Law and Development

Privatization

2011-12-07T05:37:00.000-08:00

J. David Brown, US Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), Heriot-Watt University - Centre for Economic Reform and Transformation (CERT), John S. Earle, George Mason University - School of Public Policy, Central European University (CEU) - Department of Economics, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), and Scott Gehlbach, University of Wisconsin, Madison - Department of Political Science, Harvard University - Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies have a new piece on Privatization.

ABSTRACT: In this paper prepared for inclusion in the Oxford Handbook of the Russian Economy (Michael Alexeev and Shlomo Weber, eds.), we replicate, update, and extend our earlier work on manufacturing enterprise privatization and productivity in Russia. Our results suggest a more nuanced view of Russian privatization than that offered by either its critics or its defenders. We confirm earlier findings that the average impact on productivity of privatization to domestic owners is around -3 to -5 percent, though some regions show productivity gains similar to those in Central Europe (an increase of 10 to 20 percent). The regional variation is strongly positively associated with the size of the regional bureaucracy. Notwithstanding the average negative effect, our updated results through 2005 (the most recent year for which comparable data are available) show a pronounced change after 2002 as the productivity effects of Russian privatization have begun to approach those seen elsewhere much earlier. Privatization became most effective west of the Urals, in areas with greater market access. Initially an outlier, by 2005 Russia appeared to be becoming more of a “normal country,” at least in the narrow sense of the impact of private ownership on firm productivity.

Do Victims of War Need International Law? Human Rights Education Programs in Sudan

2011-11-10T13:55:00.000-08:00

Mark Fathi Massoud (McGill Law) has a new article, Do Victims of War Need International Law? Human Rights Education Programs in Sudan. It examines contemporary programs in law and development in authoritarian and war-torn contexts. The paper is based on nearly 18 months of field research in Sudan, since 2005.

A Research Agenda for Development Economics

2011-11-04T09:58:00.000-07:00

Esther Duflo

, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) - Department of Economics has an interesting paper on A Research Agenda for Development Economics.

ABSTRACT: Development economics has grown tremendously in the last fifteen years. It can continue to grow and improve in the next decades by focusing on three areas. First, revitalizing the tradition of applied theory which transformed development economics in the 1980s and 1990s, by giving us a better understanding of how poverty shapes individual options. A new wave of applied theoretical work is needed, to incorporate recent empirical findings that have revealed the limits of the earlier theoretical framework. Second, continue expanding and improving empirical work, in particular experimental work. More ambitious, potentially more expensive experiments, should be conducted. Third, expanding theoretical and empirical work on the aggregate consequences of micro-level distortions, themselves identified by the new theoretical and the empirical work to be done under the first and second areas of focus.

Challenges for Social Sciences: Institutions and Economic Development

2011-11-04T09:56:00.000-07:00

Daron Acemoglu,

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) - Department of Economics has a great overview piece on Challenges for Social Sciences: Institutions and Economic Development.

ABSTRACT: Why some countries are much poorer than others is one of the oldest questions in social science. It will also be one of the most challenging and important questions in the next several decades. This is for several reasons. First, despite spectacular growth in per capita incomes in much of the world during the 20th century, the gaps between rich and poor countries, rather than abating, have expanded. This pattern is challenging to most of our theories because many of the barriers to the spread of prosperity have disappeared: ideas travel around the world almost instantaneously, and any nation should today be able to easily copy any economic or social practice that it wishes; various impediments to trade in goods and to financial flows and foreign direct investments have largely disappeared. But the wide gaps in incomes and living standards remain. Second, these gaps have meant that while the rich world has become richer, poverty, disease and social injustice are still widespread in many parts of the world, notably in much of sub-Saharan Africa, in parts of South Asia and in various pockets of poverty in the Caribbean and Central America.

Challenging though these issues may be, we are now much better equipped to understand, and perhaps work towards redressing, the causes of these widespread disparities. Much of the progress on this issue has been made in economics (see Acemoglu, 2009, for an overview), but the next step will require us to combine the insights and tools developed in economics with perspectives from other social sciences.

“Law and Development at the Microlevel: From Microtrade to Current Issues in Law and Development” (December 10, 2011, Seattle University School of Law

2011-10-23T06:59:00.000-07:00

The 2011 Law and Development Institute Conference

“Law and Development at the Microlevel: From Microtrade to Current Issues in Law and Development”

(December 10, 2011, Seattle University School of Law)

The Law and Development Institute (LDI, www.lawanddevelopment.net), established in Sydney, Australia, promotes law and development agendas, conducts relevant academic research, and provides forums for academic exchanges in law and development. Twenty-eight leading scholars and professionals from several countries are currently participating in the LDI. The LDI held the inaugural conference in Sydney on October 16, 2010 (www.ldiconference.net), which was promoted globally and attended by over one hundred scholars, lawyers, students, and government officials from several countries.

The LDI, in conjunction with Seattle University School of Law, holds its second annual conference in law and development on December 10, 2011, at Seattle University School of Law (Student Center, "LeRoux Room"). Eighteen leading speakers from nine countries, including U.S.A., Canada, Japan, Korea, Australia, Singapore, Thailand, United Kingdom, and India, are scheduled to present key issues on international trade, investment and finance, and least-developed countries from the perspective of law and development. On-line registration will be required for conference attendance. The updated conference schedule, speakers’ biographical information, and presentation summaries are available on the Seattle University School of Law website

(www.law.seattleu.edu/Academics/International_Programs/Law_and_Development_Institute_Conference.xml). On-line registration is required for conference attendance (http://www.regonline.com/builder/site/default.aspx?EventID=1021336).

Conference Program

Morning Sessions

8:30 – 9:00 Reception and Registration

9:00 – 9:10 Opening remark by Professor Y.S. Lee, Director of the Law and Development Institute

9:10 – 9:20 Welcome speech by Professor Mark Niles, Dean, Seattle University School of Law

9:20 – 9:30 Keynote speech by Professor Antonio Garcia-Padilla, former President, University of Puerto Rico

Panel Presentation

9:30-11:00 Microtrade I

Chair

Professor David Gantz, University of Arizona School of Law

Speakers

Professor Y.S. Lee, The Law and Development Institute

“Microtrade: An Overview”

Professor Farid Shirazi, Ryerson University, Canada

“Canada: Virtual Bazaar: An E-Commerce Model to help Microtrade in Least Developed Countries”

Dr. Arpita Gupta, Jindal Global Law School, India

“International Microtrade Regime – Structure and Financing”

Professor Andreas Neef, Kyoto University, Japan

“Community-Based Microtrade in Support of Small-Scale Farmers in Thailand and Tanzania”

11:00-11:15 Coffee Break

11:15-12:30 Microtrade II

Chair

Professor Y.S. Lee, The Law and Development Institute

Speakers

Professor Jae Min Lee, Ewha Woman’s University, Korea

“Microtrade as Reflected in DDA”

Professor Colin Picker, University of New South Wales, Australia

“Microtrade and the Legal Cultural Considerations”

Dr. Prapanpong Khumon, University of Thai Chamber of Commerce, Thailand

“Microtrade and the Fair Trade Movement”

12:30 – 1:30 Lunch break

Afternoon Sessions

1:30 – 3:20 Investment and Development Finance

Chair

Professor Caf Dowlah, City University of New York

Speakers

Professor Sophie Smyth, Temple University School of Law

“Multilateral Development Finance”

Professor Christine Hurt, University of Illinois School of Law

“Securitization, Reckless Credit and Systemic Risk: Microfinance Meets Bubble Regulation”

Professor David Gantz, University of Arizona School of Law

“Investor-State Conflicts for Developing Countries”

Professor Perry Bechky, Seattle University School of Law

“Microinvestment Disputes”

Professor Jiangyu Wang, National University of Singapore, Singapore

“Regulating Investment and Financial Liberalization”

3:20 – 3:35 Coffee break

3:35 – 5:50 Least-Developed Countries

Chair

Professor Colin Picker, University of New South Wales School of Law, Australia

Speakers

Professor Maureen Irish, University of Windsor School of Law, Canada

“Climate Change and LDCs”

Professor Alan Tomkins, U.S. State Department and University of Nebraska

“USA: Food Shortage in LDCs”

Dr. Deming Liu, New Castle University School of Law, U.K.

“Bonding Requirement for LDC Investments”

Professor Caf Dowlah, City University of New York

“Labor Sending LDCs”

Ms. Cynthia Howson, University of London SOAS, U.K.

“Women’s Smuggling in Senegal”

Professor Ruth Gordon, Villanova University School of Law, USA

“China’s Rising Influence in Africa”

5:50 - 6:00 Ending Remarks

What is Law and Development?

2011-08-22T05:43:00.000-07:00

Mariana Prado (Toronto Law) asks What is Law and Development?

ABSTRACT: Law & Development studies have been growing in the past few years, after having its death declared in the 1070s. There is, however, very little clarity as to what this field of study encompasses or whether it is a field at all. Under the label of Law & Development one can find a wide variety of studies, approaches, analyses and topics. Some studies focus on formal institutions, discussing how enforcement of contracts, protection of property rights, and an independent judiciary protect investors and improve economic growth in developing countries. Others have not focused on economic development, but instead on how laws to protect women from abuses in the family and to create quotas to guarantee their participation in the public sphere have been largely ineffective due to deeply embedded social norms and value that cannot be changed by legislation (at least not from one day to the next). Still others have criticized the Law & Development discourse as another source of imperialism and dominance that justify senseless legal transplants from the North to the South.

What brings all these studies together under one label? What is it that one should know, if one is looking for a concise summary of what this field of study encompasses? These are the questions that I will try to answer in this essay. The read should be forewarned that the title may be slightly misleading, as the paper will not provide comprehensive and conclusive answers to the question “What is Law & Development?” but hopefully it will offer a starting point for a deeper inquiry. Most importantly, I hope readers will take this as an invitation to explore this field in greater depth.

Interesting new article by Don Clarke

2011-08-12T05:55:00.000-07:00

Donald C. Clarke, George Washington University Law School has posted ‘Nothing But Wind’? The Past and Future of Comparative Corporate Governance.

ABSTRACT: Corporate law scholarship has come a long way since Bayless Manning some four decades ago famously pronounced it dead. Not only has doctrinal scholarship continued its project of critique and rationalization, but empirical and economic approaches have injected new life into the field.

Recent years have seen the rise of comparative corporate governance (CCG) as an increasingly mainstream approach within the world of corporate governance studies. This is a function partly of an increasing international orientation on the part of legal scholars and partly of an increasingly empirical turn in corporate law scholarship generally. Different practices in other jurisdictions present at least the possibility of natural experiments that attempt to find causal relationships between particular features of a corporate governance regime and real-world outcomes. This body of research has become particular relevant as we enter the second decade of the twenty-first century. The financial crisis has called into question many of our traditional ways of thinking about corporate governance and the relationship between business enterprises and the state. Are there other countries that do it better?

This article discusses what is unique about CCG as an approach to corporate governance studies. It begins by examining the concepts of corporate governance and comparative corporate governance, making the point that comparative corporate governance has in general been focused on agency problems between shareholders and managers but need not be so. It then looks at methodological issues in comparative corporate governance, critiquing in particular economic Darwinist theories and the failure of theories of international competition in corporate governance to incorporate the notion of comparative advantage. Finally, it reviews major lessons learned from this body of work and suggests direction for future research. Among other things, it calls for more comparative research into alternative business entities dubbed “uncorporations” by Larry Ribstein and into corporate governance in increasingly important economies such as China and India.

Stiglitz is Rethinking Development Economics

2011-07-20T07:41:00.000-07:00

Joe Stiglitz has published a short paper titled Rethinking Development Economics in the World bank Research Observer. See here.

Empirical Evidence on Satisfaction with Privatization in Latin America

2011-07-16T04:49:00.000-07:00

This article is interesting.

Empirical Evidence on Satisfaction with Privatization in Latin America
World Bank Econ Rev 2011.

Céline Bonnet*,
Pierre Dubois†,
David Martimort‡ and
Stéphane Straub§
↵§Stéphane Straub (corresponding author), Toulouse School of Economics (ARQADE and IDEI), Tel: (33) 561128529, stephane.straub@univ-tlse1.fr.

↵* Celine Bonnet, Toulouse School of Economics (GREMAQ, INRA), celine.bonnet@tse-fr.eu.

↵† Pierre Dubois, Toulouse School of Economics (GREMAQ, INRA, IDEI), pierre.dubois@tse-fr.eu.

↵‡ David Martimort, Paris School of Economics, martimor@parisschoolofeconomics.eu.

Abstract

Since the 1980s, privatization of formerly state-owned firms has been extensively implemented by governments across Latin America. Despite the fact that most evaluations of the process fail to find significant adverse efficiency and welfare effects, there has been a strong surge in public discontent with such policy in the region. This paper performs a systematic empirical analysis of the determinants of such dissatisfaction, using survey data from Latinobarometro covering 17 countries over the period 1998-2008, complemented by country level data on macroeconomic, political, and institutional aspects as well as data on privatization. Dissatisfaction appears to respond to absolute and relative welfare effects, and we find a robust U-shaped effect in term of education and income levels, with individuals in the middle of such distributions being more critical with the outcome of privatizations.

Legal Institutions, Innovation and Growth

2011-06-22T06:31:00.000-07:00

This paper looks interesting.

Legal Institutions, Innovation and Growth

LUCA ANDERLINI, Georgetown University - Department of Economics
Email: la2@georgetown.edu
LEONARDO FELLI, London School of Economics - Department of Economics, CESifo (Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute for Economic Research), Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR)
Email: lfelli@econ.lse.ac.uk
GIOVANNI IMMORDINO, Università degli Studi di Salerno - Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF)
Email: GIIMMO@TIN.IT
ALESSANDRO RIBONI, University of Montreal - Department of Economics
Email: alessandro.riboni@umontreal.ca
We analyze the relationship between legal institutions, innovation and growth. We compare a rigid (law set ex-ante) legal system and a flexible one (law set after observing current technology). The flexible system dominates in terms of welfare, amount of innovation and output growth at intermediate stages of technological development - periods when legal change is needed. The rigid system is preferable at early stages of technological development, when (lack of) commitment problems are severe. For mature technologies the two legal systems are equivalent. We find that rigid legal systems may induce excessive (greater than first-best) R&D investment and output growth.

Risk, Institutions and Growth: Why England and Not China?

2011-06-12T13:12:00.001-07:00

There is a new and interesting paper by Avner Grief of Stanford's Economics Department, Risk, Institutions and Growth: Why England and Not China?

ABSTRACT: We analyze the role of risk-sharing institutions in transitions to modern economies. Transitions require individual-level risk-taking in pursuing productivity-enhancing activities including developing, adopting, and using new knowledge. Individual-level, idiosyncratic risk implies that distinct risk sharing institutions - even those providing the same level of insurance - can lead to different growth trajectories if they differently motivate risk-taking. Historically, risk sharing institutions were selected based on their cultural and institutional compatibility and not their unforeseen growth implications.

We simulate our growth model incorporating England's and China's distinct pre-modern risk-sharing institutions. The model predicts a transition in England and not China even with equal levels of risk sharing. Under the clan-based Chinese institution, the relatively risk-averse elders had more control over technological choices implying lower risk-taking.

Focusing on non-market institutions expands on previous growth-theoretic models to highlight that transitions can transpire even in the absence of exogenous productivity shocks or time-dependent state variables. Recognizing the role of non-market institutions in the growth process bridges the view that transitions are due to luck and the view that transitions are inevitable. Transitions transpire when 'luck' creates the conditions under which economic agents find it beneficial to make the choices leading to positive rates of technological change. Luck came in the form of historical processes leading to risk-sharing institutions whose unintended consequences encouraged productivity-enhancing risk-taking.

Call for Papers: 2011 Law and Development Institute Conference

2011-05-24T02:44:00.001-07:00

The Law and Development Institute (LDI, www.lawanddevelopment.net) is pleased to announce a call for paper proposals for the 2011 annual conference, entitled, "Law and Development at the Microlevel: From Microtrade to Current Issues in Law and Development". The conference will be co-hosted with Seattle University School of Law on December 10, 2011. The LDI calls for papers on any aspect of microtrade, which is a new system of international trade designed to alleviate populations of least-developed countries of extreme poverty (for a concept paper, see http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1524185), as well as for papers on other law and development issues that can be considered broadly at the "micro level", including but not limited to: microfinance, microinsurance, green growth and development, etc.

Paper proposals should be limited to a 500 word abstract, which must be received by June 30 at the latest. Accepted conference papers should be completed by November 15 for circulation among the participants in advance of the conference. All proposals must be sent by email to the Law and Development Institute, info@lawanddevelopment.net (with a cc to wtogeneva@hotmail.com). The paper proposals will be peer-reviewed by members of the editorial board of the Law and Development Review (www.bepress.com/ldr). It is anticipated that paper selection will be completed by July 31, 2011. The selected authors will be invited to present their papers at the Conference. The conference venue is Seattle University School of Law, located in Seattle, United States. The invited speakers are expected to cover their own expenses to attend the conference.

Call for Papers: Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) conference to be held 20-22 October 2011

2011-05-16T11:45:00.001-07:00

Submissions are due 30 May 2011 for the upcoming Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) conference to be held 20-22 October 2011. The theme is "Capitalism and the Common Good"

The call can be found here: http://waynemorsecenter.uoregon.edu/twail

Keynote Speaker:

B.S. Chimni (Centre for International Legal Studies School of International Studies Jawaharlal Nehru University)

Confirmed speakers include:

- Antony Anghie (Samuel D. Thurman Professor of Law at the University of Utah)
- Tayyab Mahmud (Professor of Law and Director, Center for Global Justice at Seattle University School of Law)
- Balakrishnan Rajagopal (Associate Professor of Law and Development and Director, MIT Program on Human Rights and Justice at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Publication Opportunities:

Select papers will be published in the Oregon Review of International Law. We are also investigating the possibility of a TWAIL book volume.

Law and Development Perspective on International Trade Law

2011-04-18T02:01:00.000-07:00

There is an interesting new book out on Law and Development Perspective on International Trade Law (Cambridge University Press)

Edited by: Yong-Shik Lee, The Law and Development Institute, Sydney
Edited by: Gary Horlick, Georgetown University Law Center
Edited by: Won-Mog Choi, Ewha Womans University School of Law, Seoul
Edited by: Tomer Broude, Hebrew University of Jerusalem

BOOK ABSTRACT: Economic development is the most important agenda in the international trading system today, as demonstrated by the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) adopted in the current multilateral trade negotiations of the World Trade Organization (the Doha Round). This book provides a relevant discussion of major international trade law issues from the perspective of development in the following areas: general issues on international trade law and economic development; and specific law and development issues in World Trade Organization, Free Trade Agreement and regional initiatives. This book offers an unparalleled breadth of coverage on the topic and diversity of authorship, as seventeen leading scholars contribute chapters from nine major developed and developing countries, including the United States, Canada, Japan, China (including Hong Kong), South Korea, Australia, Singapore and Israel.

Contributors: Yong-Shik Lee, Tomer Broude, Bryan Mercurio, Maureen Irish, Faizel Ismail, Gary Horlick, Katherine Fennell, Andrew Mitchell, Joanne Wallis, Moche Hirsch, Mitsuo Matsushita, Anthony Cassimatis, Colin Picker, Caf Dowlah, Young-Ok Kim, Hye Seong Mun, Xiaojie Lu

Law and Development Review Special Issue (2011): The Law and Development Institute 2010 Inaugural Conference

2011-03-10T02:49:00.000-08:00

The 2011 Law and Development Review Special Issue is devoted to the Law and Development Institute Inaugural Conference entitled, “Future of Law and Development, International Trade and Economic Development”, which was held in Sydney, Australia, on the 16th of October, 2010.
Articles

Introduction
Yong-Shik Lee

Export Promotion Policies, Export Composition and Economic Development of Korea
Jai S. Mah

WTO Rules and Agricultural Development Cooperation between Developed and Developing Countries
Won-Mog Choi

International Trade and Development Law: A Legal Cultural Critique
Colin Picker

Special and Differential Treatment, Trade and Sustainable Development
Maureen Irish

International Development Disputes
Tomer Broude

Law and Development in the Islamic World: New Possibilities
Salim Farrar

Call for Papers: 15th Annual Meeting of the Latin American and Iberian Law and Economics Association

2011-02-09T04:04:00.000-08:00

The 15th Annual Meeting of the Latin American and Iberian Law and Economics Association will be held on a Wednesday and Thursday, August 3-4th, and the Course for Judges on the following Friday and Saturday, August 5-6th, at the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana at Bogota D.C., Colombia.

ABOUT THE CONFERENCE he meeting will bring together top scholars from Latin America and around the world to ntribute to the development of the field of Law and Economics.

SUBMISSIONS Those interested in presenting a paper are invited to submit an electronic copy of the final paper (Word or PDF) or an at least two pages long outline attached to an e‐mail message to lacde@alacde.org and pinzon@javeriana.edu.co. Papers can be submitted either in English,
Spanish or Portuguese. Proposals should also include an abstract in English; keywords; JEL classification; and contact nformation, including author’s complete name, e‐mail, telephone, postal address and current academic or professional position.
The submission deadline is April 1st, 2011.
Papers may be on any topic in or related to Law and Economics with particular emphasis on: 1. Experimental Law and Economics 2. International Law and Economics; 3. Property, including Intellectual Property; 4. Torts; 5. Contracts; 6. Corporate Law and Economics and Corporate Governance; 7. Criminal Law and Law Enforcement; 8. Legal Rule‐making, including Litigation; 9. Market and Non‐market Regulation; 10. Law and Public Policy; 11. Behavioral Law and Economics; 12. Constitutional Law and Economics; including Discrimination; 13. Bankruptcy and Financial Regulation; 14. Law and Development; 15. Trade Law; 16. Energy Law; 17. Environmental Law; 18. The economics of Family, sex, discrimination; 19. Antitrust and regulation. 20. Comparative Law and Economics; 21. Social security and Economic Analysis of Law; 22. Taxes and welfare state; 23. The law and conomics of labor and employment 24. Law and development; 25. Political Economy and Public Choice; 26. International trade; 27. Public and Administrative law and economics.

Papers will be selected by a committee appointed by the ALACDE. Its members will not be allowed to submit papers to the meeting.

Acceptance of proposals will be communicated to authors by May 6th, 2011. Authors whose papers are accepted should be available to comment on other papers presented during the eeting. A final electronic version of the accepted papers must be sent to the local organizers 3pm
by Junerd, 2011. Papers will then be available at http://repositories.cdlib.org/bple/alacde. And will be ublished in the book of the Center of Studies of Economics and the Law –CEDE of the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana.

Additional information about the meeting may be found at the websites www.alacde.org In case you need further details, please do not hesitate to contact the organization committee at alacde@alacde.org.

ALACDE PRIZES Selected papers can apply for the ALACDE Prizes if the applicant is a scholar in a Latin American or Caribbean country, regardless of his nationality. Applicant to the prize cannot be art of the board, or the local organization committee. All prizes will be given to papers with a Law & Economics approach. he Organization Committee will be in charge of determining the selected papers for the izes. The prizes will be announced at the end of the meeting.

ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE Alfredo Bullard ‐ Rafael Mery – Andrew Guzman ‐ Fernando Castillo Cadena – Carlos Pablo árquez Escobar – Alfonso Miranda Londoño

Symposium on Global Law and its Exceptions: Globalization, Legal Transplants, Local Reception and Resistance

2011-01-31T02:12:00.001-08:00

Symposium on Global Law and its Exceptions: Globalization, Legal Transplants, Local Reception and Resistance
Friday, February 25, 2011
Program Information
Has there emerged such a thing as "Global Law"? The symposium will explore the idea that there is emerging in almost every field a core of law which we can call "Global Law" which is influencing domestic legal evolutions in particular ways. At the same time, there are areas of law which have traditionally staved off "global influences" such as family law which appear to be fair game in this round of "Global Law." This symposium will consider this emerging "Global Law", what is driving it and how the new phase of globalization of law is transforming legal education, practice and legal doctrines. In particular, the symposium will ask if the generation, circulation and entrenchment of global modes of legal consciousness which undergird the development of this "Global Law" serve to entrench and reproduce existing social (and legal) hierarchies or whether it can be harnessed as a site for producing greater social and political participation and equity. In other words, is it possible that "Global Law" can play both a universalizing (and hegemonic) function as well as a critical (and emancipatory) function?

The theme of this symposium has been at least fifteen years in the making. In 1996 the Utah Law Review hosted a much noted symposium on "New Approaches to Comparative Law." The conference considered whether there was a materialist catalyst in the renewed interest in Comparative Law seen in the 1990s. Inspired, in part, by the work of Gunter Frankenberg, the conference sought to locate the role of Comparative Law in the expansion of capitalist market economics and liberal political structures. The conference spawned a new generation of "critical" comparative legal scholarship. Fifteen years later, much has happened in the field. The "much" that has happened is reflected, at UW School of Law, in our increasingly contested inclusion of "Comparative and International Law" as a compulsory first year course. The Utah Conference articulated itself as both

CLE Credits:
This program has been approved for 6.50 General CLE Credits.
For information regarding CLE credits in other states, contact UW CLE at 206.543.0059 or 800.253.8648.

Pre-registration is required. Please register by February 18, 2011.
Cost:
Conference without CLE credits: Free
Conference with CLE credits: $50 for CLE course materials

Accommodations for Disabilities:
The University of Washington is committed to providing access, equal opportunity and reasonable accommodation in its services, programs, activities, education and employment for individuals with disabilities. To request disability accommodation, contact the Disability Services Office at least ten days in advance at: 206.543.6450/V, 206.543.6452/TTY, 206.685.7264/fax, or email dso@uw.edu.

Questions? Please contact UW CLE at 206.543.0059 or 800.253.8648; Email: uwcle@uw.edu.

The Very Uneasy Case Against Remittances: An Ex Ante Perspective

2011-01-06T12:28:00.000-08:00

Adam Feibelman (Tulane Law) has an interesting new piece on The Very Uneasy Case Against Remittances: An Ex Ante Perspective. I think that he is correct and not merely for the reasons that he states. The most recent empirical work I have seen seems to suggest that remittances are not helpful to the home country. Overall, the empirical literature is mixed and those law professors that champion the idea of remittances have not thought through the practical administration within the payment system very well.

Call for Papers - University of Amsterdam 7th Annual Competition & Regulation Meeting: Competition Policy for Emerging Economies: When and How?

2010-12-31T17:07:00.001-08:00

ACLE Conference - Call for Papers

The Amsterdam Center for Law & Economics at the University of Amsterdam organizes its 7th annual Competition & Regulation meeting on the topic:

Competition Policy for Emerging Economies: When and How?

May 20, 2011
University of Amsterdam

Keynote Speakers include:

Frederic Jenny (ESSEC Business School)
Daniel Sokol (University of Florida)
Michal Gal (University of Haifa)

Roundtable discussion chaired by William Kovacic (FTC) between the keynote speakers, joined by Andrew Gavil (Howard University), Ioannis Lianos (UCL) and Hassan Qaqaya (UNCTAD, tbc).

The objective of this C&R Meeting is to bring together renowned specialists in emerging competition law enforcement and its interrelationship to economic development in conference to debate. We also welcome practitioners with a keen interest in this specialty subject, including (new) agency officials, government officials interested in competition policy as a development aid tool, competition lawyers and consultants and scholars working on these research topics.

Call for Papers – NOW OPEN

Academics, private practitioners and competition officials, both with a legal and an economic background, are encouraged to submit their research for inclusion in the conference program. We welcome all original research (in progress).

Submissions for inclusion in the program (full papers or abstracts) may be sent together with the author’s address information to: ACLE@uva.nl

The deadline for submission is March 1 2011. Decisions on acceptance to the program will be communicated mid March.

Call for Papers

The scientific program committee, which consists of Maarten Pieter Schinkel (chair), Rein Wesseling, Benjamin van Rooij, Jeroen van de Ven, Kati Cseres and Jo Seldeslachts, will produce a full day program based on the response to this call. Local organizers are Martijn Han and Michael Frese.

More Information

For more information, please visit the ACLE conference website: http://emergingagencies.acle.nl

Relevant information on the preliminary program, registration, fees and accommodation will be posted on this website as we progress towards the conference date.

Learning From Latvia: Adoption, Adaptation, and Evidence-Based Justice Reform

2010-12-04T17:54:00.000-08:00

New paper on the justice reform and development provides empirical support for the view that development actors must support organizational policies that build the individual capacity required to fully engage in the justice reform process.

Abstract

Justice reform through legal technical assistance has emerged since the 1990s as a means to support developing and transition countries to reform governance structures. To date, few studies have examined which aspects of capacity development can best support the adoption, adaptation and local acceptability of international norms within local justice systems. This paper presents the findings of a mixed methods study of 14 Latvian participants involved in a Canadian justice reform project that established the Latvian State Probation Service (SPS). It provides empirical support for the view that development actors must support organizational policies that build the individual capacity required to engage in the reform process.

Published in Journal of Baltic Studies, Volume 41 Issue 4 December 2010

HARVARD LAW SCHOOL AND STANFORD LAW SCHOOL FOURTH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL JUNIOR FACULTY FORUM CALL FOR PAPERS

2010-11-11T15:23:00.001-08:00

HARVARD LAW SCHOOL AND STANFORD LAW SCHOOL FOURTH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL JUNIOR FACULTY FORUM
CALL FOR PAPERS

Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School have established an International Junior Faculty Forum. The idea behind this is to stimulate exchange of ideas and research, among younger scholars in the academy, from all parts of the world; and to encourage younger scholars in their work. We live today in a global community - especially a global legal community - and it is important to develop legal scholarship on a transnational basis. Scholars in different countries are often divided by barriers of time and space, as well as barriers of different legal traditions and cultures. We hope that the Forum will be a step in the direction of surmounting these barriers. The papers at the 2010 Forum were on a very wide range of subjects, from the treatment of science by the World Trade Organization, to the concept of evil in German and American law, to the role of Islam in the development of national legal system. The young scholars came from many different countries, as did the senior scholars. In all, five continents and a wide range of viewpoints and methodologies were represented.

The sponsors, Harvard and Stanford law schools, are pleased to announce plans for the fourth International Junior Faculty Forum. The Forum will be held in November 17 - 19, 2011 at the Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA.

In order to be considered for the 2011 International Junior Faculty Forum, authors must meet the following criteria:

• Citizen of a country other than the United States.
• Home academic institution is outside of the U.S.
• Have held a faculty position or its equivalent (including positions comparable to junior faculty positions in research institutes) for less than seven years as of 2011.
• Last degree earned less than ten years earlier than 2011.
Papers may be on any legally relevant subject. We especially welcome work that is interdisciplinary. The papers can make use of any relevant approach; they can be quantitative or qualitative, sociological, anthropological, historical, or economic. The sponsoring schools would like to emphasize that they welcome papers from junior scholars from all parts of the world. No country or group of countries has a monopoly of talent. Please note that already published papers are not eligible to be considered.

The first step is to submit an abstract of the proposed paper. We would like these to be no more than four (4) pages and be in English. Tell us what you plan to do; lay out the major argument of the paper, say something about the methodology, and what you think will be the paper's contribution to scholarship. The due date for the abstracts is January 17, 2011, although earlier submissions are welcomed. Please submit the abstract electronically to both schools-- at Harvard, to Juliet Bowler (jbowler@law.harvard.edu), and at Stanford, to Lisa Woodcock (lwoodcock@law.stanford.edu) with the subject line: International Junior Faculty Forum. The abstract should contain the author's name, home institution, and the title of the proposed paper. Please also send a current CV.

After the abstracts have been reviewed, we will in February invite a number of junior scholars to submit full papers of no more than 15,000 words, electronically (in English) by May 31, 2011. Please include a word count for final papers.

An international committee of legal scholars, who themselves come from across the globe, and represent many different styles and approaches, will review the papers. In the end, about ten of the papers will be chosen for presentation at the conference. And, as before, at the conference itself, two senior scholars, will comment on each paper. After the commentators give their remarks, all of the participants, junior and senior alike, will have a chance to join in the discussion. Meeting junior and senior colleagues, and talking about your work and theirs, may be one of the most valuable - and enjoyable-- aspects of the Forum.

The sponsoring schools will cover expenses of travel, including airfare, lodging, and food, for each participant. Questions should be directed to Juliet Bowler (jbowler@law.harvard.edu) or Lisa Woodcock (lwoodcock@law.stanford.edu).

Emerging Economies and the Rule of Law: Challenges and Opportunities

2010-11-04T17:16:00.000-07:00

The 17th Commonwealth Law Conference will take place in Hyderabad, India, Feb. 5-9, 2011. Organizers expect over 1,000 lawyers, judges, and legal academics from 54 Commonwealth countries to attend. The theme of the conference is Emerging Economies and the Rule of Law: Challenges and Opportunities and the diverse business programme will cover human rights and the rule of law, corporate and commercial law and the legal and judicial professions.

AEA Annual Meeting 2011

2010-11-04T01:53:00.000-07:00

The American Economics Association will be January 6-9, 2011 in Denver, CO. There are a number of panels on issues of law and development (ans development economics more generally). See the program here.

Global Competition Law Conference: Implementing Competition Law and Policy, Global Perspectives

2010-10-10T20:04:00.000-07:00

Global Competition Law Conference:
Implementing Competition Law and Policy, Global Perspectives
19 November 2010, New Delhi, India

The recent adoption of competition law statutes in East and South Asia, culminating with the enactment of the Indian Competition Act and the Chinese Antimonopoly Law, mark a significant development to the global business community. Merger control, the application of competition law to unilateral conduct such as distribution agreements, competition issues in intellectual property rights, and state activities in the economy create important challenges in the enforcement of competition law in these crucial markets for policymakers, multinational corporations, law firms and economic consultancies. A number of panels and roundtables will examine these issues, composed by the international and local leaders of the competition/regulatory law and M&A practice.

The public conference will be preceded by an invitation only one-day workshop on the issue of economic development and competition law, a theme that is of particular importance to the global as well as to the local business community.
View the website for the invitation only conference

Major policy makers, academics and practitioners from around the world will analyze these topics and will share their unique expertise in the area of competition law and more specifically in merger control, evidence in competition law, joint ventures, distribution, cartels, and the interaction between competition and intellectual property.

The Centre for Law and Economics (Competition, Regulation and Public Policy section) at UCL acknowledges the support of our Exclusive Indian Legal Partner, Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A Shroff & Co.

Registration Fees:
£130 early bird ticket, available until 5pm on 1 October 2010
£170 standard ticket
£130 UCL alumni / Staff / Students ticket
Group discount of 10% discount on the standard ticket price is available for groups (3 or more delegates from the same organization)

The registration fee includes:
- Conference lunch and all other refreshments during the conference on 19 November
- Delegate pack with the conference materials
- Certificate of Participation from the UCL Faculty of Laws

Payment:
There are three methods of payment for this conference that you can use once you have chosen your ticket:

1. Via credit card - using Google Checkout button at the bottom of the page
2. Via bank transfer - an invoice will be issued with our bank details
3. Via cheque (in GBP) - choose to pay via cheque

To view options 2 and 3, make sure that you click on the 'show' link next to the Other Payment Options section at the bottom of the booking page.

View the conference website

Conference Schedule
08:15 Registration
08:45 Welcome and Introduction
Ioannis Lianos (UCL) & Daniel Sokol (University of Florida)
09:00 Keynote Speakers:
His Excellency Mr. Salman Khurshid (Minister of State for Corporate Affairs of India)
Justice S. H. Kapadia (Chief Justice of India) (tbc)
09:30 Parallel Sessions

PANEL 1: Mergers
Moderator:
Laura Carstensen (UK Competition Commission)

Panelists:

•Simon Baxter (Skadden, Arps)
•Dhanendra Kumar (Chairman CCI)
•Vijaya Sampath (Bharti Airtel)
•Paul Seabright (University of Toulouse, IDEI)
•Pallavi Shroff (Amarchand Mangaldas)

PANEL 2: Evidence in competition law proceedings (burden of proof, standard of proof, presumptions, economic evidence, admissibility and evaluation)

Moderator:
David Lewis (former Chairman, Competition Tribunal of South Africa)
Panelists:

•Jean Yves Art (Associate General Counsel, Microsoft)
•Cristina Caffarra (Vice-President and Head of European Competition Practice, Charles River Associates)
•John Kallaugher (UCL & Latham & Watkins LLP)
•Damien Neven (Chief Economist, DG Competition, European Commission)
•Naval Satarawala Chopra (Amarchand Mangaldas)

11:00 COFFEE BREAK
11:15 Parallel Sessions

PANEL 3: Competition Issues in Joint Ventures and Distribution Issues

Moderator:
Damien Neven (Chief Economist, DG Competition, European Commission)
Panelists:

•Kiran Desai (Mayer Brown International)
•Ashok Gupta (Aditya Birla Group)
•Jeremy Calsyn (Cleary Gottlieb)
•Ioannis Lianos (UCL)
•Stephen Malherbe (Genesis Analytics)
•Suzanne E Wachsstock (Chief Antitrust Counsel, American Express)
PANEL 4:
Cartels

Moderator:
Scott D. Hammond (US Department of Justice Antitrust Division)

Panelists:

•John Beyer (Nathan Associates)
•Marcus Bezzi (Executive General Manager, Enforcement & Compliance Division, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission)
•Ariel Ezrachi (University of Oxford)
•Scott D. Hammond (US Department of Justice Antitrust Division)
•P N Parashar (Member, Competition Commission of India)
•Maarten Pieter Schinkel (University of Amsterdam)

13:00 LUNCH BREAK
13:30 Key note speakers:

•John Fingleton (Chief Executive at the UK Office of Fair Trading / Chair of the Steering Group, International Competition Network)

14:00 Parallel Sessions
PANEL 5: Intersection between Antitrust and Intellectual Property law issues

Moderator:
Howard Shelanski (Deputy Director, Bureau of Economics, Federal Trade Commission)
Panelists:

•Andrea Appella (Deputy General Counsel, European & Asia, News Corporation)
•Harry First (NYU Law School)
•Damien Neven (Chief Economist, DG Competition, European Commission)
•Robbert Snelders (Cleary, Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP)
•Doug Melamed (General Counsel, Intel)
•P N Parashar (Member, Competition Commission of India)

PANEL 6:
Government Barriers to Competition

Moderator:
Pradeep S. Mehta (Secretary General, Consumer Unity & Trust Society (CUTS))
Panelists:

•Allan Fels (Dean, The Australia and New Zealand School of Government and Former Chairman of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission)
•Shubhashis Gangopadhyay, (Director, India Development Forum)
•Martha Licetti (Head of Competition Policy, World Bank)
•Rahul Sarin (Member, Competition Appellate Tribunal)
•Daniel Sokol (University of Florida)
•Bharat Vasani (GC, Tata Sons)

15:30 COFFEE BREAK

16:00 Enforcers' Roundtable:
Limits to the discretion of competition authorities: a comparative perspective
(due process, judicial review, priorities setting, guidelines and reductive versus expansive interpretation of the law, comity principles)

Moderator:
Frederic Jenny (Cour de Cassation (Judge of the French Supreme Court) and Chairman, OECD Competition Committee)
Panelists:

•Marcus Bezzi (Executive General Manager of the Enforcement & Compliance Division, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission)
•Laura Carstensen (Deputy Chairman, UK Competition Commission)
•John Fingleton (Chief Executive at the UK Office of Fair Trading / Chair of the Steering Group, International Competition Network)
•Dhanendra Kumar (Chairman, Competition Commission of India)
•Damien Neven (Chief Economist, DG Competition, European Commission)
•Shan Ranburuth (South African Competition Commission)
•Scott D. Hammond (US Department of Justice Antitrust Division)

18:00 Close of Conference

The public conference on 19 November is preceded by an invitation only workshop on the issue of economic development and competition law, a theme that is of particular importance to the global as well as to the local business community.

Additional speakers at this workshop include:

•William Kovacic - Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission
•Masahiko Aoki - Stanford University
•Tom Arthur - Emory Univ. Law School
•Aditya Bhattacharjea - Delhi School of Economics
•Thomas Cheng - University of Hong Kong, Law
•Vivek Ghosal - Georgia Institute of Technology, Economics
•Abel Mateus - New University of Lisbon
•George Priest - Yale Law School
•Patrick Rey - IDEI, Toulouse
•Barak Richman - Duke University
•Paul Seabright - IDEI, Toulouse
•Rahul Singh - National University of India, Bangalore
When
Friday, November 19, 2010 from 8:45 AM - 6:00 PM (GMT+0530)
Add to my calendar

Outlook Calendar
Google Calendar
Yahoo! Calendar
iCal Calendar
Where
The Taj Mahal Hotel
1 Mansingh Road
New Delhi 110 011
India

Hosted By
UCL Law Faculty
The Faculty of Laws at UCL has a world-class reputation for research, and has been rated by the UK government in the highest categories for both research and teaching.

We value research not only in contributing to the quality of our teaching and the supervision we give our students, but also in its contribution to the development of law and its influence on legal practice and public policy.

The Faculty was ranked 2nd in the UK by The Times Good University Guide (subject table: Law) in 2008. UCL is ranked 4th in the World University rankings.

See more UCL Laws events at http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/events

How and Why Does History Matter for Development Policy?

2010-09-24T01:52:00.001-07:00

Michael Woolcock, World Bank - Development Research Group, Harvard University - Kennedy School of Government, Simon Szreter, World Bank and Vijayendra Rao, World Bank have an interesting new paper that ask How and Why Does History Matter for Development Policy?

ABSTRACT: The consensus among scholars and policymakers that"institutions matter"for development has led inexorably to a conclusion that"history matters,"since institutions clearly form and evolve over time. Unfortunately, however, the next logical step has not yet been taken, which is to recognize that historians (and not only economic historians) might also have useful and distinctive insights to offer. This paper endeavors to open and sustain a constructive dialogue between history -- understood as both"the past"and"the discipline"-- and development policy by (a) clarifying what the craft of historical scholarship entails, especially as it pertains to understanding causal mechanisms, contexts, and complex processes of institutional change; (b) providing examples of historical research that support, qualify, or challenge the most influential research (by economists and economic historians) in contemporary development policy; and (c) offering some general principles and specific implications that historians, on the basis of the distinctive content and method of their research, bring to development policy debates.

Legal Institutions and Economic Development

2010-09-17T05:38:00.000-07:00

Thorsten Beck (Tilburg - Economics) has a new paper worth reading on Legal Institutions and Economic Development.

ABSTRACT: Legal institutions are critical for the development of market-based economies. This paper defines legal institutions and discusses different indicators to measure their quality and efficiency. It surveys a large historical and empirical literature showing the importance of legal institutions in explaining cross-country variation in economic development. Finally, it presents and discusses three different views of why we can observe the large cross-country variation in legal institutions, the social conflict, the legal origin and the culture and religion hypotheses.

Law and Pluralism in Asia: Exploring Dynamics of Reflection, Reinforcement, and Resistance

2010-09-13T19:16:00.000-07:00

North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation presents

Law and Pluralism in Asia: Exploring Dynamics of Reflection, Reinforcement, and Resistance
Friday, January 14, 2011
9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Kenan-Flagler Business School, Kenan Center
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Register for the 2011 Symposium

In recent years, Asian societies have experienced a growth in heterogeneity. Due to economic developments, there has been increased intraregional migration that redefines local demographics. For example, economic forces have driven migrant workers from Southeast Asia to resettle in parts of East Asia. Workers have also been migrating to Asia from other parts of the world. State policies have promoted this migration. For example, jurisdictions such as Singapore and Hong Kong have sought to attract educated "creative class" workers from all around the world. Finally, there has also been increasing diversity due to empowerment of local minority groups. The growing political legibility of gays and lesbians in Asia is but one example of this development. States in Asia have been instituting legal reforms to address these changing dynamics. This symposium explores these sociolegal changes, examining how, in different ways, the law reflects, reinforces, and resists pluralism in Asia.

The keynote address will be given by Madhavi Sunder, 2006 Carnegie Scholar and professor of law at the University of California-Davis School of Law.

Confirmed symposium panelists include:

Kelley Loper, University of Hong Kong
Puja Kapai, University of Hong Kong
Wen-chen Chang, National Taiwan University
David Law, Washington University in St. Louis
Illhyung Lee, University of Missouri
Apichai Shipper, University of Southern California
Timothy Webster, Yale University
Anil Kalhan, Drexel University
Carl Minzner, Washington University in St. Louis
Jeffrey Redding, St. Louis University School of Law
Meredith Weiss, University of Albany
Hyunah Yang, Seoul National University

Selecting International Judges

2010-09-12T15:59:00.000-07:00

New book discusses the role of international judges on international justice...

See here

The (Indispensable) Middle Class in Developing Countries; or, the Rich and the Rest, Not the Poor and the Rest

2010-09-06T03:04:00.000-07:00

Nancy Birdsall at the Center for Global Development has an interesting new paper The (Indispensable) Middle Class in Developing Countries; or, the Rich and the Rest, Not the Poor and the Rest.

ABSTRACT: Inclusive growth is widely embraced as the central economic goal for developing countries, but the concept is not well defined in the development economics literature. Since the early 1990s, the focus has been primarily on pro-poor growth, with the “poor” being people living on less than $1 day, or in some regions $2 day. The idea of pro-poor growth emerged in the early 1990s as a counterpoint to a concern with growth alone (measured in per-capita income) and is generally defined as growth which benefits the poor as much or more than the rest of the population. Examples include conditional cash transfers, which target the poor while minimizing the fiscal burden on the public sector, and donors’ emphasizing primary over higher education as an assured way to benefit the poor while investing in long-term growth through increases in human capital. Yet these pro-poor, inclusive policies are not necessarily without tradeoffs in fostering long-run growth. In this paper I argue that the concept of inclusive growth should go beyond the traditional emphasis on the poor (and the rest) and take into account changes in the size and economic command of the group conventionally defined as neither poor nor rich, i.e., the middle class.

1st African Conference on Int’l Commercial Law - Douala, Cameroon

2010-08-29T11:46:00.001-07:00

The University of Basel in Switzerland and the University of Buea in Cameroon, with the support of UNCITRAL (United Nation Commission on International Trade Law) and OHADA (Organisation for the Harmonised Business Law in Africa) are organising an international conference entitled “The 1st African Conference on International Commercial Law.” The Conference will be held in Douala, Cameroon, Jan. 13-14, 2011. The Conference will focus on topics related to international sales law, international arbitration and unification of general contract law.

During this conference early career researchers also have the opportunity to present recent research papers relating to the topics of the conference. Early career researchers interested in submitting abstracts are invited to do so before Oct. 1, 2010. The abstract should be submitted as a word or pdf document with 12-point font, 1.5 line spacing and should not exceed 1500 words. The abstract should be sent via email to Jeanalain.Penda [at] unibas.ch. A jury of established academics will select the successful eight abstracts. The researchers of the selected abstracts will be given 10 minutes to present their papers during the “Early Career Researchers Panel.” The travel and accommodation expenses of the selected candidates will be covered.

Who is an Early Career Researcher?
Early Career Researchers are people who are within two years of the start of their research careers when submitting their abstract. They should be currently undertaking a dissertation, Ph.D. thesis or the like, or have received a doctoral degree not earlier than 2008.

For additional information please contact:
Jean Alain Penda at Jeanalain.Penda [at] unibas.ch or
Stephanie Wassem at Stephanie.Wassem [at] unibas.ch

Law and Development Institute Inaugural Conference

2010-08-01T03:34:00.000-07:00

The Law and Development Institute (LDI) is an international academic network established as a non-profit research institution in Sydney, Australia, with an objective of promoting law and development studies and projects. Law and development concerns the impacts of law on economic and social development, and the LDI aims to become an international centre for law and development studies.

Law and development studies concern the impact of international and domestic legal orders on economic development, which has become increasingly relevant to our economic lives due to the rapid globalization that has taken place in the recent decades. Law and development issues have become a subject of considerable attention in the recent Doha Round negotiations of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in relation to international trade law. The Doha Round was suspended because of the large gaps between the developed and developing countries in their positions on key international trade law and development issues. There are also many unresolved issues about the role of domestic laws and regulations as well as international law in economic development.

The LDI addresses those issues and seeks to help find solutions to poverty issues around the world by clarifying the impact that law has on economic development. Currently a number of preeminent scholars and professionals from several countries, includng the United States, Canada, China (including Hong Kong), Japan, Australia, Korea, Israel, and Singapore, are participating in the LDI.

LDI will be hosting its innagural conference, which will focus on trade issues.

Morning Session: Panel presentation I

Chair

Speakers

Professor Gary Horlick, former Head of U.S. Department of Commerce Import Administration

Professor Jai Sheen Mah, Ewha Womans University
"Law and Development in Korea: A Success Story"

Professor Jiangyu Wang, National University of Singapore
"Law and Development in China: Present and Future"

Dr. Salim Farrar, University of Sydney
"Law and Development in the Islam World: New Possibilities"

Dr. Malcolm Cook, Lowe Institute for International Policy
"Strategic Dimensions of National Development: Case of East Asia"

Afternoon Session: Panel presentation II

Chair

Speakers

Dr. Salim Farrar, University of Sydney

Professor Gary Horlick, former Head of U.S. Department of Commerce Import Administration
"The Future of the World Trade Organization: From Development Perspectives"

Professor Y.S. Lee, The Law and Development Institute
"Theoretical Basis and Regulatory Framework for Microtrade: Combining Volunteerism with
International Trade towards Poverty Elimination"

Professor Won-Mog Choi, Ewha Womans University
"WTO Rules and Agricultural Development Cooperation between Developed and Developing
Countries"

Professor Colin Picker, University of New South Wales
"International Trade and Development Law: A Legal Cultural Critique"

Afternoon Session: Panel presentation III

Chair

Speakers

Professor Y.S. Lee, The Law and Development Institute

Professor Mitsuo Matsushita, University of Tokyo and former WTO Appellate Body member
"Positions of Developing Countries in Free Trade Agreements"

Professor Maureen Irish, University of Windsor
"Special and Differential Treatment, Trade and Sustainable Development"

Professor Andrew Mitchell, University of Melbourne
"The Development Aspect of Trade & Health"

Dr. Tomer Broude, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
"Settling International Development Disputes through Conciliation"

Brain Drain Taxation as Development Policy

2010-07-14T12:54:00.000-07:00

My colleague Yariv Brauner has a forthcoming article titled Brain Drain Taxation as Development Policy.

ABSTRACT: This article examines the potential use of taxation to generate development funds in connection with the immigration of skilled immigrants from developing into developed countries, known as the "brain drain," if designed according to the principles of the new development agenda. It explains that a tax on the brain drain that has been discussed for several decades, yet considered impossible to administer, may be administratively and legally implementable within the framework of the current international tax regime. It argues that designing such a tax according to the principles of the new development agenda, tying together the collection and use of the revenue functions, is essential for the tax to be justifiable and effective. The article proceeds to set the parameters for its design.

African Land Grabbing: Whose Interests Are Served?

2010-07-04T05:49:00.000-07:00

A new piece by Brookings Director of the Africa Growth Initiative Ernest Aryeetey discusses transnational land acquisitions in Africa.

Naomi Campbell ordered to testify at Taylor war crimes trial

2010-07-01T11:54:00.000-07:00

Modelling international criminal justice?

More from the BBC

The Relation Between Firm-Level Corporate Governance and Market Value: A Study of India

2010-06-18T08:11:00.000-07:00

There is some interesting new data in this article.

Bala N. Balasubramanian
Indian Institute of Management Bangalore

Bernard S. Black
Northwestern University - School of Law; Northwestern University - Kellogg School of Management; University of Texas at Austin - School of Law; McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin; European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)

Vikramaditya S. Khanna
University of Michigan Law School

The Relation Between Firm-Level Corporate Governance and Market Value: A Study of India

ABSTRACT: Relatively little is known about the corporate governance practice of firms in emerging markets. We provide a detailed overview of the practices of publicly traded firms in India, and identify areas where governance practices are relatively strong or weak, relative to developed countries. We also examine whether there is a cross-sectional relationship between measures of governance and measures of firm performance and find evidence of a positive relationship for an overall governance index and for an index covering shareholder rights. The association is stronger for more profitable firms and firms with stronger growth opportunities.

Corporate Governance at the World Bank and the Dilemma of Global Governance

2010-06-16T03:23:00.000-07:00

There is a very interesting forthcoming piece in the World Bank Economic Review titled Corporate Governance at the World Bank and the Dilemma of Global Governance by Ashwin Kaja and Eric Werker.

ABSTRACT: Most major decisions at the World Bank are made by its Board of Executive Directors. While some countries enjoy the opportunity to serve on this powerful body, most countries rarely, if ever, get that chance. This gives rise to the question: Does board membership lead to higher funding from the World Bank's two main development financing institutions, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA). Empirical analysis shows that developing countries serving on the board can expect more than double the funding from the IBRD as countries not on the board. In absolute terms, countries on the board receive an average $60 million "bonus" in IBRD loans, an amount that rises in years when IBRD loans are in high demand, particularly for countries in the most influential seats. This effect is more likely driven by informal rules and norms in the boardroom than by the power of the vote itself. No significant effect is found in IDA funding. These results point to challenges of global governance through representative institutions.

Democratization and Economic Globalization

2010-06-08T03:20:00.000-07:00

A new article caught my attention. Helen V. Milner, Princeton University and Bumba Mukherjee, Pennsylvania State University have work that came out in the Annual Review of Political Science, (Vol. 12, pp. 163-181, 2009) titled Democratization and Economic Globalization.

ABSTRACT: We address two questions that are central to the literature on the emergence of democracy and economic globalization. First, does democratization foster higher levels of trade and capital account openness? Second, do trade and capital account openness increase the likelihood of democratization? We review the literature in international political economy and comparative politics that has theoretically and empirically addressed these questions. We then conduct some empirical tests in a sample of developing countries to briefly evaluate the empirical relationship between democracy and economic globalization. Our analysis reveals that evidence for the claim that democracy fosters trade and capital account liberalization is robust but that empirical support for the predicted positive effect of economic openness on democracy among developing countries is weak. More theoretical work is needed to clarify the link between democracy and economic liberalization, and to this end we provide possible topics for future research.

Attention Lower and Middle Income Country Academics

2010-06-02T17:12:00.000-07:00

Christine Parker (University of Melbounre - Law) has asked for some help. She writes:

Vibeke Nielsen and myself together chair the “collaborative research network on regulatory governance” for the US Law and Society Meeting. We have the opportunity to obtain some funding to help bring scholars from low and middle income countries to the next two meetings of the Law and Society Association in San Francisco (2011) and Hawai’i (2012). However we need to have the names of scholars now.

If you are in this category, would you please email me urgently (by Monday June 7) with your name and a very rough idea of the topics on which you might present at the Law and Society meeting. (You will not be held to it – but we do need to provide a specific indication at this stage.

I have included a list of relevant countries below my signature line.

All the best,

Christine Parker

Dr Christine Parker
Associate Professor and Reader
ARC Australian Research Fellow
Melbourne Law School
University of Melbourne
Victoria 3010 AUSTRALIA
(+61) (0)3 8344 1093
My web profile:
http://www.law.unimelb.edu.au/staff/Christine%20Parker

Below is a list of low income, lower middle income and upper middle income countries.

LOWER
Afghanistan
Bangladesh
Benin
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cambodia
Central African Republic
Chad
Comoros
Congo, Dem. Rep.
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gambia, The
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Haiti
Kenya
Korea, Dem. Rep.
Kyrgyz Republic
Lao PDR
Liberia
Madagascar
Malawi
Mali
Mauritania
Mozambique
Myanmar
Nepal
Niger
Rwanda
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Somalia
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Togo
Uganda
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
Yemen, Rep.
Zambia
Zimbabwe
****
LOWER MIDDLE
Albania
Angola
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Belize
Bhutan
Bolivia
Cameroon
Cape Verde
China
Congo, Rep.
Côte d'Ivoire
Djibouti
Ecuador
Egypt, Arab Rep.
El Salvador
Georgia
Guatemala
Guyana
Honduras
India
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Iraq
Jordan
Kiribati
Kosovo
Lesotho
Maldives
Marshall Islands
Micronesia, Fed. Sts.
Moldova
Mongolia
Morocco
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Pakistan
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Philippines
Samoa
São Tomé and Principe
Solomon Islands
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Swaziland
Syrian Arab Republic
Thailand
Timor-Leste
Tonga
Tunisia
Turkmenistan
Ukraine
Vanuatu
West Bank and Gaza
*****
UPPER MIDDLE
Algeria
American Samoa
Argentina
Belarus
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Cuba
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Fiji
Gabon
Grenada
Jamaica
Kazakhstan
Latvia
Lebanon
Libya
Lithuania
Macedonia, FYR
Malaysia
Mauritius
Mayotte
Mexico
Montenegro
Namibia
Palau
Panama
Peru
Poland
Romania
Russian Federation
Serbia
Seychelles
South Africa
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Suriname
Turkey
Uruguay
Venezuela, RB

Call for Papers

2010-05-24T11:34:00.000-07:00

A conference on 'Law and Culture: Meaningful Legal Pluralism in the Pacific and Beyond' will be hosted by the USP School of Law, Emalus Campus in Port Vila, Vanuatu from 30 August-1 September 2010.

Sounds like an adventure! For more info go to the conference website

New Article in Law and Development Review

2010-05-20T10:02:00.000-07:00

A critical view on TRIPs, Patents and Medical Access...

M., Gopakumar K. (2010) "Product Patents and Access to Medicines in India: A Critical Review of the Implementation of TRIPS Patent Regime," The Law and Development Review: Vol. 3 : No. 2, Article 11.

In 2005, India amended its Patents Act, 1970 to introduce TRIPS compliant product patent regime. Generally speaking, law and policy makers in India during the time of the amendment were confronted with two major concerns viz. the future of the Indian pharmaceutical industry and access to affordable medicines in India and other developing countries. To address these concerns India along with many other developing countries attempted to incorporate TRIPS flexibilities in their domestic law. However, the success of the TRIPS flexibilities in addressing the question of access to affordable medicines mainly depends on three factors: a) the incorporation of flexibilities in the domestic law; b) the manufacturing capability of a country; and c) the political will to use the public interest safeguards provided in the domestic law. There are only a few countries like India, which satisfy the above-mentioned conditions to a certain extent. This article examines whether these premises hold true after five years into the implementation of the TRIPS compliant patent system in India. In this context the paper identifies and analyzes the legal, policy and institutional challenges that India is currently facing in the implementation of TRIPS flexibilities. It also identifies the main legal, policy and institutional disconnect in the implementation of TRIPS flexibilities in India. It argues that to effectively use TRIPS flexibilities to address access to affordable medicines require changes in three areas viz. law, policy and institutions. It clearly shows that mere incorporation of TRIPS flexibilities in the domestic legislation alone is not enough and the domestic legislation needs to be complemented with policy and institutional framework.

www.bepress.com/ldr/vol3/iss2/art11/

Law and Development Review: Spexial Issue - New Voices from Emerging Powers - Brazil and India

2010-05-09T17:27:00.000-07:00

This symposium looks interesting. I write looks because I am still grading finals so I do not have time to read it yet.

Law and Development review
Volume 3, Number 2 (2010)
Special Issue (2010): New Voices from Emerging Powers - Brazil and India

Introduction3
Bhupinder Chimni and David Trubek

PDF4
Linking Promises to Policies: Law and Development in an Unequal Brazil5
Diogo R. Coutinho

PDF6
The Persistence of Formalism: Towards a Situated Critique beyond the Classic Separation of Powers7
Jose R. Rodriguez

PDF8
Development Bank, Law and Innovation Financing in a New Brazilian Economy9
Mario Schapiro

PDF10
John Rawls' Justice as Fairness and the WTO: A Critical Analysis on the Initial Position of the Multilateral Agricultural Negotiation11
Rafael Rosa Cedro and Bruno Furtado Vieira

PDF12
Turning Trips on Its Head: An "IP Cross Retaliation" Model for Developing Countries13
Shamnad Basheer

PDF14
Exceptions and Limitations in Indian Copyright Law for Education: An Assessment15
Lawrence Liang

PDF16
The Indian Competition Act: A Historical and Developmental Perspective17
Shiju Varghese Mazhuvanchery

PDF18
Transit and Trade Barriers in South Asia: Multilateral Obligations and Development Perspective19
Prabir De

PDF20
Stock Market and Shareholder Protection: Are They Important for Economic Growth?21
Francis Xavier Rathinam and A. V. Raja

Designing Antitrust Agencies for More Effective Outcomes: What Antitrust Can Learn From Restaurant Guides

2010-05-04T06:03:00.000-07:00

I have a new essay in which I propose a user guide to measure effectiveness of regulatory agencies. The essay is Designing Antitrust Agencies for More Effective Outcomes: What Antitrust Can Learn From Restaurant Guides.

Antitrust policy should be concerned with the quality and effectiveness of the antitrust system. Some efforts at agency effectiveness include self-study of antitrust agencies to determine the factors that lead to improving agency quality. Such studies, however, often focus only on enforcement decisions and other agency initiatives such as competition advocacy. They do not reflect at least one other part of the equation: what do non-government users of the antitrust system think about the quality of antitrust agencies? This Symposium Essay advocates the use of a ratings guide by antitrust practitioners for antitrust agencies to add to the tools in which to measure agency effectiveness for both mature and emerging antitrust agencies.

Who Bribes in Public Contracting and Why: Worldwide Evidence from Firms

2010-04-24T17:38:00.000-07:00

This new article has some really interesting findings. Download it while it is hot.

Who Bribes in Public Contracting and Why: Worldwide Evidence from Firms

Utilizing data from an enterprise survey of over 11,000 firms operating in 125 countries, and building on a profit maximizing cost-benefit framework driving a firm’s bribery decision, we study the determinants of bribery in public procurement contracting. The data suggest that about one-third of firms bribe in order to secure public contracts, and that these firms pay an average of 7.9% of the contract value in bribes. The likelihood of bribing is higher in low income countries (50%), yet in industrialized OECD countries bribery does take place among a substantial minority (14%) of firms.

Econometric estimations suggest that the demand side of good governance (voice and democratic accountability, press freedom, transparency) and the supply-side (rule of law, government effectiveness), along with competition, reduce both the incidence and magnitude (fee) of procurement bribery by the firm. Multinational firms appear to partially adapt to their host country governance environment, bribing more often in medium- and low-income countries (at 20%) than in OECD countries (at 11%). Yet multinationals do not fully ‘adapt’ and thus do not behave exactly like the domestic firms in the host country (at 36%); transnational firms appear more sensitive to reputational costs in their home country and internationally as well.

Firms that are larger and foreign-owned are less likely to bribe than smaller domestic firms, yet among bribers, foreign and domestic firms pay similar bribe fees. This suggests that reputational risks - which weigh on the decision to bribe, not on the amount - play an important role. The results are consistent with the firm’s profit-maximizing framework and have implications for policy, namely in efforts to raise the cost and lower the benefits of bribing (e.g. detection and public disclosure of firms that bribe). The results also cast doubt on conventional initiatives that do not affect the profit function (such as voluntary codes of conduct).

Laws Locations: The Textures of Legality in Developing and Transitional Societies

2010-04-24T17:22:00.000-07:00

Laws Locations: The Textures of Legality in Developing and Transitional Societies
April 23-25, 2010, UW Law School

The Conference titled "Laws Locations: The Textures of Legality in Developing and Transitional Societies" will be held at the University of Wisconsin Law School on April 23-25, 2010. The conference is held in conjunction with the annual symposium of the Wisconsin International Law Journal. It is part of the Research Circle on Role of Law in Developing and Transition Countries.

The conference is held in honor of Professor David Trubek, Voss Bascom Emeritus Professor of Law and Senior Fellow, Center for World Affairs and the Global Economy (WAGE).

Guest speaker:

Professor Richard Abel, Michael J Connell Professor of Law, University of California Los Angeles Law School will deliver "Personal Reminiscences of David Trubek."

Conference theme

Agenda

Speaker bios

Abstracts

Papers

Flavia Agnes

Cathi Albertyn

Helena Alviar

Joe Conti

Allison Christians

Javier Couso

Diogo Coutinho

Jackie Dugard

David Engel

Mary Gallagher

Manuel Gomez

Mario Gomez

Diana Kapiszewski

Jonathan Klaaren

Lisa Laplante

Lauren McCarthy

Sally Merry

Shunko Rojas

Alvaro Santos

Greg Shaffer

Mario Schapiro

Druscilla Scribner

Mauricio Villegas

LLSV Revisited Symposium in the BYU Law Review

2010-04-03T17:57:00.000-07:00

Volume 2009, no. 6

Articles
“Law and Finance”: Inaccurate, Incomplete, and Important
Ruth V. Aguilera and Cynthia A. Williams

Law and Financial Development: What We Are Learning from Time-Series Evidence
John Armour, Simon Deakin, Viviana Mollica, and Mathias Siems

Legal Regimes and Political Particularism: An Assessment of the “Legal Families” Theory from the Perspectives of Comparative Law and Political Economy
John W. Cioffi

Unpacking Adaptability
Andreas Engert and D. Gordon Smith

The Legal Origins Theory in Crisis
Lisa M. Fairfax

Legal Origins and the Tasks of Corporate Law in Economic Development: A Preliminary Exploration
John Ohnesorge

A "Law & Personal Finance" View of Legal Origins Theory
Karl S. Okamoto

Rethinking the "Law and Finance" Paradigm
Katharina Pistor

Legal Origins, Investor Protection, and Canada
Poonam Puri

Mixing-and-Matching Across (Legal) Family Lines
J. Mark Ramseyer

Competition Policy and Comparative Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises
D. Daniel Sokol

Contemporary Legal Transplants: Legal Families and the Diffusion of (Corporate) Law
Holger Spamann

Legal Origins, Functionalism, and the Future of Comparative Law
Christopher A. Whytock

Technology Entrepreneurship and Management Conference and Call for Papers

2010-03-24T06:16:00.000-07:00

The Brown International Advanced Research Institutes (BIARI) ambitious new program is designed to provide a valuable professional development opportunity for young faculty in the early stages of their research and teaching careers.

From June 13th - June 26th 2010, we will convene 30-40 emerging scholars at an Institute on Technology Entrepreneurship and Management at Brown University in the United States.

This Institute will provide a forum for presenting and discussing research on a broad range of current themes in entrepreneurship studies and related disciplines. Perspectives will include, but are by no means limited to: development economics, organizational and economic sociology, management theory, and technology studies. The program will devote particular attention to similarities and differences between entrepreneurship in the ‘Global North’ and ‘Global South’; however, work with a purely Southern or purely Northern focus is also welcome, especially if the researcher is receptive to cross-national comparisons.

Instructors and keynote speakers at the Institute will be a mix of Brown faculty and leading scholars from institutions around the world. Further details about the Institute can be found here.

Technology Entrepreneurship and Management is one of four Institutes being held in June 2010. To learn more about the BIARI initiative and the application process. please visit our website at: http://brown.edu/BIARI

The Brown International Advanced Research Institutes program has been generously funded by Brown University and Santander Universities. Successful applicants will receive travel assistance, be hosted in University residential housing and be provided catered meals. During
the Institute, participants will have access to Brown University's world class research facilities. Please send questions and comments to BIARI@brown.edu.

Unpacking Adaptability

2010-03-20T05:28:00.000-07:00

I just read an interesting new paper on LLSV.

Unpacking Adaptability

Andreas Engert
Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich - Institute of International Law - Comparative Law

D. Gordon Smith
Brigham Young University - J. Reuben Clark Law School

Brigham Young University Law Review, p. 1553, 2009

Abstract: Legal Origins Theory -- first proposed over a decade ago by Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrei Shleifer and Robert W. Vishny -- holds that adaptable legal systems produce superior substantive law that, in turn, leads to superior economic outcomes. In this essay, we examine this adaptability hypothesis. The chief methodological challenge confronting the empirical study of adaptability is that researchers cannot measure adaptability directly. Legal Origins Theory attempts to surmount this challenge, in the first instance, by using legal institutions as proxies for adaptability. One of the foundational assumptions of Legal Origins Theory is that courts engage in highly contextualized rulemaking that improves the quality of law over time. Legal Origins Theory then takes this assumption one step further, asserting that “judicial law making and adaptation play a greater role in common than in civil law.” Thus, legal origin becomes a second-order proxy for adaptability. We contend that adaptability is undertheorized and that a more nuanced understanding of adaptability reveals the implausibility of legal origin as proxy for adaptability.

Harvard Institute for Global Law and Policy Workshop on Global Law and Economic Policy

2010-03-20T04:27:00.000-07:00

The Institute for Global Law and Policy is proud to announce our first annual Workshop on Global Law and Economic Policy, June 2-11, 2010 at Harvard Law School.

IGLP: The Workshop is an intensive ten day residential program designed for doctoral and post-doctoral scholars. The Workshop aims to promote innovative ideas and alternative approaches to issues of global law, economic policy and social justice in the aftermath of the economic crisis. The initiative will bring young scholars and faculty from around the world together with leading faculty working on issues of global law and economic policy for serious research collaboration and debate. Hosted by Harvard Law School, The Workshop aims to bring together specialists from across the arts and sciences as well as the professional schools who are interested in the intersections between law, economics and global policy.

The Workshop is funded with generous support from Santander Universities and Sovereign Bank

It is co-sponsored by the School for Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London, the Bernard and Audre Rapoport Center for Human Rights and Justice at the University of Texas, and Sciences Po Law School in Paris.

Professor David Kennedy will serve as Faculty Director for the Workshop. He is Director of The Institute for Global Law and Policy and Professor of Law at Harvard Law School where he teaches international law, international economic policy, legal theory, law and development and European law. His research uses interdisciplinary materials from sociology and social theory, economics and history to explore issues of global governance, development policy and the nature of professional expertise.

The Core Faculty for 2010 will include:

Matthew Craven, Dean of the Faculty of Law and Social Sciences, Professor of International Law and Director, Centre for the Study of Colonialism, Empire and International Law, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London; Dennis Davis, Judge of the High Court of Cape Town, South Africa; Christine Desan, Professor of Law, Harvard Law School; Karen Engle, Cecil D. Redford Professor in Law and Director, Bernard and Audre Rapoport Center for Human Rights and Justice, University of Texas; Jorge Esquirol, Professor of Law and Director of International & Comparative Law Programs, Florida International University College of Law; Roy Kreitner, Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv; Susan Marks, Professor of Public International Law, King's College London; Vasuki Nesiah, Lecturer in Law, Brown University; Kerry Rittich, Associate Professor at The Faculty of Law and the Women's and Gender Studies Institute at The University of Toronto; Alvaro Santos, Associate Professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center; Chantal Thomas, Professor of Law and Director of the Clarke Initiative for Law and Development in the Middle East and North Africa, Cornell Law School; Robert Wai, Associate Professor of Law, Osgoode Hall Law School, Toronto; Mikhail Xifaras, Professor of Law, Sciences Po Law School.

The Core Faculty will be joined by speakers and discussants from Harvard and other leading universities.

While in residence at Harvard, participants will review current scholarly developments and reconsider canonical texts with the aim of strengthening our ability to understand and influence the shape and direction of global economic policy and law. Afternoon pro-seminars will offer participants the opportunity to share their own work in progress with colleagues and leading scholars in their field.

IGLP: The Workshop will be organized around six Program Themes:

The Structure and History of Global Law
Global Political Economy: The Architecture of Monetary and Financial Integration
Human Rights and Social Justice
International Economic Policy and Transnational Regulation
Law and Economic Development
Global Law: Universality and Constitutionalism
Exploration of each Program Theme will be led by a team of senior scholars and will be designed to promote discussion on recent scholarly trends as well as classical texts. In addition there will be several plenary talks by leading scholars and policy makers. All participants in The Workshop will have an opportunity to participate in exploration of each thematic area and to share their own scholarship. Our goal will be to understand the history and structure of our contemporary world political and economic system. We will aim to map modern money, finance, development, governance, regulation and social justice, opening them to contestation and debate.
Click here to Apply to IGLP: The Workshop!

The Institute for Global Law and Policy is committed to keeping the Workshop as cost-free as possible for admitted applicants, including travel, meals and lodging.

Click Here for Information about Traveling to Harvard.

Law, Finance and Development: Further Analyses of Longitudinal Data

2010-03-14T04:20:00.000-07:00

Prabirjit Sarkar, Centre for Business Research,University of Cambridge, Jadavpur University and Ajit Singh, University of Cambridge explore Law, Finance and Development: Further Analyses of Longitudinal Data.

ABSTRACT: This paper analyses a longitudinal dataset on legal protection of shareholders over a 36 year period, 1970-2005, for four advanced countries, the UK, France, Germany and the USA. It examines two aspects of the legal origin hypothesis-whether shareholder protection is higher in the common law countries (UK and USA) than in the civil law countries (France and Germany) and whether shareholder protection matters for stock market development in the short and long runs. It also examines the ‘causation’ issue and the ‘endogeneity’ problem-whether greater shareholder protection leads to stock market development or whether stock market development leads to changes in law. The paper casts serious doubt on the validity of the basic theses of the Anglo Saxon legal and developmental model.

Afghanistan and the Future of State Building

2010-03-14T04:17:00.000-07:00

The University of La Verne College of Law presents What Makes States Successful? Afghanistan and the Future of State Building April 15-17, 2010.

State failure is one of the most challenging public policy problems of our age. Despite the pressures of globalization on the autonomy of states, they remain the most important locations of institutions to promote justice and the welfare of the peoples of the world. States are vital to maintaining peace and security across the globe. We need states to succeed. But they sometimes fail. Why? And how do we turn failed states into successful states? This symposium examines these questions with a four-fold focus. First, the focus is on state failure that is either caused by or is in some way related to armed conflict within a state, either from a civil war or from armed intervention by intervening states, United Nations Security Council action, or otherwise. Second, the focus is on institutional solutions to state failure, with an emphasis on rule of law. Third, the focus is on developing action plans or protocols containing concrete solutions to help failed states become successful states. Fourth, the symposium focuses on Afghanistan. Afghanistan provides a rich source of data and experience on what works and what fails, although Afghanistan remains very much a work in progress. An important symposium aim is to produce policy guidance for future directions in that country. The symposium approach is multi-disciplinary, with the goal of learning from a diversity of views.

Keynote Speakers:
•H.E. Mohammad Eshak Aloko
Attorney General of Afghanistan
•Cherif Bassiouni
Distinguished Research Professor of Law, DePaul University
College of Law , President Emeritus of the International
Human Rights Law Institute
•Hon. Pierre-Richard Prosper
Former U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues
Panel Discussions Include:
•Are Protocols Possible?
•Constitutions, Multicultural Democracies, and Citizenship
•Criminal Justice
•Human Rights
•Immediate Post-Conflict Priorities
•Militaries and National Security Institutions
•Military Intervention
•Transitional Justice
Event Schedule:
Event Schedule

Panelists Include:
•Juan Botero
Rule of Law Index Director, World Justice Project
•Hon. David O. Carter
U.S. District Judge, Central District of California
•Feryal Cherif
Assistant Professor of Political Science,
University of California Riverside
•Marisa S. Cianciarulo
Associate Professor of Law, Chapman University School of Law
•Erin Daly
Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Development, Widener University School of Law
•Michael Delaney
Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for South Asia
•John Dempsey
Senior Rule of Law Adviser, Kabul,
United States Institute of Peace
•Jasteena Dhillon
Associate Fellow, Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government, Carr Center for Human Rights Policy
•Elise Groulx Diggs
President, International Criminal Defence Attorneys Association
•Lew Diggs
Principal, L.H. Diggs Consulting Services
•Jonathan Eddy
Director, Asian Law Center; Manager, Afghanistan Legal Educators Project and Professor of Law, University of Washington School of Law
•Pierre Englebert
Professor of Politics, Pomona College
•Fatima Gailani
President, Afghanistan Red Crescent Society
•David Glazier
Professor of Law, Loyola Los Angeles Law School
•Tiffany Graham
Associate Professor of Law, University of La Verne College of Law
•Ric Grenell
Former Director of Communications and Public Diplomacy for the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations; Senior Vice President for Communications for DaVita, Inc.
•John Hall
Associate Professor of Law, Chapman University School of Law
•Hon. Kerry Murphy Healey
Former Lieutenant Governor, Commonwealth of Massachusetts
•Col. V. Joshi
Canada Deputy Judge Advocate General/Military Justice and Administrative Law
•David Kaye
Executive Director, UCLA International Human Rights Program
•Steve Kraft
Director, Afghanistan-Pakistan Office, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State
•Hon. Stephen G. Larson
Partner, Girardi Keese
•LCol (Ret.) David Last
Professor of Political Science, Royal Military College of Canada
•John Linarelli
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law,
University of La Verne College of Law
•Grey Maggiano
Justice Program Manager, Afghanistan-Pakistan Office, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs,
U.S. Department of State
•Major Jeremy Marsh
U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School, Charlottesville, VA
•Admiral (Ret.) Bruce MacDonald
former Judge Advocate General, U.S. Navy
•Col. Dominic D. McAlea
Canada Deputy Judge Advocate Regional Services Ottawa
•CDR Caren McCurdy
U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General
•Serge Michailof
former Executive Director Agence
Francaise de Développement
•Hon. Douglas P. Miller
Associate Justice, California Court of Appeal
•Hon. Robert O’Brien
Managing Partner, Arent Fox LLP; Co-Chair, U.S. Department of State Public-Private Partnership for Justice Reform in Afghanistan
•Mary Ellen O’Connell
Robert and Marion Short Professor of Law and Research Professor of International Dispute Resolution, University of Notre Dame Law School
•Cesare Pinelli
Professor of Regional and Constitutional Law,
University of Rome La Sapienza
•Rohullah Qarizada
President, Afghanistan Independent Bar Association
•Lako Tongun
Associate Professor of International and Intercultural Studies,
Pitzer College

Important Law and Development Session at Law and Society this May in Chicago

2010-03-10T18:03:00.000-08:00

Scheduled Time: Sat, May 29 - 2:30pm - 4:15pm Building/Room: Renaissance / tba 03
Title Displayed in Event Calendar: CRN24 Rule of Law, State Building, and Transition--Roundtable--Success in Law and Development: Evaluating the Conventional Wisdom of Using Evidence from the Field 3403

Abstract: Law and development works involves Assessing existing rights and duties, Building capacity, Contesting existing and future rights and duties, Delegating the implementation of projects and Evaluating outcomes. This round table is made up of participants who have conducted extensive field work in developing and transitional economies. Drawing on their field work, each participant will give a short presentation about the extent to which a specific legal reform program has achieved its objectives. Thereafter, there will be a round table discussion covering a broader discussion on the role of legal reforms and what is working and what is not. At this point the audience will be invited to participate in the discussion.

Session chair: Amanda Perry-Kessaris, Birkbeck, University of London
Participants:
Elin Cohen (University of Washington) evaluates the Kenyan government's efforts to improve the business climate and stimulate economic growth by supporting small business associations.
Jon Eddy (Univeristy of Washington) rethinks assumptions underlying US Rule of Law efforts in Afghanistan.
Kevin Fandl (American University) examines the relationship between weak rule of law, including business registration and legal compliance and the informal economy in Colombia.
Amanda Perry-Kessaris (Birkbeck, University of London) evaluates the World Bank's attempts to increase foreign direct investment by encouraging the Government of India to reform Indian laws and legal institutions.
Veronica Taylor (University of Washington/ Australian National University) presents new empirical findings from China that challenge the common assumptions about the benefits of clinical law programs and legal aid projects.

Book review for Latin American Competition Law and Policy

2010-03-08T08:08:00.000-08:00

Ricardo Jungmann of the Catholic University of Chile has a very nice book review of my book Latin American Competition Law and Policy.

Formal or Informal Justice in Afghanistan

2010-03-05T11:10:00.000-08:00

Interesting view on role law and development might play in Afghanistan. Here

The Future of Development: Human Rights and International Aid Beyond the Economic Crisis

2010-02-14T03:05:00.000-08:00

Yale Law School will host

Bernstein Symposium 2010
The Future of Development:
Human Rights and International Aid Beyond the Economic Crisis

Robert L. Bernstein International Human Rights Fellowship Symposium

Sponsored by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation

April 8-9, 2010

Competition Policy and Comparative Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises

2010-02-12T07:04:00.000-08:00

My newest paper, Competition Policy and Comparative Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises, is available on SSRN.

ABSTRACT: The legal origins literature overlooks a key area of corporate governance - the governance of state-owned enterprises (“SOEs”). There are key theoretical differences between SOEs and publicly-traded corporations. In comparing the differences of both internal and external controls of SOEs, none of the existing legal origins allow for effective corporate governance monitoring. Because of the difficulties of undertaking a cross-country quantitative review of the governance of SOEs, this Article examines, through a series of case studies, SOE governance issues among postal providers. The examination of postal firms supports the larger theoretical claim about the weaknesses of SOE governance across legal origins. In itself, the lack of effective corporate governance would not be fatal if some of the SOE’s inefficient and societal-welfare-reducing behavior could be remedied under antitrust law. However, a review of antitrust decisions on the issue of predatory pricing by SOEs reveals that antitrust is equally ineffective in its attempts to monitor SOEs. This Article concludes by identifying a number of devices to reduce the current inadequacies of both antitrust and corporate governance of SOEs.

Symposium: The Future of Law and Development, Part V

2010-02-01T18:48:00.000-08:00

The final part of our blog symposium series is up, with contributions from Veronica Taylor (U. Washington) and John Ohnesorge (Wisconsin).

Kaufmann on the Misuse of Law

2010-01-22T03:55:00.000-08:00

Daniel Kaufmann of Brookings has a great post on Misrule of Law Matters: Time to Reboot?

The Future of Law and Development Symposium Recap

2010-01-12T07:42:00.000-08:00

The Future of Law and Development Symposium was our first online blog venture in the world of symposia. I think it was a great success. Thank you to all of our participants and the staff of the Northwestern Law Review Colloquy.

To find the various postings (which are also available via westlaw and lexis) see the following:

Part I
Tom Ginsburg (Chicago), Salil Mehra (Temple), Katharina Pistor (Columbia), & Anna Gelpern (American)
Part II
Mariana Prado (Toronto), Susan D. Franck (Washington & Lee), & John Cioffi (UC Riverside)
Part III
Kevin Davis (NYU), Adam Feibelman (Carolina), Brian Z. Tamanaha (Wash U), & Yuka Kaneko (Kobe)
Part IV
D. Daniel Sokol (Florida) & Daniel Kaufmann (Brookings)

Symposium: The Future of Law and Development, Part IV

2010-01-11T15:55:00.000-08:00

The final part of the Future of Law and Development is up on the Northwestern Law Review website, availabloe here. The final set of contributions come from Daniel Sokol (University of Florida) and Daniel Kaufmann (Brookings Institution).

Marketing and Selling Transnational ‘Judges’ and Global ‘Experts’: Building the Credibility of (Quasi)Judicial Regulation

2010-01-05T06:10:00.000-08:00

There is a new piece out worth reading on Marketing and Selling Transnational ‘Judges’ and Global ‘Experts’: Building the Credibility of (Quasi)Judicial Regulation by Yves M. Dezalay, National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS)Bryant Garth, Southwestern Law School, American Bar Foundation.

ABSTRACT: Drawing on examples from the fields of international commercial arbitration and international human rights, in particular, and also on trade, intellectual property and governance, this article explores the processes through which transnational norms are created and legitimated. The article rejects approaches that presume an international consensus around norms or simply the imposition of Northern norms and technologies on the South, showing instead how the fields are developed, the advantages that favour ideas and approaches that are credible in the North, and also how limited openings to individuals from the South subtly modify the norms - which in turn reinforces their legitimacy. The article also shows that legal processes, courts and court-like approaches serve to capture both the hierarchies of the field and the processes that can allow a slow evolution that produces some change-but no challenge to the basic orientation.

Law and Development in Antitrust - the Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law

2010-01-02T04:27:00.000-08:00

Over at the Antitrust and Competition Policy Blog, Wentong Zheng (Buffalo Law) has a series of great posts analyzing the first year of the Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law.

Post 1
Post 2
Post 3
Post 4
Post 5

An Important New article on Legal Origins - Specifically Legal Origins in Roman Law

2010-01-01T04:39:00.000-08:00

A fun article to read this break has been Ulrike Malmendier's "Law and Finance "at the Origin"." Journal of Economic Literature, 47(4): 1076–1108 (2009). It is in the current issue.

ABSTRACT: What are the key determinants of financial development and growth? A large literature debates the relative importance of countries' legal and political environment. In this paper, I present evidence from ancient Rome, where an early form of shareholder company, the societas publicanorum, developed. I show that the societas publicanorum flourished in a legally underdeveloped but politically supportive environment (Roman Republic) and disappeared when Roman law reached its height of legal sophistication but the political environment grew less supportive (Roman Empire). In the Roman case, legal development appears to have mattered little as long as the law as practiced was flexible and adapted to economic needs. The "law as practiced," in turn, reflected prevalent political interests. After discussing parallels in more recent history, I provide a brief overview of the literature on law and finance and on politics and finance. The historical evidence suggests that legal systems may be less of a technological constraint for growth than previously thought -- at least "at the origin."

Stanford/Harvard Third Annual International Junior Faculty Forum

2009-12-28T16:53:00.000-08:00

Harvard Law School and Stanford Law School
Third Annual International Junior Faculty Forum

Call for Papers

Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School have established an International Junior Faculty Forum. The idea behind this is to stimulate exchange of ideas and research, among younger scholars in the academy, from all parts of the world; and to encourage younger scholars in their work. We live today in a global community-- especially a global legal community-- and it is important to develop legal scholarship on a transnational basis. Scholars in different countries are often divided by barriers of time and space, as well as barriers of different legal traditions and cultures. We hope that the forum will be a step in the direction of surmounting these barriers.

The papers at the 2009 Forum were on a very wide range of subjects, from the WTO to issues of Muslim marriage in South Africa to the role of lawyers in the financial crisis. The young scholars came from many different countries, and, so too, did the senior scholars. Together, six continents and a wide range of points of view were represented.

The sponsors, Harvard and Stanford law schools, are pleased to announce plans for the third International Junior Faculty Forum. The Forum will be held in October 2010 at the Stanford Law School, Stanford, California with the precise dates to be determined later.

Junior scholars whose home institution is outside the United States and who have held a faculty position for less than seven years, as of 2010, or whose last degree was earned less than ten years earlier than 2010 and are not U.S. citizens, are invited to apply for the 2010 session. The first step in applying is to submit an abstract of the proposed paper. We would like these to be no more than 4 pages. Tell us what you plan to do; lay out the major argument of the paper, say something about the methodology, and what you think will be the paper's contribution to scholarship. We ask you to submit the abstract in English. The due date for the abstracts is January 20, 2010, although earlier submissions are welcomed. Please submit the abstract electronically to both schools-- at Harvard, to Juliet Bowler ( jbowler@law.harvard.eduThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ), and at Stanford to Stephanie Basso ( sbasso@law.stanford.eduThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ). The subject line should be: International Junior Faculty Forum. The abstract should contain the author's name, home institution, and the title of the proposed paper.

After the abstracts have been reviewed, we will in February invite a number of junior scholars to submit full papers, electronically (in English) by May 31, 2010. Papers may be on any legally relevant subject. We especially welcome work that is interdisciplinary. The papers can make use of any relevant approach; they can be quantitative or qualitative, sociological, anthropological, historical, or economic. The sponsoring schools would like to emphasize that they welcome papers from junior scholars from all parts of the world. No country or group of countries has a monopoly of talent. Please note that already published papers are not eligible to be considered.

An international committee of legal scholars, who themselves come from across the globe, and represent many different styles and approaches, will review the papers. In the end, about ten of the papers will be chosen for presentation at the conference. And, as before, at the conference itself, two senior scholars, will comment on each paper. After the commentators give their remarks, all of the participants, juniors and seniors alike, will have a chance to join in the discussion. Meeting junior and senior colleagues, and talking about your work and theirs, may be one of the most valuable-- and enjoyable-- aspects of the forum.

The sponsoring schools will cover expenses of travel, including airfare, lodging, and food, for each participant. Questions should be directed to Juliet Bowler ( jbowler@law.harvard.eduThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ) or Stephanie Basso ( sbasso@law.stanford.eduThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ).

Symposium: A Changing of the Guard: The Future of International Law and Development under Obama

2009-12-25T16:30:00.000-08:00

Symposium
A Changing of the Guard: The Future of International Law and Development under Obama
North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commerical Regulation

Friday, January 29, 2010
9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Kenan-Flagler Business School, Kenan Center
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Register for the 2010 Symposium

After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the international aid and development policies of the United States and other Western powers were dominated by the Washington Consensus, a standard package of legal and economic reforms designed to allow the free hand of competitive markets to bring economic prosperity and political stability to the developing world. The Consensus stressed the shrinking of states and their regulatory structures; privatization; trade liberalization; protection of individual rights; and the general Westernization of poor countries' legal systems. In the view of most commentators, these Consensus reforms failed to achieve their intended results. Poor countries who adopted them become poorer and less politically stable.
In recent years, U.S. development policy has focused on the importance of healthy institutions. While the Consensus aimed to drastically pare governmental institutions, the new institutional approach acknowledges the vital role of institutions - particularly laws and legal enforcement mechanisms - and focuses on ensuring that those institutions are healthy, high-functioning, and conducive to economic growth and political stability.

This Symposium will explore questions such as:

•Will - or should - the new institutional approach remain at the center of future law and development policy?
•Will other voices prevail, such as the growing call for the United States to stop meddling in the developing world and withdraw entirely from the international development business?
•Will the emergence of China and India as powerful economic and political actors alter the rules of the law and development game?
•Will a bold new vision for international law and development take shape under the Obama administration?
Confirmed symposium panelists include:

•Emily Burrill, University of North Carolina Department of Women's Studies
•Amy Cohen, Ohio State University Moritz College of Law
•James Gathii, Albany Law School
•Margaret Lee, University of North Carolina Department of African and Afro- American Studies
•Ezra Rosser, American University Washington College of Law
•Sophie Smyth, Temple University Beasley School of Law

China and India: The End of Development Models?

2009-12-24T12:08:00.000-08:00

The Wellington Conference on Contemporary China

2010

China and India: The End of Development Models?

An International Conference to be held at

Victoria University of Wellington
Wellington, New Zealand
April 12-13, 2010

Sponsored and organised by
The New Zealand Contemporary China Research Centre
in association with
The Asian Studies Institute

Over the last thirty years, the impressive growth performance of China and India has caused a new wave of global anxiety about the rise of power and wealth outside the developed world. More pointedly, scholarly interests and debates have focused on how the rising of China and India would change the international political and economic structure, and whether India or China would outperform the other in the long run. What is missing amidst the anxieties and fanfare about the two new “giants” is a genuine scholarly interest in an understanding of how the impressive growth and social transformation has been achieved in these two unique countries. With “Japan as No 1” in the 1950s and 1960s, the “four little dragons” in the 1960s and 1970s, the extension of the “East Asian miracle” to the rest of the Pacific Asia in the 1980s and 1990s, and now China and India, scholars must have enough empirical evidence to revisit some of the long-troubling issues in post-War development research and debate: Is the developmental state essential for economic growth? Is export concentration inevitable? Are corporate groupings necessary? Does law matter? How do cultural and social relations contribute to economic and social development?

Moreover, China and India are two major world civilizations that have taken very different paths in modern development. Modern state building started in each of these countries under a set of very different conditions. China and India have been problematic cases in modern development. With the two countries reaching a new historical phase of their modern development, it would be useful to revisit the scholarly debate on modern development again and hopefully to lift it to a new level: how do colonial experiences, nationalism, communism and socialism affect a nation’s modern development? How do traditional social structure, values and relations transform or persist in modern development and how do these shape the emergent modern state? Are there different types of modernity or different models of modern developments?

The conference is designed to bring leading scholars in the field to address these issues. We are very pleased to have Professor Wing Thye Woo of UC Davis; Professor Pranab Bardhan, UC Berkeley; Professor Zhenglai Deng of Fudan University; Professor Prasenjit Duara of National University of Singapore; Professor B. Sudhakara Reddy of Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research; Professor Fu Jun of Peking University; Professor Sun Shihai of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences; Dr John Alexander Michael of University of Madras; Professor Sheng Kaiyan of Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences; Professor Guo Sujian of Fudan University; Professor Dilip K. Das, of Conestoga College; Professor Heng Quan of Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences;

We are inviting paper proposals on any aspects of the conference theme and welcome participation of scholars in related disciplines. We will publish selected papers as an edited volume by an international publisher. Those interested in giving a paper at the conference should forward their paper proposals (title and a 150-word abstract, with full contact details) to Professor Xiaoming Huang (xiaoming.huang@vuw.ac.nz) and Professor Sekhar Bandyopadhyay (Sekhar.Bandyopadhyay@vuw.ac.nz), co-chairs of the conference organizing committee, no later than 30 January 2010. Registration details for the conference and acceptance letters will be sent shortly after that. For those who require a formal letter for travel and visa purposes, please send your proposal early and indicate accordingly. We look forward to your participation.

New Challenges for Taylor Trial

2009-12-24T09:58:00.000-08:00

Came across this article in the Sunday Times last week. Despite a number of challenges (political, economic, legal) the trial of Charles Taylor will continue in the new year.

An international panel of four judges, based in The Hague, is trying Mr. Taylor specifically for arming and controlling a brutal rebel force in Sierra Leone during the country’s 1991-2002 civil war that led to the deaths of some 200,000 people. His indictment holds him accountable for the rebels’ crimes as they pillaged, killed and raped, used children as soldiers and hacked off hands to terrorize civilians. Many others died in his home country, Liberia, but events there are not within the mandate of the court.

Read more

Law and Development: Women and Africa

2009-12-22T09:03:00.000-08:00

Two recent conferences held in Africa focused on the role of women in achieving equality and political empowerment. The Eighth Africa Regional Conference on Women (Beijing+15) took place in Banjul, Gambia, in West Africa in November and the Pan-African Women Conference 2009 was held in Sandton, South Africa in October.

For more details see here:

The Evolution of Ideology, Fairness and Redistribution

2009-12-21T03:08:00.000-08:00

A new paper worth reading is The Evolution of Ideology, Fairness and Redistribution by Alberto F. Alesina (Harvard), Guido Cozzi (Glascow), and Noemi Mantovan (Glascow). They add a contribution to understanding the development mystery.

ABSTRACT: Ideas about what is "fair" above and beyond the individual's position in the income ladder influence preferences for redistribution. We study the dynamic evolution of different economies in which redistributive policies, perceptions of fairness, inequality and growth are jointly determined. We show how including fairness explains various observed correlations between inequality, redistribution and growth. We also show how different beliefs about fairness can keep two otherwise identical countries in different development paths for a very long time.

UN General Assembly on Legal Empowerment of the Poor

2009-12-20T23:37:00.000-08:00

One of the trends in law and development practice in the past few years has been towards emphasizing legal access for the poor. The high-level Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor issued its report in 2008, and I now see that the report has received the endorsement of the UN General Assembly (see Document A/C.2/64/L.4/Rev.2 if you are interested). Like much in law and development, it seems to reflect a consensus between political right and left: much of the emphasis is on formalization of property rights, but also on legal services to the poor and poverty reduction.

I must admit some skepticism about what all this means on the ground. Its probably safe to say that anything endorsed by the UN General Assembly must represent a consensus so shallow as to be insipid. In most countries, for structural reasons, the law is a mechanism in which the "haves come out ahead." Political movements, of course, can force redistribution much more effectively than the courts. I wonder if there is any evidence on this kind of thing affecting large scale change in any particular country.

Law and Development as Democratic Practice

2009-12-18T22:41:00.000-08:00

An older title but relevant I think to discussions about the role of law and development in Afghanistan and beyond...

McInerney, TF (2005) Law and Development as Democratic Practice Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 37, p. 935

Abstract:
Despite appreciable gains in the stature of law and development during the past decade, new doubts about the field's viability have surfaced. Recent scholarship seems united in the belief that rule of law and good governance promotion have until now delivered neither improved rule of law nor improved governance. The causes of these alleged failures are not yet well understood. This article contends that the problems critics have identified are principally the product of conceptual and methodological weaknesses of efforts in this area. After identifying some of these foundational problems, this article attempts to re-conceptualize law and development in terms of a broader process of democratic development. In a departure from the prevailing instrumentalist agenda, this article contends that rule of law promotion activities must respect the internal relation between law and democracy in order to bring about the conditions under which legitimate legal orders can emerge.

Keywords: Rule of Law, Law and Development, Governance

Request for CVs - Criminal Justice Reform in Georgia

2009-12-14T11:09:00.000-08:00

******************* Positions have been filled ********************

The Center for Justice Law and Development (www.cjld.org) is seeking interested parties for 2 consultancy positions in the Republic of Georgia.

Through Georgia-EU cooperation, the Georgia Action Plan focuses on the cooperation in the fields of Rule of Law and Justice specifically related to the implementation of the criminal justice reforms in Georgia (including judiciary, prosecution, penitentiary, police and law enforcement agencies). This project has not yet been awarded, so CVs would be vetted by a relevant Executing Agency for inclusion in an upcoming proposal.

Interested parties should have relevant education, at least ten years of experience as an international consultant, and ideally would have regional experience in the FSU. Salary is competitive and the assignment is based around 3 trips to Georgia over the next two years.

Please contact jwheeldon@gmail.com for more information.

Universities and Development in Canada

2009-12-11T09:05:00.000-08:00

A note from north of the border, where participation in international development may become more difficult for Universities in the years ahead.

See here

Impact Assessments in Finance and Private Sector Development: What Have We Learned and What Should We Learn?

2009-12-08T01:58:00.000-08:00

I call to our readers' attention a new article in the World Bank Research Observer, Impact Assessments in Finance and Private Sector Development: What Have We Learned and What Should We Learn?, by David McKenzie, who makes the important point that we need better evaluative tools, including impact assessments to determine whether or not programs are effective.

ABSTRACT: Until recently rigorous impact evaluations have been rare in the area of finance and private sector development. One reason for this is the perception that many policies and projects in this area lend themselves less to formal evaluations. However, a vanguard of new impact evaluations on areas as diverse as fostering microenterprise growth, microfinance, rainfall insurance, and regulatory reform demonstrates that in many circumstances serious evaluation is possible. The purpose of this paper is to synthesize and distill the policy and implementation lessons emerging from these studies, use them to demonstrate the feasibility of impact evaluations in a broader array of topics, and thereby help prompt new impact evaluations for projects going forward.

Toward a L&D Afghan Research Program

2009-12-06T16:30:00.000-08:00

Thanks for the interest expressed by some of you in this piece...

The recent announcement by the Obama Administration of increased troop deployments to Afghanistan (or should that be the Af-Pak region?) has been met with an air of skepticism by some and inevitability by most. It is hoped this surge will provide the basis for a new sort of stabilization required to promote an effective civilian strategy in partnership with the UN and Afghan people. Yet while some details of the new military strategy have been released, it is not clear how the civilian surge can address the dysfunctional Afghan governance structures. There are two cancers growing in Afghanistan. One is from the resurgent Taliban and Al Qaida remnants that challenge the Afghan people’s physical security. The other is the corrupt system of governance that fails to deliver basic human needs to its population and engages in detainee abuses and other human rights violations. It is not clear that more troops can tackle these twin cancers. While they may help quell the violence in the short term, it will take a different sort of investment to build the local capacity required to tackle the corruption and continued human rights abuses that have sown the seeds of instability in a region with a history of poverty, religious intolerance, and gender inequality.

An immediate critique to this line of reasoning is that addressing the Afghan situation requires a two-step process. Step one requires providing basic security. Only then can the development community truly engage in the second step of working with Afghan citizens. This may be right and the ideal way to proceed should an intervention of this kind be required in the future. The reality of course is that USAID and a host of other development agencies from countries around the world are all ready in place in Afghanistan. The delivery of foreign aid and governance reform programming is all ready underway. Despite recent concerns about cost by Thomas Friedman and others, the attention of the world is firmly fixed (for now) on Afghanistan. This may present an opportunity for scholars to begin to catalogue events and focus on the connections between social justice, legal reform, and human development. What can the study of Law and Development tell us about what is needed to promote human security, stability, and political reconciliation? What do we know (or think we know) and what might an L&D Afghan research program look like?

For the full blog:

see here

In Defense of Evidence in Law and Development

2009-12-04T13:49:00.000-08:00

Reading through the 3-part colloquium on the future of law and development, by Northwestern University has been a great pleasure. Anyone who hasn’t taken some time to review these essays should.

In addition to providing some insights into this community, (very important for us young'uns), it was great to see the variety of views presented by so many law and development scholars from different institutions and traditions. I was particularly struck by Mariana Prado’s exploration about the utility of adopting a ‘what works’ approach to law and development. While I believe her contribution rightly points to some complications inherent in this approach, I am not so sure about the “what works” definition she presents.

While speaking about “what works” is certainly not new, as I understand it, recent explorations focus on applying more experimental research methodologies used in education and health to development. In this way, one can replace the inconsistent and theoretically limited approach to existing practice with a model based on ‘evidence-based aid’ as presented in Fissman & Miguel’s 2008 offering Economic Gangsters. On this view the use of evidence can replace the past practice of privileging tool kits or traditional managerial approaches to law and development. By gathering evidence of what works the development community can more easily support, disseminate, and integrate law and development lessons learned though past projects. This would allow evidence and not ideology to influence institutions and organizations that today are too often concerned with the pursuit of unproven policies based on unreasonable expectations and unrealistic time-lines.

Whatever the definitional disagreements, I do not mean to undermine the force of Prado’s critique. Her concern that this approach may result in the attempt to replicate successes in very different social, economic, cultural, or political environments is well placed. In addition what one calls evidence may also be of deep concern. While social and economic indicators can be useful, more robust measures of project success are needed. These must include the views of the people on the ground for whom various reforms are purportedly designed. To these concerns, one might add the very serious challenge that only a fraction of projects that currently receive aid could be subject to trials. While the debate about what constitutes evidence is on going, attempting to use what evidence exists and investing in research programs moving forward should not be.

The issue I take is with Prado’s final comment that focusing on a "what works" or evidence-based approach might somehow result in the co-optation of scholars by those who favor simplistic fixes for complex problems. This to me is exactly backward and points to one of the major challenges for academics who seek to engage with and not simply comment on the world around them. The time for hand wringing on the sidelines is over. Without developing and disseminating scholarly evidence to allow policy makers and practitioners to make better-informed decisions, scholars risk further irrelevance. By exploring existing approaches, analyzing their outcomes, and most importantly developing and testing different methodological approaches, those of us interested in law and development can better study projects operating at the intersection of the past, present, and future.

That's What He Believes

2009-12-03T16:39:00.000-08:00

The always quotable Thomas Friedman offers another view on Afghanistan in the NY Times today. In short - there is too much nation building to do at home.

More here

Scaling up or down in Afghanistan?

2009-12-03T12:32:00.000-08:00

Fareed Zakaria is on record as providing a limited endorsement for the Obama Afghan plan. He argues that by scaling back objectives, the plan may have a reasonable chance of succeeding.

More here

Coming soon: Toward a L&D Afghan Research Program

Article on International Justice Coursework

2009-12-03T09:34:00.000-08:00

At the risk of self promotion (!) - a paper came out in Oct which may be of interest to the L&D scholars who follow this blog.

Wheeldon, J (2009) “Between Pedagogy and Practice: Developing and Delivering International Criminal Justice Coursework" Crime, Law and Social Change. Volume 52, Issue 5 (October, 2009)

It is available for a short time here.

Although focusing primarily on social, political, and legal elements to understanding international issues of justice, the paper offers a revisable road map for those interested in developing new or building up existing coursework. Hope you like it.

The Future of Law and Development, Part III

2009-11-25T09:57:00.000-08:00

The third part of our wonderful symposium on the Future of Law and Development has just been published by the Northwestern Law Review Online Colloquy. Contributors in this batch are Kevin Davis (NYU), Adam Feibelman (UNC), Brian Tamanaha (Washington University) and Yuka Kaneko (Kobe University).

Comment on the Afghanistan-Tajikistan Comparison

2009-11-23T21:17:00.000-08:00

Foreign Affairs has a recent article by George Gavrilis arguing for a "Tajikistan" solution to Afghanistan. Tajikistan's bloody post-Soviet civil war gradually wound down and, with the modest support of the international community, the country has now stabilized into a corrupt but peaceful autocracy, with the narco-trade being an important component of the economy. The key to acheiving something similar in Afghanistan, suggests Gavrilis, is a willingness to scale down expectations, turn a blind eye to non-democratic elements, and recognize the importance of basic order as the first goal. Development and democracy can come later.

This thought-provoking article misses one crucial disanalogy: the Soviets failed in Afghanistan, whereas they succeeded in Tajikistan over several decades. That is, Tajikistan had a centralized state structure, a largely secular population, and somewhat of a modernist ethic, notwithstanding its poverty. Afghanistan is a long, long way behind. Even if the parties could brought to the table and conclude an agreement, its likely to be more than just a couple decades before any Afghan government could exert the effective control of Rahmonov. Order, alas, is a precondition to development.

Promoting LD Research Linkages

2009-11-19T20:43:00.000-08:00

A new resource for those interested in the relationships between justice, legal reform, and human development can be found at www.cjld.org. It is a new center of sorts, with the goal of promoting communication between students, researchers, and practitioners working and thinking about law and development. The center will focus initially on justice issues in the Former Soviet Union, the role and potential of diasporas in development, and more general trends in international development.

Contributors and connections are welcome.

Great L & D Job Posting at Tulane

2009-11-15T20:33:00.000-08:00

The announcement below came in from Steve Griffin at Tulane. It sounds like an exceptional opportunity from one of the great centers of comparative law in the U.S.

---

Tulane Law School is seeking a full-time tenured faculty member interested in international development to teach and become the Executive Director of the School’s Payson Center for International Development and Technology Transfer. This is a unique opportunity to head a Center with international impact and to develop its potential to serve the Law School and diverse communities around the world.

The Payson Center was established in 1998 as an independent interdisciplinary center at Tulane University and offers a Ph.D., a Masters Degree, and a coordinate undergraduate major in international development. In 2007, the Payson Center merged with the Law School. The Center administers in excess of $30M in grants and contracts, mainly in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The Center has begun to shift the focus of its grants and contracts to law related issues concerning the international environment, transitional justice, violence against women, child labor, and justice systems, to name only a few.

The Law School is seeking to hire a tenured faculty member (or a person who can meet Tulane Law School’s tenure requirements) beginning July 1, 2010 to teach law and development, a course in the regular law school curriculum (there is flexibility as to the area), and become the Executive Director of the Payson Center. This latter position involves management of the academic program and the general oversight of the grants and contracts. The Payson Center has an administrative staff of 11 full-time and one part-time employees including a financial officer and a grants and contracts manager. This is a special opportunity to help shape a new and exciting program. A law degree is required and experience in international development work is preferred. A Ph.D. or Masters degree is a plus. The salary will be highly competitive. The Payson center website is at http://www.payson.tulane.edu/.

Tulane Law School enjoys a strong international reputation, with specialized programs that include maritime law, civil law, international & comparative law, and environmental law. Tulane University was founded in 1834. It is ranked as a Doctoral/Research Universities-Extensive by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and is a member of the prestigious Association of American Universities. It has a student body of approximately 13,200 undergraduate and graduate students, 100,000 alumni, and an approximate budget of in excess of $600 million. Tulane Law School particularly welcomes applications from candidates who will enhance the diversity of its law faculty.

Please send a statement of interest (no more than two pages) and your resume electronically to: Professor Paul Barron, Chair Payson Center Steering Committee, Tulane Law School (pbarron@tulane.edu). Applications will be considered on a rolling basis and the search will remain open until the position is filled. Please address any questions to Paul Barron at the above email address.

Global Trends and Constraints on Tax Policy in the Least Developed Countries

2009-11-10T10:30:00.000-08:00

Allison Christians (Wisconsin Law) has an interesting new piece on tax law and development that is worth reading called Global Trends and Constraints on Tax Policy in the Least Developed Countries.

ABSTRACT: Through decades of tax reform and cross-border collaboration, the world's wealthiest countries have adopted domestic tax policy norms that meet their mutually beneficial interests. But these norms have introduced rigorous change and increasingly rigid parameters for tax policy in the world's poorest countries. While much scholarly attention is devoted to identifying tax strategies that poor countries could or should adopt in response to global tax trends, relatively little is paid to the process through which these trends developed and how they constrain alternative policy choices. This article argues that many of the biggest challenges to taxation faced by the world's poorest countries are a reflection of the international community's failure to consider the impact of their tax policy consensus on these vulnerable nations. It concludes that the world's wealthiest nations should unleash the global constraints on tax policy by reforming their own approaches to taxation.

New paper by Santos

2009-11-06T08:55:00.000-08:00

Alvaro Santos has a new paper, entitled Labor Flexibility, Legal Reform, and Economic Development, just published in the Virginia Journal of Int’l Law. Its discussed in an online symposium at opiniojuris.org.

The paper can be downloaded here . Highly recommended!

Symposium: The Future of Law and Development, Part II

2009-11-03T22:49:00.000-08:00

The second installment of our blog symposium on the future of Law and Development is up on the Northwestern Law Review website. This second installment includes contributions by Mariana Prado (University of Toronto - Law), Susan D. Franck (Washington & Lee - Law) and John Cioffi (UC Riverside - Political Science).

GRANTS FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRY RESEARCHERS STUDYING POVERTY ISSUES

2009-10-29T03:44:00.000-07:00

The Poverty and Economic Policy (PEP) Research Network
    announces a call for proposals for its 2010 competition for
    research grants with a total value of up to $CAN 50,000
    each.
   
    DEADLINE: January 6, 2010
    
    
    OBJECTIVES:
    
    PEP provides financial and scientific support to teams of
    developing country researchers studying poverty issues.
    Specific objectives are to:
    
    - Better understand the causes and consequences of poverty
    - Propose pro-poor policies and programs
    - Improve the measurement and monitoring of poverty
    - Strengthen local research capacity on poverty issues
    - Develop new concepts and techniques for poverty analysis
    
    To maximize capacity building, PEP favors teams composed of
    at least one senior researcher supervising a gender-
    balanced group of junior researchers. PEP especially
    encourages proposals from the poorest countries. Funding
    includes a core research grant of $CAN 20K, plus separate
    funding of up to $CAN 30K to participate in training
    workshops, PEP meetings, international conferences, study
    visits and other activities. All team members must
    originate from and reside in a developing country during
    the course of the project.
   
   
    GRANT PROGRAMS:
   
    Grants are awarded under four programs:
    
    - Community Based Monitoring Systems (CBMS): For the
      development and institutionalization of a community-based
      poverty monitoring system involving either: (1) the
      development and pilot-test of a CBMS, or (2) expansion
      and institutionalization of an existing CBMS.
    - Modeling and Policy Impact Analysis (MPIA): Analyzing the
      impacts of macroeconomic shocks and policies on poverty
      and income distribution (Priority themes: Inclusive
      growth, public spending and agricultural policies).
    - Policy Impact Evaluation Research Initiative (PIERI):
      Evaluations of the impacts of interventions that aim to
      increase human capital and alleviating poverty, e.g.
      child health, schooling, training and safety net
      programs.
    - Poverty Monitoring, Measurement and Analysis (PMMA):
      Monitoring, measurement and analysis of a wide range of
      poverty issues (Priority themes: Multidimensional
      poverty, public spending, intrahousehold allocation and
      poverty dynamics2).
    
    
    FURTHER INFORMATION/SUBMISSION PROCEDURE:
    
    For more information and to submit a proposal, please
    consult the "Call for Proposals" section on the PEP 
    website:
    
                   http://www.pep-net.org
    
    PEP is financed by the Australian Agency for International
    Development (AusAID), and by the Government of Canada
    through the International Development Research Centre
    (IDRC) and the Canadian International Development Agency
    (CIDA). 
    
    Decisions will be communicated by April 30, 2010 at the
    latest.

Symposium: The Future of Law and Development, Part I

2009-10-26T18:05:00.000-07:00

The first installment of our blog symposium on the Future of Law and Development has been published by the Northwestern Law Review. Further installments will appear in the next one to two months. As a reminder, the first installment includes pieces by Tom Ginsburg (Chicago - Law), Salil Mehra (Temple - Law), Katharina Pistor (Columbia - Law), & Anna Gelpern (American - Law).

Courts in authoritarian regimes

2009-10-23T06:06:00.000-07:00

Readers may know I have an occasional interest in the role of courts in authoritarian regimes. There is a wonderful quote in today's NYTimes from Iranian "opposition" leader Mehdi Karroubi, who has been threatened with trial at a special court for clergy. The concept of this special court is itself interesting: the court is used as a device to maintain cohesion within the dictatorial class, somewhat similar to Robert Barros' found in his study of the Chilean constitutional court. But Karroubi's quote, copied below, captures well the idea that because of their public nature, courts can be used to rally support for the opposition, even in cases that they lose. Karroubi says: "I am not only unworried about this court .... I wholeheartedly welcome it since I will use it to express my concerns regarding the national and religious beliefs of the Iranian people and the ideas of Imam Khomeini, and clearly reveal those who are opposed to these concerns.”

The Rule of Law Unplugged

2009-10-22T14:32:00.000-07:00

A worthwhile read that just got posted on SSRN is the working paper The Rule of Law Unplugged by Mathew D. McCubbins, Daniel B. Rodriguez and Barry R. Weingast.

ABSTRACT: The 'Rule of Law' is a venerable concept, but, on closer inspection, is a complex admixture of positive assumptions, occasionally wishful thinking, and inchoate political and legal theory. While enormous investment has been made in rule of law reformism throughout the world, advocates of transplanting American-style legal and political institutions to developed and developing countries in the world are often unclear about what they are transplanting and why they are ambitiously doing so. Scholars clearly have more work to do in understanding the rule of law and designing institutions to realize the objectives for which this grand project is intended.

In this paper, we revisit the concept of the rule of law in order to help unpack the theoretical and operational assumptions underlying scholarship and reform efforts. We do so from the perspective of legal and positive political theory; and we interrogate various institutional devices (such as constitutionalism and the independent judiciary) in order to shed light on how the construct of the rule of law is being put into service on behalf of cross-national reform initiatives.

Important new paper on the regulation of entry

2009-09-24T10:45:00.001-07:00

Just published is important work by Simeon Djankov (an occasional LLSV member). If you buy into the LLSV project, he has a useful new addition to the literature in the World Bank Research Observer.

The Regulation of Entry: A Survey
Simeon Djankov

Simplifying entry regulation has been a popular reform since the publication of Djankov and others (2002). The inclusion of business entry indicators in the World Bank's Doing Business project has led to an acceleration in reform: in 2003–08, 193 reforms took place in 116 countries. A large academic literature has followed: 201 academic articles have used the data compiled by Djankov and others (2002) and subsequently by the World Bank. The author identifies three theories as to why some countries impose burdensome entry requirements. He also surveys the literature on the effects of making business entry easier.

Corporate Governance in a Law and Development Context - The Case of Brazil

2009-09-21T03:04:00.001-07:00

Bernie Black did some seminal empirical work in explaining corporate governance of Russian firms a few years ago. He extends his work in the law and development of corporate law and governance to another BRIC country, Brazil. Among his coauthors is Erica Gorga, a very good young legal scholar from FGV in Brazil (and lamentably, someone who turned down a job offer from UF last year). Some of the findings in the paper seem counter-intuitive. This paper is a worthwhile read.

Does One Size Fit All in Corporate Governance? Evidence from Brazil

Bernard S. Black
University of Texas at Austin - School of Law; McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin; European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); Northwestern University - School of Law; Northwestern University - Kellogg School of Management

Antonio Gledson De Carvalho
Fundacao Getulio Vargas School of Business at Sao Paulo

Erica Gorga
Getulio Vargas Foundation Law School at Sao Paulo

July 14, 2009

ECGI - Finance Working Paper
Northwestern Law & Economics Research Paper No. 09-20
U of Texas Law, Law and Economics Research Paper No. 152
McCombs Research Paper Series

Abstract:
A central issue in corporate governance research is the extent to which “good” governance practices are universal (one size mostly fits all) or whether they depend on country and firm characteristics. We report evidence here, from a case study of Brazil, supporting the second view. We use a survey of Brazilian firms’ governance practices at year-end 2004 to construct a corporate governance index, and show that the overall index and subindices for ownership, board procedure, and minority shareholder rights predict higher lagged Tobin’s q. A disclosure subindex is important by itself, but loses significance when it must compete with other subindices in the same regression. In contrast to studies in other countries, we find a negative association between board independence and Tobin’s q. Firm characteristics also matter: governance is associated with market value for manufacturing (but not nonmanufacturing) firms, large (but not small) firms, and high-growth (but not low-growth) firms. Our results suggest that country characteristics importantly influence which aspects of governance are associated with firm market value, and at which firms that association is found. They support a flexible approach to governance, which leaves ample room for firm choice, rather than a more regulatory approach.

Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association (LACEA) Annual Meeting in Buenos Aires

2009-09-10T06:14:00.000-07:00

Upcoming is the 14th Annual LACEA Meeting will take place in Buenos Aires, on October 1st -3rd, hosted by Universidad Torcuato Di Tella. There are some interesting paper presentations on law and development issues.

Law and Development - Where Do We Go From Here?

2009-09-10T06:09:00.000-07:00

Starting soon, we will link to our forthcoming symposium appearing in the Northwestern Law Reviews' online Colloquy. We had a great series of posts on the future of law and development from a number of different perspectives.

Rule of Law Paper by Magen

2009-09-10T06:00:00.000-07:00

There are a large number of critiques of the law and development enterprise, many of which say essentially the same thing: transplanting institutions is difficult, we have little knowledge about what works, and existing efforts have do a poor job of conceptualizing and measuring the rule of law. A recent paper by Amichai Magen, The Rule of Law and its Promotion Abroad: Three Problems of Scope, 45 Stanfurd Journal of International Law 51 (2009), does a particularly good job of synthesizing and reframing the problems. He articulates three problems of scope: conceptual scope, intellectual scope and empirical scope. It is a lucid discussion that places rule of law promotion in broader literatures of comparative and international politics. In the discussion of empirical scope, for example, he calls attention to the various mechanisms of external influence that have little to do with foreign aid per se. Only when we understand these mechanisms can we begin to see how intervention might or might not work.

Whither Chinese Constitutionalism?

2009-09-09T21:11:00.000-07:00

China’s constitution has been described (by Professor Donald Clarke) as the least important document in the Chinese legal system. But constitutional discourse is clearly becoming more important in Chinese law politics, as highlighted by the recent high profile arrest and subsequent release of Xu Zhiyong, a lawyer associated with the Open Constitution Initiative. Like other communist documents, the Chinese constitution is usually described as serving programmatic and ideological rather than constitutionalist ends. That is, rather than providing for enforceable rules constraining government, the constitution is used either to bless changes that have already occurred or to announce new policies to be achieved in the future. One frequent pattern, found in the former Soviet Union and in China until 1982, was that new constitutions would be adopted with changes in leadership, as new leaders sought to announce their presence.

The 1982 Constitution, adopted shortly after Deng Xiaoping consolidated power and launched China’s modernization program, is an interesting document in this regard. Law played a central role in Deng’s thinking as he sought to provide greater institutional order to underpin China’s development. The 1982 Constitution de-emphasizes the Chinese Communist Party and nominally places the Constitution above all organizations in the country. Post-Deng leaders have modified the constitution through amendment, rather than replacement, preserving ideological continuity with Deng. Amendments have been used to mark ideological developments. For example, in 1988, the Constitution was revised to make reference to a privatesector to complement the “socialist public economy.” The 1993 amendments added the phrase “socialism with Chinese characteristics” to the preamble and introduced the “socialist market economy,” thus incorporating Deng Xiaoping’s formula into the document. In 1999, a reference to the recently deceased Deng was incorporated into the preamble. In 2004, the Constitution was amended to guarantee private property rights and provide for compensation for expropriated land, an important signal for both foreign investors and China’s own market sector. Human rights are also included, reflecting the Party’s ideological pushback against critics. In addition, in keeping with the tradition of each Chinese leader’s leaving his mark on the Constitution, Jiang Zemin’s theory of the Three Represents was introduced into the preamble. This provided ideological coverage for inclusion of the business class (“advanced productive forces”). It seems highly likely that a future amendment will incorporate the latest formula of the Harmonious Society that is the mark of current leaders, Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao.

My forthcoming co-authored book, The Endurance of National Constitutions, speculates that China’s 1982 Constitution might ultimately play a role not unlike that of Mexico’s 1917 Constitution. Mexico under the PRI regime had a constitution that embodied ideological continuity, but not constitutionalism. Over the long period of PRI rule, however, the constitution was frequently amended to co-opt and include new social forces as they arose. This led to gradually increasing congruence between the formal promises of the text and actual social practice. Eventually, when Mexico democratized in the late 1990s, the constitution was preserved and now operates as a more significant constraint on political actors, with both left and right wing parties relying on it in particular instances. The story shows the gradually increasing importance of a constitution within an authoritarian regime, under conditions in which there is a need for ideological continuity. To be sure, the analogy between China and Mexico is speculative, and there are important structural and ideological differences between the CCP and the PRI. But the Mexico outcome is at least one possible model for China. More on the Chinese Constitution can be found in an excellent forthcoming book edited by Stephanie Balme and Michael Dowdle. No doubt we’ll have more to say about the topic when that book hits the shelves.

(cross-posted at www.comparativeconstitutions.com)

How Do We Explain the Decline if Latin America?

2009-08-03T03:30:00.001-07:00

Sebastian Edwards of UCLA has an interesting new paper that provides some economic history of the Latin America and explains its relative decline. Hint: too much government intervention is a bad thing.

FORTY YEARS OF LATIN AMERICA'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: From the Alliance for Progress to the Washington Consensus
by Sebastian Edwards - #15190 (IFM ITI)

Abstract: In this paper I analyze the evolution of economic and social conditions in Latin America from the 1950s through the 1980s, when deep external crises erupted in country after country. The point of departure of our story is the political awakening of the region in the late 1950s and early 1960s and the emergence of guerilla movements in many countries, including in Cuba. I then analyze the Alliance for Progress, a major and ambitious aid program sponsored by the United States whose main objective was to improve social conditions in the region. I show that in spite of the Alliance, social circumstances did not improve significantly; I also show that throughout this period protectionism and government intervention became more ingrained, discouraging productivity improvements. I then deal with inflation, fiscal largesse, and the Mexican debt crisis of 1982, a crisis that led to the so-called "lost decade." The paper ends with a discussion of the launching of the reforms of the Washington Consensus in 1989-1990. I provide a detailed analysis of the most important elements of this consensus, and I touch on some of the implementation challenges.

Law, the World Bank, and the Politics of the Surveillance Culture

2009-07-27T05:52:00.000-07:00

As anyone who has followed the impact of US New and World Report on universities will testify, we live in a surveillance culture in which statistical indicators reflecting policy choices are shaping behavior of institutions and individuals. Often these indicators have a quasi-scientific quality and give substantial power to technocratic elites. But occasionally they become the target of political contestation. The saga of the World Bank's "Employing Workers Indicator" (EWI) illustrates the potential of contestation over a legal indicator.

The EWI is part of the overall Doing Business project. Doing Business ranks countries in terms of what it considers to be a favorable business climate. EWI has a strong deregulatory slant, giving the highest rating to countries with the lowest level of job protection for workers. As a result, borrowers may come under pressure to deregulate their labor markets.

Doing Business has been criticized by academics and unions for some time. Alvaro Santos, Kevin Davis and others have published critical analyzes of the way data is collected, indicators developed, and policy conclusions drawn. The International Trade Union Conference (ITUC) has pressed the Bank and the IMF to change the EWI to make it follow ILO standards more closely. The AFL-CIO has supported this effort and sought Congressional support for the effort.

Congressman Barney Frank has been an outspoken critic of the EWI for some time and has been putting pressure on the Bank to change the indicator. He has held hearings and it is reported he has threatened to condition future US funds for the Bank on reform of EWI. In April, the Bank announced that it is no longer using the EWI and that it would develop a new approach using ILO standards. It stated that the EWI would no longer be used for policy advice or to evaluate a country's development strategy. This was greeted warmly by ITUC. (The Bank's announcement is at http://www.doingbusiness.org/documents/EWI_revisions.pdf. ITUC's reaction is at http://www.ituc-csi.org./spip.php?article3505)

That is not the end of the story. The struggle continues as the Bank develops a new version of the EWI. It looks like the Congress is not satisfied that the issue has been resolved satisfactorily. In June, it added a section to the House Supplemental Appropriations Bill that would require the US Executive Directors at The Bank to pressure for suspension of the current EWI and revision of the indicators in a way that "fairly represent the value of internationally recognized worker's rights".

Law and Development Academic Communities

2009-07-24T18:16:00.001-07:00

I just returned from two weeks in Chile. I have lots of interesting Law and Development thoughts but as we arrived in the US at 4:48am today, my thoughts are about going to sleep. However, I would note that from what I can tell, Law and Development is as fragmented in Chile as in the US. Generally, the law and econ people don't really talk to the law and society people and vice versa.

New paper by Cohen

2009-07-18T03:32:00.000-07:00

Amy Cohen of Ohio State just published an interesting piece called Thinking with Culture in Law and Development, 57 Buffalo Law Review 511 (2009). An SSRN version is available here.

Abstract: This Article considers a recent programmatic shift among law and development scholars who have moved from advocating building rule-of-law processes, rules, and institutions to also building rule-of-law cultures. The Article carefully examines how these scholars envision culture as a tool to refashion the relationship between legal institutions and ordinary individuals. It traces the ways in which they use culture as a means to take law - general, universal, and acultural - and to make law specific, local, and embedded within the consciousness of ordinary people. It then suggests that this turn from law to culture produces a conceptualization of culture uncannily analogous to the conceptualization of law that the turn to culture was meant to supplement and correct. This similarity becomes especially apparent when examining development projects. The Article therefore draws on ethnographic examples of development challenges in Nepal to illustrate the difficulties inherent in culture change projects and the dangers of conceptualizing culture apart from the politics and conflict of everyday life.

A new location for an old blog...

2009-07-13T09:02:00.000-07:00

The Law and Development Blog, formerly located here is moving to this new neighborhood! Look for regular posts beginning in August, and a terrific web symposium on law and development later in the Fall.