Deliberative capacity in the intellectual property rights regime complex

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

World politics is increasingly described in terms of regime complexity – the proliferation of regulatory arrangements operating within the same policy domain. This concept has been fruitfully applied to a variety of fields including trade, climate change, human rights, energy, refugee and security politics. Although empirical work on regime complexity has burgeoned, normative work has lagged behind. In this article, I explore whether regime complexity hinders or promotes deliberative democracy. This focus is motivated in response to the much-discussed global democratic deficit. I undertake this analysis by applying the recent ‘systemic turn’ in deliberative theory. Specifically, I draw upon John Dryzek’s notion of deliberative capacity to assess whether regime complexity provides space to develop inclusive, authentic and consequential deliberation. To gain traction on this argument, I look at the regime complex which governs intellectual property rights. In addition to this normative assessment, I also begin probing the scope conditions under which deliberative capacity arises. I suggest that forum shopping, inter-institutional competition and decentralized authority – all core features of regime complexity – enable (but do not guarantee) deliberative capacity. Overall, I argue that treating regime complexes as deliberative systems opens novel ways of thinking about global democratization.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)317-338
JournalCritical Policy Studies
Volume9
Issue number3
Early online date24 Apr 2015
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

    Fingerprint

Bibliographical note

Cited By :3

Export Date: 19 September 2018

Correspondence Address: Kuyper, J.; Department of Political Science, Stockholm UniversitySweden

References: Alter, K.J., Meunier, S., The Politics of International Regime Complexity (2009) Perspectives on Politics, 7 (1), pp. 13-24; Bannerman, S., The WIPO Development Agenda Forum and Its Prospects for Taking into Account Different Levels of Development (2009) Implementing the WIPO’s Development Agenda, pp. 24-33. , de Beer J., (ed), Ottawa: Wilfrid Laurier University Press; Botzem, S., Hofmann, J., Transnational Governance Spirals: The Transformation of Rule-Making Authority in Internet Regulation and Corporate Financial Reporting (2010) Critical Policy Studies, 4 (1), pp. 18-37; Braithwaite, J., Drahos, P., (2000) Global Business Regulation, , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Busch, M.L., Overlapping Institutions, Forum Shopping, and Dispute Settlement in International Trade (2007) International Organization, 61 (4), pp. 735-761; (2013) Director General’s Report on Implementation of the Development Agenda.”, , http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/mdocs/en/cdip_11/cdip_11_2.pdf, April; Chambers, S., Deliberative Democratic Theory (2003) Annual Review of Political Science, 6, pp. 307-332; Chon, M., Intellectual Property Equality (2010) Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 9 (1), pp. 259-273; (2015) About, , http://creativecommons.org/about; Curato, N., Deliberative Capacity as an Indicator of Democratic Quality: The Case of the Philippines (2015) International Political Science Review, 36 (1), pp. 99-116; de Beer, J., Defining WIPO’s Development Agenda (2009) Implementing the WIPO’s Development Agenda, pp. 1-23. , de Beer J., (ed), Ottawa: Wilfrid Laurier University Press; Deere, C., Reforming Governance to Advance the WIPO Development Agenda (2009) Implementing the WIPO’s Development Agenda, pp. 43-56. , de Beer J., (ed), Ottawa: Wilfrid Laurier University Press; Deitelhoff, N., The Discursive Process of Legalization: Charting Islands of Persuasion in the ICC Case (2009) International Organization, 63 (1), pp. 33-65; Dobusch, L., Quack, S., Framing Standards, Mobilizing Users: Copyright Versus Fair Use in Transnational Regulation (2013) Review of International Political Economy, 20 (1), pp. 52-88; Drezner, D., The Power and Peril of International Regime Complexity (2009) Perspectives on Politics, 7 (1), pp. 65-70; Dryzek, J.S., Democratization as Deliberative Capacity Building (2009) Comparative Political Studies, 42 (11), pp. 1379-1402; Elstub, S., The Third Generation of Deliberative Democracy (2010) Political Studies Review, 8 (3), pp. 291-307; Eriksen, E.O., Fossum, J.E., Europe in Search of Legitimacy: Strategies of Legitimation Assessed (2004) International Political Science Review, 25 (4), pp. 435-459; Falk, R., Strauss, A., Toward Global Parliament (2001) Foreign Affairs, 80 (1), pp. 212-220; Fung, A., Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences (2003) Journal of Political Philosophy, 11 (3), pp. 338-367; Gehring, T., Oberthür, S., The Causal Mechanisms of Interaction between International Institutions (2009) European Journal of International Relations, 15 (1), pp. 125-156; Geist, M., ACTA’s State of Play: Looking Beyond Transparency (2011) American University International Law Review, 26 (3), pp. 543-558; (2005) The Geneva Declaration on the Future of the WIPO, , http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/futureofwipodeclaration.pdf, May; Goodin, R.E., Sequencing Deliberative Moments (2005) Acta Politica, 40 (2), pp. 182-196; Goodin, R.E., Global Democracy: In the Beginning (2010) International Theory, 2 (2), pp. 175-209; Gutmann, A., Thompson, D., (1996) Democracy and Disagreement, , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; Habermas, J., (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, , Cambridge: Polity Press; Held, D., Democracy and Globalization (1995) Cosmopolitan Democracy: An Agenda for a New World Order, pp. 11-27. , Archibugi D., Held D., (eds), Oxford: Polity Press; Helfer, L., Regime Shifting: TRIPs Agreement and New Dynamics of Intellectual Property Lawmaking (2004) Yale Journal of International Law, 29 (1), pp. 1-84; Helfer, L., Regime Shifting in the International Intellectual Property System (2009) Perspectives on Politics, 7 (1), pp. 39-44; Higgott, R., Erman, E., Deliberative Global Governance and the Question of Legitimacy: What can we Learn from the WTO? (2010) Review of International Studies, 36 (2), pp. 449-470; Johnson, T., Urpelainen, J., A Strategic Theory of Regime Integration and Separation (2012) International Organization, 66 (4), pp. 645-677; Kapczynski, A., The Access to Knowledge Mobilization and the New Politics of Intellectual Property (2008) Yale Law Journal, 117 (5), pp. 804-884; Keohane, R.O., (1984) After Hegemony. Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; Keohane, R.O., Victor, D.G., The Regime Complex for Climate Change (2011) Perspectives on Politics, 9 (1), pp. 7-23; Levine, D.S., Transparency Soup: The ACTA Negotiating Process and ‘Black Box’ Lawmaking (2011) American University International Law Review, 26 (3), pp. 811-837; Mansbridge, J., Everyday Talk in the Deliberative System (1999) Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, pp. 211-242. , Macedo S., (ed), Oxford: Oxford University Press; Marchetti, R., (2008) Global Democracy: For and Against, , London: Routledge; May, C., The World Intellectual Property Organisation and the Development Agenda (2008) Global Society, 22 (1), pp. 97-113; Milewicz, K., Goodin, R.E., Deliberative Capacity Building through International Organizations (2012) Paper prepared for APSA 2012 Annual Meeting, , New Orleans, LA: August; Muzaka, V., Linkages, Contests and Overlaps in the Global Intellectual Property Rights Regime (2010) European Journal of International Relations, 17 (4), pp. 755-776; Netanel, N., (2009) The Development Agenda: Global Intellectual Property and Developing Countries, , Oxford: Oxford University Press; Okediji, R., The International Relations of Intellectual Property: Narratives of Developing Country Participation in the Global Intellectual Property System (2003) Singapore Journal of International & Comparative Law, 7 (2), pp. 315-385; Orsini, A., Compagnon, D., From Logics to Procedures: Arguing within International Environmental Negotiations (2013) Critical Policy Studies, 7 (3), pp. 273-291; Orsini, A., Morin, J.-F., Young, O., Regime Complexes: A Boom, Bust, or Buzz for Global Governance? (2013) Global Governance, 19 (2), pp. 27-39; Overdevest, C., Zeitlin, J., Assembling an Experimentalist Regime: Transnational Governance Interactions in the Forest Sector (2014) Regulation & Governance, 8 (1), pp. 22-48; Palmedo, M., (2013) A2K Infojustice Roundup., , http://lists.keionline.org/pipermail/a2k_lists.keionline.org/2013-January/001741.html, January; Parkinson, J., (2006) Deliberating in the Real World: Problems of Legitimacy in Deliberative Democracy, , Oxford: Oxford University Press; Parkinson, J., Mansbridge, J., (2012) Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale, , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Raustiala, K., Victor, D.G., The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources (2004) International Organization, 58 (2), pp. 277-309; Risse, T., ‘Let’s Argue!’: Communicative Action in World Politics (2000) International Organization, 54 (1), pp. 1-39; Risse, T., Arguing about Arguing: A Comment (2013) Critical Policy Studies, 7 (3), pp. 339-349; Saez, C., (2012) No Agreement on Future Work at WIPO Committee on Patents, , http://www.ip-watch.org/2012/05/26/no-agreement-on-future-work-at-wipo-committee-on-patents/, May; Saez, C., (2013) Concerns Arise Over Implementation of Development Agenda, , http://www.ip-watch.org/2013/05/14/concerns-arise-over-implementation-of-wipo-development-agenda/, May; Saez, C., (2013) WTO Members Agree on Draft Extension of TRIPS Transition for LDCs., , http://www.ip-watch.org/2013/06/07/wto-members-agree-on-draft-extension-of-trips-transition-for-ldcs/, June; Schmidt, V., Speaking of Change: Why Discourse Is Key to the Dynamics of Policy Transformation (2011) Critical Policy Studies, 5 (2), pp. 106-126; Scholte, J.A., Reinventing Global Democracy (2014) European Journal of International Relations, 20 (1), pp. 3-28; Sell, S.K., Prakash, A., Using Ideas Strategically: The Contest Between Business and NGO Networks in Intellectual Property Rights (2004) International Studies Quarterly, 48 (1), pp. 143-175; Stevenson, H., Dryzek, J.S., The Legitimacy of Multilateral Climate Governance: A Deliberative Democratic Approach (2012) Critical Policy Studies, 6 (1), pp. 1-18; Stevenson, H., Dryzek, J.S., The Discursive Democratisation of Global Climate Governance (2012) Environmental Politics, 21 (2), pp. 189-210; United States – Sections 301–310 of the Trade Act of 1974 (1999) Report of the Panel, , December; Waltz, K.N., (1959) Man, the State and War, , New York: Columbia University Press; Yu, P.K., International Enclosure, The Regime Complex, and Intellectual Property Schizophrenia (2007) Michigan State Law Review, 1 (6), pp. 1-33; Yu, P.K., ACTA and its Complex Politics (2011) The WIPO Journal, 3 (1), pp. 1-16

Keywords

  • deliberative capacity
  • deliberative democracy
  • global governance
  • intellectual property
  • regime complexity

Cite this