The international competition network, its leniency best practice and legitimacy: An argument for introducing a review system

研究成果: 著書/レポートタイプへの貢献

1 引用 (Scopus)

抄録

In his contribution The International Competition Network, its Leniency Best Practice and Legitimacy: An Argument for Introducing a Review System, Steven Van Uytsel argues that the International Competition Network, as an example of a transnational regulatory network, should set up a review system of its best practices. Best practices of transnational regulatory networks, are seen as a legitimate tool for influencing the regulatory behavior of their members. These best practices are, at the end, developed by experts in the field based upon the experiences of these experts with their respective legislation or practices. Nevertheless, this chapter shows that this may be problematic if the legislation or the practice with which these experts work exhibits flaws. This is an argument that can be made in the framework of the leniency program and its best practice under the Competition Network. Van Uytsel shows that the best practice finds its origin in the leniency program of two major jurisdictions, the United States and the European Union. The leniency programs of these two jurisdictions have recently been negatively scrutinized by several scholars. Therefore, the question arises on whether best practice is really reflecting a legitimate end-result for convergence. Suggesting that it is not, Van Uytsel argues that a review process could overcome the potential threat to legitimacy in this kind of transnational regulatory network and he also offers some ideas on how this review process could be institutionalized.

元の言語英語
ホスト出版物のタイトルNetworked Governance, Transnational Business and the Law
出版者Springer Berlin Heidelberg
ページ185-227
ページ数43
ISBN(電子版)9783642412127
ISBN(印刷物)9783642412110
DOI
出版物ステータス出版済み - 1 1 2014

Fingerprint

international competition
best practice
legitimacy
expert
jurisdiction
legislation
threat

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Sciences(all)

これを引用

The international competition network, its leniency best practice and legitimacy : An argument for introducing a review system. / Van Uytsel, Steven J.

Networked Governance, Transnational Business and the Law. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2014. p. 185-227.

研究成果: 著書/レポートタイプへの貢献

Van Uytsel, Steven J. / The international competition network, its leniency best practice and legitimacy : An argument for introducing a review system. Networked Governance, Transnational Business and the Law. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2014. pp. 185-227
@inbook{51a5d6a61ac943b2a89a9b12bb324828,
title = "The international competition network, its leniency best practice and legitimacy: An argument for introducing a review system",
abstract = "In his contribution The International Competition Network, its Leniency Best Practice and Legitimacy: An Argument for Introducing a Review System, Steven Van Uytsel argues that the International Competition Network, as an example of a transnational regulatory network, should set up a review system of its best practices. Best practices of transnational regulatory networks, are seen as a legitimate tool for influencing the regulatory behavior of their members. These best practices are, at the end, developed by experts in the field based upon the experiences of these experts with their respective legislation or practices. Nevertheless, this chapter shows that this may be problematic if the legislation or the practice with which these experts work exhibits flaws. This is an argument that can be made in the framework of the leniency program and its best practice under the Competition Network. Van Uytsel shows that the best practice finds its origin in the leniency program of two major jurisdictions, the United States and the European Union. The leniency programs of these two jurisdictions have recently been negatively scrutinized by several scholars. Therefore, the question arises on whether best practice is really reflecting a legitimate end-result for convergence. Suggesting that it is not, Van Uytsel argues that a review process could overcome the potential threat to legitimacy in this kind of transnational regulatory network and he also offers some ideas on how this review process could be institutionalized.",
author = "{Van Uytsel}, {Steven J.}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/978-3-642-41212-7_10",
language = "English",
isbn = "9783642412110",
pages = "185--227",
booktitle = "Networked Governance, Transnational Business and the Law",
publisher = "Springer Berlin Heidelberg",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - The international competition network, its leniency best practice and legitimacy

T2 - An argument for introducing a review system

AU - Van Uytsel, Steven J.

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - In his contribution The International Competition Network, its Leniency Best Practice and Legitimacy: An Argument for Introducing a Review System, Steven Van Uytsel argues that the International Competition Network, as an example of a transnational regulatory network, should set up a review system of its best practices. Best practices of transnational regulatory networks, are seen as a legitimate tool for influencing the regulatory behavior of their members. These best practices are, at the end, developed by experts in the field based upon the experiences of these experts with their respective legislation or practices. Nevertheless, this chapter shows that this may be problematic if the legislation or the practice with which these experts work exhibits flaws. This is an argument that can be made in the framework of the leniency program and its best practice under the Competition Network. Van Uytsel shows that the best practice finds its origin in the leniency program of two major jurisdictions, the United States and the European Union. The leniency programs of these two jurisdictions have recently been negatively scrutinized by several scholars. Therefore, the question arises on whether best practice is really reflecting a legitimate end-result for convergence. Suggesting that it is not, Van Uytsel argues that a review process could overcome the potential threat to legitimacy in this kind of transnational regulatory network and he also offers some ideas on how this review process could be institutionalized.

AB - In his contribution The International Competition Network, its Leniency Best Practice and Legitimacy: An Argument for Introducing a Review System, Steven Van Uytsel argues that the International Competition Network, as an example of a transnational regulatory network, should set up a review system of its best practices. Best practices of transnational regulatory networks, are seen as a legitimate tool for influencing the regulatory behavior of their members. These best practices are, at the end, developed by experts in the field based upon the experiences of these experts with their respective legislation or practices. Nevertheless, this chapter shows that this may be problematic if the legislation or the practice with which these experts work exhibits flaws. This is an argument that can be made in the framework of the leniency program and its best practice under the Competition Network. Van Uytsel shows that the best practice finds its origin in the leniency program of two major jurisdictions, the United States and the European Union. The leniency programs of these two jurisdictions have recently been negatively scrutinized by several scholars. Therefore, the question arises on whether best practice is really reflecting a legitimate end-result for convergence. Suggesting that it is not, Van Uytsel argues that a review process could overcome the potential threat to legitimacy in this kind of transnational regulatory network and he also offers some ideas on how this review process could be institutionalized.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84956636781&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84956636781&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-3-642-41212-7_10

DO - 10.1007/978-3-642-41212-7_10

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84956636781

SN - 9783642412110

SP - 185

EP - 227

BT - Networked Governance, Transnational Business and the Law

PB - Springer Berlin Heidelberg

ER -