International Regime Complexity and Regional Governance: Evidence from the Americas

Gomez-Mera, Laura

doi:10.1163/19426720-02101004

Cited by 50 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparative regional study scholars (Arcarazo and Geddes 2014;Gomez-Mera 2015;Lavenex 2006) have focused on the external aspects of EU migration policy. Early literature on intra-EU venue-shopping explains why employers, immigrant associations and nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) bypassed the anti-immigrant national rule-making to join negotiations in 'market power Europe' (Boswell 2003;Geddes 2009;Guiraudon 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to Special issue: ‘migration governance in an era of large movements: a multi-level approach’

Panizzon

Riemsdijk

2018

Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world …. Surely some revelation is at hand. W.B. Yeats, The Second Coming 1919. 1 If ambition carries the day, … they will use the compact to set standards in key areas of migration governance, which they would pledge to … wherever possible surpass, in national policies and bilateral and regional agreements. Report of the Special Representative to the UN Secretary-General on Migration,

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to Special issue: ‘migration governance in an era of large movements: a multi-level approach’

Panizzon

Riemsdijk

2018

Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Building on this foundation, the emerging literature on international regime complexity presents a compelling case that the proliferation of overlapping rules, norms and organisations is becoming an increasingly salient issue in many areas of global politics (Goldstein et al 2001, Raustiala and Victor 2004, Aggarwal 2005, Alter and Meunier 2006, Benvenisti and Downs 2007, Drezner 2013, Orsini et al 2013, Gehring and Faude 2014, Gómez-Mera 2015.…”

Section: Norm Shopping In Complex Regimesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rising Powers in Complex Regimes: South African Norm Shopping in the Governance of Cross-Border Investment

Murray-Evans

2019

New Political Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emerging Global Order' [Grant Number ECF-2016-384]. Additional research cited in this article was also carried out under an Economic and Social Research Council doctoral studentship. I would like to thank three anonymous reviewers and Matthew Bishop, Jean Grugel, Tony Heron, Gabriel Siles-Brügge, Liam Clegg and Jappe Eckhardt for their helpful comments. Any remaining mistakes or omissions are my own.

show abstract

“…The continuous contestation accompanying with international IP rule‐making initiatives in various fora led to international IP regime complexity (Alter & Meunier, ; Raustiala & Victor, ). Structurally, regime complexity introduces legal fragmentation and rule ambiguity, and facilitates cross‐institutional political strategies by states (Gomez‐Mera, ). For actors situated in international IP regime complexity, the presence of regime complexity also means that powerful actors can no longer play the game of “winner‐takes‐all”—more than one regime exists in the situation of regime complexity, so an actor will not win in every regime given other actors can opt out by regime shifting.…”

Section: Global Ip Governance: State Of Playmentioning

confidence: 99%

China engages with the global intellectual property governance: The recent trend

Cheng

2019

World Intellectual Property

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As China becomes the second largest economy in the world, there have been increasing domestic demands requesting China to engage with the global governance of various issues more closely. In intellectual property (IP), China has recently engaged with global IP governance both responsively and actively. This paper answer the questions (a) how did China respond to the global IP up‐ratchet which sets higher IP standards; and (b) how did China actively promote its agenda for the global IP governance. This paper argues that China has a clearer and more consistent position in its responsive engagement than in active engagement. In other words, China is more affirmative in making defensive coalitions opposing TRIPS‐plus standards proposed by developed countries than promoting its own IP initiatives regionally or plurilaterally. China's positions in these defensive coalitions are the classic pro‐development, developing country positions. Its active IP engagement is more diversified. Specifically, China keeps a low profile and does not attempt to take the lead in IP negotiations at the Regional Compressive Economic Partnership. By contrast, China has emerged as a model exporter, focusing on IP capacity building in its IP arrangements in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and BRICS.

show abstract

International Regime Complexity and Regional Governance: Evidence from the Americas

Cited by 50 publications

References 16 publications

Introduction to Special issue: ‘migration governance in an era of large movements: a multi-level approach’

Introduction to Special issue: ‘migration governance in an era of large movements: a multi-level approach’

Rising Powers in Complex Regimes: South African Norm Shopping in the Governance of Cross-Border Investment

China engages with the global intellectual property governance: The recent trend

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About