Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article examines the resource management design of international courts (ICs) and asks: how are ICs designed in terms of the management of resources and what factors contribute to the resource management design of ICs? Theoretically, this article draws on existing literature to conceptualize resource management as a design feature of international courts and considers three causal mechanisms that might shape the resource management design of ICs: diffusion by emulation, the uploading of domestic governance norms, and bureaucrats who pursue institutional independence and sustainability. Empirically, I examine the resource management design of 24 ICs and assess who selects their chief administrators and approves their budgets. A case study on the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) is also analyzed in order to gain traction on the causal mechanisms generating resource management design of ICs. The article shows that there is a strong tendency for ICs to have greater control over the appointment of their chief administrators, but less control over their budgets. States generally retain authority to approve ICs' budgets. Moreover, it suggests that domestic judicial norms and national legal bureaucrats influenced the design of the CCJ's resource management.

This monograph examines and analyses the phenomenon of non-binding instruments (also known as 'soft law') in the law of armed conflict, or international humanitarian law. It covers the benefits and drawbacks for States and non-States actors as well as their effectiveness and development in the context of armed conflict.

Within international relations one seldom finds discussion of how legitimacy affects 'state capacity'—a state's capacity to enact and adapt to domestic and international change. This is especially surprising for neo- Weberian approaches that have viewed state capacity as a major concern for over two decades. And although legitimacy was a key ingredient to Max Weber's approach to the state, the concept is eschewed or ignored in the three discernible neo Weberian approaches to state capacity. The first two of these approaches, 'isolated autonomy' and 'embedded autonomy', produce functionalist view of a state which responds to an anarchical international system. The third, 'social embeddedness', conceives of the state–society complex as a contested rather than functional space but does not produce a substantive conception of legitimacy. I argue that a reinvigorated conception of legitimacy provides us with a substantive neo-Weberian 'historicist' approach that provides a deeper understanding of how both norms and material interests shape the state. This approach is applied to a brief case study of financial reform in the United States and Japan to illustrate that bringing legitimacy back in provides a better means of understanding state capacity.