A Glimpse at the Democratic Legitimacy of Private Standards
This article seeks to shed light on a notion that is often considered essential in conferring global regulatory authority, but is rarely defined in contemporary scholarship on global governance: the notion of legitimacy. The authors centre their analysis on the value of democracy as one of the seminal determinants of the legitimacy of regulatory actors and the norms they adopt. They further focus on the democratic legitimacy of norms adopted by global private actors. A specific breed of such 'private standards' is studied, namely those addressing food safety. More in particular, the leading standard scheme for good agricultural practices--GLOBALG.A.P.--is taken as a case study. The authors view democratic legitimacy in global governance as a function of the 'public accountability' of the relevant regulatory actors, which comprises a prospective and a retrospective dimension. Public accountability is analyzed as this link which unites, in a democratic fashion, a regulatory actor and its public, i.e. the ensemble of the people who are affected by its regulatory activities. GLOBALG.A.P.'s standard-setting is assessed in light of this analytical framework. The authors find that, while the accountability of GLOBALG.A.P. as a regulatory actor in the field of food safety is satisfactory in respect of its internal members, additional efforts need to be made to ensure stronger (democratic) accountability vis-à-vis its other--external--stakeholders, particularly those located in developing countries. Oxford University Press 2011, all rights reserved, Oxford University Press.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 14 (2011)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://www.jiel.oupjournals.org/
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:14:y:2011:i:3:p:677-710. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.