From accuracy to accountability: subjecting global indicators to the rule of law

Abstract

This paper presents a double genealogy of indicators as instruments of governance. These have their roots both in the use of statistical tools for normative purposes by states and in the development of indicators within firms as preferred instruments of ‘new management’. The paper argues that social indicators not only convey information, but are genuine tools of global governance and that, for this reason, their legitimacy depends not only on their accuracy, but also on their accountability. If indicators are intended to produce or effectively produce regulatory effects, they should be subjected to the rule of law and to judicial review. The essay ends by formulating four main principles that these indicators should comply with.

Differentiating and connecting indicators: the quality and performance of law in the World Bank's Doing Business Project

“…Sociologists have long been interested in understanding how international organisations (IOs) create global norms of law, diffuse model laws to different nations and shape their national policies (Halliday and Carruthers, 2007; Carruthers and Halliday, 1998; Halliday and Osinsky, 2006; Chorev, 2005; Babb, 2013; Meyer et al , 1997; Dobbin et al ., 2007; Bennett, 1991; Henisz et al ., 2005; Twining, 2005). Transnational legal indicators (TLIs) produced by the IOs play an important role in this process (Davis et al ., 2012a; Davis, 2014; Merry et al ., 2015; Amariles, 2015; 2017; Amariles and Mclachlan, 2018; Siems and Nelken, 2017; Frydman, 2017). The TLIs turn the complex and abstract features of legal rules and systems into quantitatively expressed scores, which allow the IOs to compare, rank and order legal systems according to their conduciveness to economic development.…”