, Daniel Drezner argues that this view is wrong. Despite globalization, states--especially the great powers--still dominate international regulatory regimes, and the regulatory goals of states are driven by their domestic interests. As Drezner shows, state size still matters. The great powers--the United States and the European Union--remain the key players in writing global regulations, and their power is due to the size of their internal economic markets. If they agree, there will be effective global governance. If they don't agree, governance will be fragmented or ineffective. And, paradoxically, the most powerful sources of great-power preferences are the least globalized elements of their economies. Testing this revisionist model of global regulatory governance on an unusually wide variety of cases, including the Internet, finance, genetically modified organisms, and intellectual property rights, Drezner shows why there is such disparity in the strength of international regulations.