Towards a Theory of Democratic Global Economic Governance: Hybridization of Soft and Hard Law in the Case of Gender within the World Trade Organization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study is about democracy.It asks whether global economic governance (GEG) can take a democratic turn by testing whether the representation of women and women's interests can be accomplished within the World Trade Organization (WTO).The test answers the question because the representation of women and women's interests is a sine qua non of democracy in the 21 st century, and because the WTO is the hardest case amongst institutions of GEG for the representation of women and women's interests.This produces two corollaries: if the WTO cannot incorporate a sine qua non of democracy, then GEG cannot become democratic without significant institutional restructuring; if the representation of women and women's interests can be accomplished in the 'hardest case,' it should be possible within GEG generally.So proceeding, the study builds a framework for democratic GEG called Inclusive Global Institutionalism (IGI), comprising the principles inclusion, caution, simplicity, legitimacy and flexibility.IGI, balancing juridification, hybridization and pathdependency, is preferred over three ideas of democratic global governance: a global democratic state, 'multitude,' and 'a new world order of networks.'The study validates its test by showing that the representation of women and women's interests can stand proxy for democratization, while the WTO can stand proxy for GEG.The former is accomplished by critiquing Pitkin's 'substantive representation' and 'potentiality,' advancing a more expansive concept of representation.The latter is accomplished by developing seven 'Moments of Juridification' showing that the WTO represents the post-WWII juridification of GEG, and nine 'Reasons' why the WTO is the 'hardest case.'The study determines that the representation of women and women's interests is made possible by hybridizing soft and hard law in the Enhanced Integrated Framework and Aid-for-Trade, which require WTO interaction with other IOs, but are brought within the WTO's Committee for Trade and Development in Aid-for-Trade session.This allows the conclusion that democratization of GEG is not impossible, and that representation of women and women's interests is possible within the WTO without fundamental structural reform.The study finally concludes that to balance juridification, hybridization and pathdependency is necessary to any stable democracy or sustained democratization.v
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".