Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-94d59 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T08:09:45.796Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Liberal Theories of International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2013

Jeffrey L. Dunoff
Affiliation:
Temple University, Philadelphia
Mark A. Pollack
Affiliation:
Temple University, Philadelphia
Get access

Summary

Liberal theories of international relations (IR) focus on the demands of individuals and social groups, and their relative power in society, as fundamental forces driving state policy. For liberals, every state is embedded in an interdependent domestic and transnational society that decisively shapes the basic purposes or interests that underlie its policies, its interaction with other states, and, ultimately, international conflict and order. This “bottom-up” focus of liberal theories on state–society relations, interdependence, and preference formation has distinctive implications for understanding international law (IL). In recent years liberal theory has been among the most rapidly expanding areas of positive and normative analysis of international law. As the world grows more and more interdependent and countries struggle to maintain cooperation amid diverse economic interests, domestic political institutions, and ideals of legitimate public order, international law will increasingly come to depend on the answers to questions that liberal theories pose.

The first section of this chapter (“Liberal Theories of International Relations”) elaborates the assumptions and conclusions of liberal international relations theory. Section II (“What Can Liberal Theories Tell Us about International Law-Making?”) develops liberal insights into the substantive scope and depth of international law, its institutional form, compliance, and long-term dynamic processes of evolution and change. Section III (“International Tribunals: Liberal Analysis and Its Critics”) examines the specific case of international tribunals, which has been a particular focus of liberal theorizing, and treats both conservative and constructivist criticisms of liberal theory. Section IV (“Liberalism as Normative Theory”) considers the contribution of liberal theory to policy, as well as to conceptual and normative analyses of international law.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, Kenneth W. (2008). “Enriching Rational Choice Institutionalism for the Study of International Law,” University of Illinois Law Review, No. 1, pp. 5–46.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen J. (1998). “Explaining National Court Acceptance of European Court Jurisprudence: A Critical Evaluation of Theories of Legal Integration,” in Slaughter, Anne-Marie, Sweet, Alec Stone, and Weiler, Joseph H. H. (eds.), The European Court & National Courts: Doctrine and Jurisprudence (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press), pp. 227–52.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen J (2008). “Delegating to International Courts: Self-Binding vs. Other-Binding Delegation,” Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 71, No. 1, pp. 37–76.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen J., M. Florencia Guerzovich, and Laurence R. Helfer (2009). “Islands of Effective International Adjudication: Constructing an Intellectual Property Rule of Law in the Andean Community,” American Journal of International Law, Vol. 103, No. 1, pp. 1–46.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen J., and Helfer, Laurence R (2009). “The Andean Tribunal of Justice and Its Interlocutors: Understanding Preliminary Reference Patterns in the Andean Community,” New York University Journal of International Law & Politics, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 871–930.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen J., and Sophie, Meunier (2009). “The Politics of Regime Complexity,” Perspectives on Politics, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 13–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, José E. (2001). “Do Liberal States Behave Better? A Critique of Slaughter's Liberal Theory,” European Journal of International Law, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 183–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Michael A., Goldstein, Judith, and Weingast, Barry R. (1997). “The Institutional Roots of American Trade Policy: Politics, Coalitions, and International Trade,” World Politics, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 309–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beitz, Charles R. (1979). Political Theory and International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Benvenisti, Eyal, and Downs, George W. (2009). “National Courts, Domestic Democracy, and the Evolution of International Law,” European Journal of International Law, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 59–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, Harold J. (1995). “World Law,” Fordham International Law Journal, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 1617–22.Google Scholar
Brummer, Chris (2011). “How International Financial Law Works (and How It Doesn't),” Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 99, No. 2, pp. 257–327.Google Scholar
Buchanan, Allen (2004). Justice, Legitimacy, and Self-Determination: Moral Foundations for International Law (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Burley, Anne-Marie, and Mattli, Walter (1993). “Europe before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Integration,” International Organization, Vol. 47, No. 1, pp. 41–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chayes, Abram, and Chayes, Antonia Handler (1993). “On Compliance,” International Organization, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 175–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chayes, Abram, and Chayes, Antonia Handler 1995. The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Checkel, Jeffrey T. (2000). “Compliance and Domestic Institutions,” Paper presented at Annual Meeting (Washington, DC: American Political Science Association).
Conant, Lisa (2013). “Whose Agents? The Interpretation of International Law in National Courts,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey L. and Pollack, Mark A. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art(New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 394--420.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. (1999). “Can International Organizations Be Democratic? A Skeptic's View,” in Ian Shapiro and Casiano Hacker-Cordón (eds.), Democracy's Edges (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, Xinyuan (2005). “Why Comply? The Domestic Constituency Mechanism,” International Organization, Vol. 59, No. 2, pp. 363–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Christina L. (2004). “International Institutions and Issue Linkage: Building Support for Agricultural Trade Liberalization,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 98, No. 1, pp. 153–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Christina L., and Bermeo, Sarah Blodgett (2009). “Who Files? Developing Country Participation in GATT/WTO Adjudication,” The Journal of Politics, Vol. 71, No. 3, pp. 1033–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desbordes, Rodolphe, and Vauday, Julien (2007). “The Political Influence of Foreign Firms in Developing Countries,” Economics & Politics, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 421–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, George W., and Rocke, David M (1995). Optimal Imperfection? Domestic Uncertainty and Institutions in International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Drezner, Daniel W. (2007). All Politics Is Global: Explaining International Regulatory Regimes (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Evans, Gareth, and Sahnoun, Mohamed (2002). “The Responsibility to Protect,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 81, No. 6, pp. 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, Jeffrey A. (1997). Regional Trading Blocs in the World Economic System (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics).Google Scholar
Gilligan, Michael J. (1997a). Empowering Exporters: Reciprocity, Delegation, and Collective Action in American Trade Policy (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilligan, Michael J (1997b). “Lobbying as a Private Good with Intra-industry Trade,” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 41, No. 3, pp. 455–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, Jack, and Daryl Levinson (2009). “Law for States: International Law, Constitutional Law, Public Law,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 122, No. 7, pp. 1791–868.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, Jack L., and Posner, Eric A (1999). “A Theory of Customary International Law,” The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 66, No. 4, pp. 1113–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, Jack L., and Posner, Eric A (2005). The Limits of International Law (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Goldstein, Judith, and Martin, Lisa L (2000). “Legalization, Trade Liberalization, and Domestic Politics: A Cautionary Note,” International Organization, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 603–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, Ryan, and Jinks, Derek (2004). “How to Influence States: Socialization and International Human Rights Law,” Duke Law Journal, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 621–703.Google Scholar
Grossman, Gene M., and Helpman, Elhanan (1994). “Protection for Sale,” American Economic Review, Vol. 84 No. 4, pp. 833–50.Google Scholar
Grotto, Andrew J. (2008). “What Drives States to Support New Nonproliferation Obligations? An Empirical and Theoretical Exploration,” Discussion paper for: International Implications for and Levers on U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy, U.S. Nuclear Policy Review Project, The Stanley Foundation (Washington, DC: Henry L. Stimson Center).
Haas, Michael (2008). International Human Rights: A Comprehensive Introduction, 1st ed. (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
Haas, Peter M. (1989). “Do Regimes Matter? Epistemic Communities and Mediterranean Pollution Control,” International Organization, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 377–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie (forthcoming). “International Human Rights Regimes,” Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 15, pp. 3.1–3.22.
Hathaway, Oona A. (1998). “Positive Feedback: The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Industry Demands for Protection,” International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 575–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hathaway, Oona A (2007). “Why Do Countries Commit to Human Rights Treaties?” The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 588–621.CrossRef
Held, David. (2003). “Cosmopolitanism: Globalization Tamed?,” Review of International Studies, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 465–80.CrossRef
Helfer, Laurence R., and Slaughter, Anne-Marie (1997). “Toward a Theory of Effective Supranational Adjudication,” Yale Law Journal, Vol. 107, No. 2, pp. 273–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helleiner, Eric, Pagliari, Stefano, and Zimmermann, Hubert (2010) (eds.). Global Finance in Crisis: The Politics of International Regulatory Change, 1st ed. (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
Hiscox, Michael J. (2002). “Commerce, Coalitions, and Factor Mobility: Evidence from Congressional Votes on Trade Legislation,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 96, No. 3, pp. 593–608.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, William I. (2004). The Struggle for Europe: The Turbulent History of a Divided Continent, 1945–Present (New York: Anchor Books).Google Scholar
Hymans, Jacques E. C. (2006). “Theories of Nuclear Proliferation: The State of the Field,” The Nonproliferation Review, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 455–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahler, Miles (1999). “Evolution, Choice, and International Change,” in David A. Lake and Robert Powell (eds.), Strategic Choice and International Relations (Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press), pp. 165–96.Google Scholar
Keck, Margaret, and Kathryn, Sikkink (1998). Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. (1982). “The Demand for International Regimes,” International Organization, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 325–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, Robert O (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O (1998). “When Does International Law Come Home?,” Houston Law Review, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 699–713.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O., Macedo, Stephen, and Moravcsik, Andrew (2009). “Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism,” International Organization, Vol. 63, No. 1, pp. 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, Robert O., Moravcsik, Andrew, and Slaughter, Anne-Marie (2000). “Legalized Dispute Resolution: Interstate and Transnational,” International Organization, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 457–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, Robert O., and Nye, Joseph S (1977). Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition (Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company).Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O., and Victor, David G. (2011). “The Regime Complex for Climate Change,” Perspectives on Politics, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kissinger, Henry (1995). Diplomacy (New York: Simon & Schuster).Google Scholar
Kleine, Mareike (2011). “Making Cooperation Work: Informal Rules and Flexibility in the European Union,” Paper for presentation at the Workshop “Institutional Dynamics in World Politics” (Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin).
Koh, Harold Hongju (1998). “Bringing International Law Home,” Houston Law Review, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 623–81.Google Scholar
Koremenos, Barbara (2002). “Can Cooperation Survive Changes in Bargaining Power? The Case of Coffee,” Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 31, No. S1, pp. S259–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krasner, Stephen D. (1991). “Global Communications and National Power: Life on the Pareto Frontier,” World Politics, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 336–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krasner, Stephen D (1999). Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ku, Charlotte (2001). Global Governance and the Changing Face of International Law. ACUNS Reports and Papers No. 2 (Puebla: Academic Council on the United Nations System).Google Scholar
Lake, David A., and Powell, Robert (1999) (eds.). Strategic Choice and International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Landman, Todd (2005). Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press).Google Scholar
Legro, Jeffrey W. (1997). “Which Norms Matter? Revisiting the ‘Failure’ of Internationalism,” International Organization, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 31–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfield, Edward D., and Pevehouse, Jon C (2006) “Democratization and International Organizations,”International Organization, Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 137–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Lisa.Interests, Power, and Multilateralism,” International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 4 (Autumn 1992), pp. 765--92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mills, Alex, and Stephens, Tim (2005). “Challenging the Role of Judges in Slaughter's Liberal Theory of International Law,” Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milner, Helen V. (1997). Interests, Institutions, and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Milner, Helen V., and Keohane, Robert O (1996). “Internationalization and Domestic Politics: An Introduction,” in Robert O. Keohane and Helen V. Milner (eds.), Internationalization and Domestic Politics (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew (1994). “Why the European Union Strengthens the State: Domestic Politics and International Institutions,” Working Paper No. 52 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Center for European Studies).Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew (1995). “Explaining International Human Rights Regimes: Liberal Theory and Western Europe,” European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 157–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew (1997). “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics,” International Organization, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 513–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew (1998). The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew (2000). “The Origins of Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in Postwar Europe,” International Organization, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 217–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew (2001). “The New Abolitionism: Why Does the U.S. Practice the Death Penalty While Europe Does Not?,” European Studies Newsletter, Vol. 4, No. 1.
Moravcsik, Andrew (2002). “In Defense of the ‘Democratic Deficit’: Reassessing Legitimacy in the European Union,” Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 603–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew (2004). “Is There a ‘Democratic Deficit’ in World Politics? A Framework for Analysis,” Government and Opposition, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 336–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew (2005). “The Paradox of U.S. Human Rights Policy,” in Ignatieff, Michael (ed.), American Exceptionalism and Human Rights (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press), pp. 147–97.Google Scholar
Pelc, Krzysztof J. (2009). “Seeking Escape: The Use of Escape Clauses in International Trade Agreements,” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 53, No. 2, pp. 349–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philpott, Daniel (2001). Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Posner, Eric A. (2005). “International Law and the Disaggregated State,” Florida State University Law Review, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 797–842.Google Scholar
Posner, Eric A., and Yoo, John C (2005a). “Judicial Independence in International Tribunals,” California Law Review, Vol. 93, No. 1, pp. 1–74.Google Scholar
Posner, Eric A., and Yoo, John C (2005b). “Reply to Helfer and Slaughter,” California Law Review, Vol. 93, No. 3, pp. 957–73.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert D. (1988). “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics,” International Organization, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 427–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raustiala, Kal (2002). “The Architecture of International Cooperation: Transgovernmental Networks and the Future of International Law,” Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 1–92.Google Scholar
Raustiala, Kal, and Slaughter, Anne-Marie (2002). “International Law, International Relations and Compliance,” in Carlsnaes, Walter, Risse, Thomas, and Simmons, Beth A. (eds.), Handbook of International Relations (London: Sage Publications, Ltd.), pp. 538–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raustiala, Kal, and Victor, David G (1998). “Conclusions,” in Victor, David G., Raustiala, Kal, and Skolnikoff, Eugene B. (eds.),The Implementation and Effectiveness of International Environmental Commitments: Theory and Practice (Cambridge, MA: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis), pp. 659–708.Google Scholar
Risse, Thomas, and Sikkink, Kathryn (1999). “The Socialization of International Human Rights Norms into Domestic Practice: Introduction,” in Risse, Thomas, Ropp, Steve C., and Sikkink, Kathryn (eds.), The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robins, Philip (2007). “Turkish Foreign Policy since 2002: Between a ‘Post-Islamist’ Government and a Kemalist State,” International Affairs, Vol. 83, No. 2, pp. 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosendorff, B. Peter, and Milner, Helen V (2001). “The Optimal Design of International Trade Institutions: Uncertainty and Escape,” International Organization, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 829–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruggie, John Gerard (1982). “International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order,” International Organization, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 379–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sagan, Scott D. (2011). “The Causes of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation,” Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 14, pp. 225–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sikkink, Kathryn (2011). The Justice Cascade: How Human Rights Prosecutions Are Changing World Politics (New York: W. W. Norton & Company).Google Scholar
Simmons, Beth A. (2001). “The International Politics of Harmonization: The Case of Capital Market Regulation,” International Organization, Vol. 55, No. 3, pp. 589–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, Beth A (2009). Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics (New York: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, David Andrew (2007). Regulating Capital: Setting Standards for the International Financial System (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
Slaughter, Anne-Marie (2000). “Judicial Globalization,” Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 1103–24.Google Scholar
Slaughter, Anne-Marie (2004). A New World Order (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Slaughter, Anne-Marie, and Burke-White, William (2006). “The Future of International Law Is Domestic (or, The European Way of Law),” Harvard International Law Journal, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 327–52.Google Scholar
Slaughter-Burley, Anne-Marie (1993). “New Directions in Legal Research on the European Community,” Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 391–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone Sweet, Alec, and Sandholtz, Wayne (1997). “European Integration and Supranational Governance,” Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 297–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sykes, Alan O. (1991). “Protectionism as a ‘Safeguard’: A Positive Analysis of the GATT ‘Escape Clause’ with Normative Speculations,” The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 255–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tocci, Nathalie (2005). “Europeanization in Turkey: Trigger or Anchor for Reform?,” South European Society and Politics, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 73–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trachtman, Joel P. (2010). “International Law and Domestic Political Coalitions: The Grand Theory of Compliance with International Law,” Chicago Journal of International Law, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 127–58.Google Scholar
Voeten, Erik (2005). “The Political Origins of the UN Security Council's Ability to Legitimize the Use of Force,” International Organization, Vol. 59, No. 3, pp. 527–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Staden, Andreas (2009). Shaping Human Rights Policy in Liberal Democracies: Assessing and Explaining Compliance with the Judgements of the European Court of Human Rights, Princeton University, Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar
Waltz, Kenneth N. (1979). Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw-Hill).Google Scholar
Waters, Melissa A. (2005). “Mediating Norms and Identity: The Role of Transnational Judicial Dialogue in Creating and Enforcing International Law,” Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 93, No. 2, pp. 487–574.Google Scholar
Waters, Melissa A (2007). “Creeping Monism: The Judicial Trend toward Interpretive Incorporation of Human Rights Treaties,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 107, No. 3, pp. 628–705.Google Scholar
Weiler, J. H. H. (1991). “The Transformation of Europe,” The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 100, No. 8, pp. 2403–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiler, J. H. H. (1994). “A Quiet Revolution: The European Court of Justice and Its Interlocutors,” Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 510–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiler, J. H. H. (1996). “European Neo-constitutionalism: In Search of Foundations for the European Constitutional Order,” Political Studies, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 517–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, Alexander (1999). Social Theory of International Politics (New York: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×