37 / 532
NONǧTRADITIONAL NORMS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
The IN-LAW, GAL, IPA and TPR methodologies run up against their own limits
when it comes to the proposal of concrete solutions and tangible standards. The
following recommendations could be taken on board when preparing a research
agenda and deciding upon priorities for future studies launched in the context of
non-traditional lawmaking. First, legal research should avoid discarding the broader
context in which non-traditional lawmaking takes place. It is fundamental that the
relationship of international regulatory action with general public international law
is further explored. Second, the methodologies discussed, to a large extent, have
avoided naming common principles of legitimacy, accountability and democracy.
Future research projects should make the effort to identify and develop oversight and
control standards that could be employed throughout the transnational regulatory
space. Third, legal scholarship should invest in conducting scientific research that is
socially relevant, or adapt it in a way so that it becomes practicable to ask complex
questions. Research efforts should be able to provide useful tools for those that
interact transnationally (civil servants, experts, private actors) when they engage
in regulatory activities. All of this also necessitates a much more interdisciplinary
approach than what current legal scholarship has been able to deliver.
5. Concluding remarks
Legal scholarship on non-traditional lawmaking is detailed, varied, and multifaceted
‒ mirroring the object of research. The approaches discussed in this contribution study
the variety of actors, processes, and instruments through which non-traditional norm-
development take place. The introduction of new concepts, layers of governance, and
accountability mechanisms makes the study of non-traditional norms challenging,
both for scholars and practitioners. Regulatory agents are confronted with highly
multifaceted matters. It would be naive to think that the legal questions regarding
non-traditional norms can be addressed instantly. Yet, given their ever expanding
reach and impact on individuals, it is essential that non-traditional legal norms
at the international level are made a priority in research and practice. Regulatory
actors participating in international networks, agencies, and organizations have to
uphold democratic and rule of law principles and must be kept accountable. The
methodologies presented in this contribution continue to struggle to link legal
concepts to the non-traditional norms studied. Accountability frameworks and the
promotion of both domestic and international control mechanisms have all too
often been addressed in rather vague terms. It is of the utmost importance that legal
scholarship on these issues progresses steadily and starts to provide critical guidance
for law- and policymakers acting on the global plane.