Print Journal

Issue 1, Print Journal, Volume 64

Hidden Power in Global Supply Chains

Hidden Power in Global Supply Chains

By Trang (Mae) Nguyen

View Full Article

Most consumers are familiar with brand names like Apple, Nike, and H&M, but few have heard of the actual offshore multinational enterprises that make their products: Foxconn, Yue Yuen, TAL Apparel, and many others. This Article argues that these companies—whom I call “Big Suppliers”—represent a new crop of hidden corporate powers that have transformed the legal organization of global trade and production. In today’s “made in the world” era, transnational suppliers, not brands, are the true quarterbacks of global supply chains. As manufacturing experts, they coordinate and oversee supplier networks spanning Asia, Latin America, and beyond. Acting at once as employers, landlords, and quasiregulators, they manage the employment, housing, mobility, and social lives of millions of workers whose labor sustains global trade. Yet, legal scholarship has only begun to notice the presence of these new global capitalists.

This Article is the first to systematically unearth the hidden impact of Big Suppliers on a suite of public and private law issues, including cross-border contracts, corporate social responsibility designs, trade regulations, private regulatory functions, and beyond. It makes three principal contributions: First, it identifies a critical yet largely overlooked power shift in the economic forms of globalization, that is, the reconsolidation of global production at the level of first-tier suppliers. Second, in revealing how transnational suppliers operate in a highly enmeshed market, it complicates the influential paradigm of “buyerdriven” globalization, which has long assumed that Global North brands are the key power holders in global trade. As this Article demonstrates, the narrative of buyer hegemony rests on an incomplete assumption that buyers can effectively exert pressure on their suppliers that has long undergirded important laws and policies such as corporate social responsibility designs. Third, this Article conceptualizes “norm assembly” as a process by which transnational suppliers, by virtue of their size and scale, act as critical sites of norm contestation, diffusion, and resistance. Norm assembly may be driven by agency, but could also happen simply as a by-product of a firm’s organizational logic and economic arrangement. Ultimately, in revealing the engine under the hood of global supply chains, this Article identifies a group of new critical actors and opens up potential venues for inquiries and interventions at a moment of imminent shifts in the architecture of globalization.

[hr gap=”1″]

Cover image credit

Issue 1, Print Journal, Volume 64

Empty Promises: Peacekeeper Babies and Discretionary Impunity Within the United Nations

Empty Promises: Peacekeeper Babies and Discretionary Impunity Within the United Nations

By Emma Svoboda

In six decades of U.N. peacekeeping operations, the presence of U.N. military units in some of the planet’s most unstable conflict zones has led to the births of tens of thousands of Peacekeeper Fathered Children (“PKFC”). Mothers of PKFC seeking acknowledgments of paternity or child support payments have been stonewalled by the United Nations; the organization has used its legal immunities to absolve itself of any responsibility to connect abandoned children with their peacekeeper fathers. This inaction has persisted despite external and internal calls for reform and promises by U.N. leadership for new pathways to remedies. This Note sets out the problems and obstacles faced by PKFC mothers when seeking paternity claims and details the ways in which U.N. policies create a remedy gap. It additionally proffers an explanation for that paradox of inaction: the United Nations’ automatic categorization of all PKFC as instances of improper Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (“SEA”). The United Nations is temperamentally disposed to zealously exercise its legal immunities as an International Organization (“IO”) to shield itself from civil or criminal claims seeking damages for rape, sexual abuse, or other misdeeds. This Note argues that impulse may be hampering the United Nations’ ability to take ownership over civil paternity claims, even as it claims that providing remedies to PKFC and their mothers is a political priority for the organization.

Cover image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/67163702@N07/8229506972 (CC BY-SA 2.0)

Issue 2, Print Journal, Volume 64

Volume 64, Issue 2

Issue 1, Print Journal, Volume 64

Volume 64, Issue 1

Volume 62, Special Issue

WTO REFORM AND CHINA: DEFINING OR DEFILING THE MULTILATERAL TRADING SYSTEM?

By: Henry Gao

PDF

Abstract

In November 2001, China finally acceded to the World Trade Organization, in a deal described by then WTO Director General Mike Moore as a “defining moment in the history of the multilateral trading system.” In recent years, however, China has been accused of defiling the letter and spirit of WTO rules with its unique economic model. Believing that existing WTO rules are inadequate in dealing with the China challenge, key WTO Members have launched a new round of WTO reform, which is the subject of this article.

Contrary to popular belief, most of the problems concerning China are not new but reflect long-standing issues in China’s economic system which predate the WTO accession. Thus, the article starts by tracing China’s long and storied history with the GATT and WTO, highlighting the key commitments designed to alleviate the perceived problems with China’s unique economic system. The next part discusses China’s limited role in the ill-fated Doha Round, the first and only negotiating round ever officially launched by the WTO. This is followed by a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the main issues in the current discussions on WTO reform, a process that started at the last WTO Ministerial Conference held in December 2017. In particular, the paper examines in detail the efforts by some major players to turn it into a so-called “China Round,” and China’s reactions. The paper concludes with a review of the failed attempt of the United States to address some of these issues through the trade war and suggests that multilateral negotiation is the best way forward.

Volume 62, Special Issue

CHINA’S LAW AND DEVELOPMENT: A CASE STUDY OF THE CHINA INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL COURT

By: Weixia Gu

PDF

Abstract

Established in 2018, the China International Commercial Court (CICC) represents a major step of China’s top-down effort in its capacity building in terms of its national dispute resolution infrastructure, judicial personnel, as well as the ambition to create a Belt and Road lex mercatoria and legal harmonization.

Through a close examination of the legal framework of the CICC, the paper argues that the establishment of the CICC has showcased a shift in the paradigm in the Beijing Consensus in the context of law and development via a more active top-down, institutional and hard-law approach. The article argues that the shift in paradigm does not mean that China is necessarily moving away from or abandoning the norm-based soft-law approach. Instead, it is likely that both Yin (soft power) and Yang (hard power) of China’s law and development will be a complementary attempt in its overriding “Rule of Law China” (fazhi zhongguo) vision. It is further argued that the establishment of the CICC will represent a reshaping and readjustment of the Beijing Consensus amidst the tension between Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative and Washington’s IndoPacific Strategy, signifying a more determined and proactive mindset in the ideological tug of war in the realm of legal architecture and the international rule of law discourse.

Scroll to Top