Top

Published in:

2020 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

3. Concepts of International Organization and Membership

Author : Gerd Droesse

Published in: Membership in International Organizations

Publisher: T.M.C. Asser Press

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

This chapter discusses the classification of international organizations in different ways, such as: according to (i) the manner of their establishment (public and private organizations); (ii) the division of power (legislative, administrative, and judicial organizations);” (iii) “the extent of authority and power of the organization vis-à-vis states: policy-making, operative and supranational organizations;” (iv) the scope of their activities (general or special organizations), or (v) in relation to their membership structures. These classifications are generally discussed with reference to traditional international organizations with treaty foundation. It is one of the themes of the book that the above approach is too narrow and that classifications as mentioned above should also comprise international organizations without a treaty base. The classification of an international organization does not depend on the mode of its establishment but on its functions. The book also shows that region is a political concept not a geographic one and discusses the many connotations of region for organizations legal and institutional frameworks. In addition, the chapter reviews in detail the definitions and concepts of membership, the difference between membership and representation, and certain cases where such distinction increasing gets blurred.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

previous chapter Historic Evolution of Membership Concepts

next chapter Decline or Disaggregation of the Nation State, Dichotomy of Public and Private and Constitution and Constitutionalization

El-Erian 1963, p. 168.

El-Erian 1963, pp. 168–169.

Amerasinghe 2005, p. 9.

El-Erian 1963, p. 168.

Schermers and Blokker 2011, §64.

Ibid.

The Permanent Court of International Justice stated: “As the European Commission is not a State, but an international institution with a special purpose, it only has the functions bestowed upon it by the Definitive Statute with a view to the fulfilment of that purpose, but it has power to exercise these functions to their full extent, in so far as the Statute does not impose restrictions upon it.” Permanent Court of International Justice, Advisory Opinion No. 14. “Jurisdiction of the European Commission of the Danube between Galatz and Braila”, In Publications of the Permanent Court of International Justice. Series B–No. 14. 1927. Leiden: AW Sijthoff Publishing Company. http://www.icj-cij.org/files/permanent-court-of-international-justice/serie_B/B_14/01_Commission_europeenne_du_Danube_Avis_consultatif.pdf (emphasis added).

The World Health Assembly had requested by Resolution WHA46.40 adopted on 14 May 1993 the International Court of Justice to given an Advisory Opinion on the following question: “In view of the health and environmental effects, would the use of nuclear weapons by a State in war or other armed conflict be a breach of its obligations under international law including the WHO Constitution?” “Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion” ICJ Reports. 1996, 66, para 1, http://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/93/093-19960708-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf.

The International Court of Justice stated in its aforementioned Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996:

25. The Court need hardly point out that international organizations are subjects of international law which do not, unlike States, possess a general competence. International organizations are governed by the ‘principle of speciality’, that is to say, they are invested by the States which create them with powers, the limits of which are a function of the common interests whose promotion those States entrust to them.

The Court further stated in para 25:

In the opinion of the Court, to ascribe to the WHO the competence to address the legality of the use of nuclear weapons—even in view of their health and environmental effects—would be tantamount to disregarding the principle of speciality; for such competence could not be deemed a necessary implication of the Constitution of the Organization in the light of the purposes assigned to it by its member States.

In line with the above, while the International Court of Justice found in para 32 that it was “not able to give the advisory opinion which was requested of it under World Health Assembly resolution”, it complied in a second Advisory Opinion also rendered on 8 July 1996 with the request of the General Assembly “to render its advisory opinion on the following question: ‘Is the threat or use of nuclear weapons in any circumstance permitted under international law?’” “Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion”, ICJ Reports 1996, 226, paras 1 and 105(1). http://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/95/095-19960708-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf.

Williams 1987, p. 2.

Klabbers 2014, p. 648.

Ibid., 649.

Mitrany 1948, p. 358.

Luard 1977, p. 5.

Williams 1987, 14.

Stone 2013, p. 183.

Ibid., 185.

Ibid., 183.

Head 1994, pp. 605–666.

El-Erian 1963, p. 169.

Schermers and Blokker 2011, §61.

Klabbers 2015, p. 26.

Schermers and Blokker 2011, §61.

Jessop 2004, p. 54.

Ibid.

Bernhard 1998, p. 27.

Treaty establishing the European Economic Community. 25 March 1957.

Blockmans and Prechal 2006, p. 1.

Ibid.

The Bundesverfassungsgericht stated in its judgement of 12 Oct. 1993, Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts (BverfGE) Vol. 89, 155 ss., under note 90: “Der Vertrag begründet einen europäischen Staatenverbund, der von den Mitgliedstaaten getragen wird und deren nationale Identität achtet; er betrifft die Mitgliedschaft Deutschlands in supranationalen Organisationen, nicht eine Zugehörigkeit zu einem europäischen Staat (II.1).” Note 95 further provides: “(b) Das Demokratieprinzip hindert mithin die Bundesrepublik Deutschland nicht an einer Mitgliedschaft in einer—supranational organisierten—zwischenstaatlichen Gemeinschaft. Voraussetzung der Mitgliedschaft ist aber, daß eine vom Volk ausgehende Legitimation und Einflußnahme auch innerhalb eines Staatenverbundes gesichert ist.” Note 112 further reads: “Deutschland ist einer der ‘Herren der Verträge’, die ihre Gebundenheit an den ‘auf unbegrenzte Zeit’ geschlossenen Unions-Vertrag (Article Q EUV) mit dem Willen zur langfristigen Mitgliedschaft begründet haben, diese Zugehörigkeit aber letztlich durch einen gegenläufigen Akt auch wieder aufheben könnten. Geltung und Anwendung von Europarecht in Deutschland hängen von dem Rechtsanwendungsbefehl des Zustimmungsgesetzes ab.”

“Der Vertrag von Lissabon macht erstmals das bestehende Recht jedes Mitgliedstaates zum Austritt aus der Europäischen Union im Primärrecht sichtbar (Article 50 EUV-Lissabon). Dieses Austrittsrecht unterstreicht die Souveränität der Mitgliedstaaten und zeigt ebenfalls, dass mit dem derzeitigen Entwicklungsstand der Europäischen Union die Grenze zum Staat im Sinne des Völkerrechts nicht überschritten ist [….] Kann ein Mitgliedstaat aufgrund einer selbstverantworteten Entscheidungaustreten, ist der europäische Integrationsprozess nicht unumkehrbar. Die Mitgliedschaft der Bundesrepublik Deutschland hängt vielmehr von ihrem dauerhaften und fortbestehenden Willen ab, der Europäischen Union anzugehören.” Urteil vom 30 Juni 2009—2 BvE 2/08, BVerfGE 123, 267–437, Note 329. https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/2009/06/es20090630_2bve000208.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1.

Cited by Goebel 2013, pp. 82–83, footnote 16.

Schermers and Blokker 2011, §53.

United Nations. UN Member States. Founding Member States. http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/unms/founders.shtml.

Dominicé 2001, p. 67.

Boisson de Chazournes 2010, p. 102.

See, in this context, the discussion in Czerwinsky 1974, p. 48: “Die Bezugnahme auf die Völkerrechtsprinzipien macht deutlich, daβ das Prinzip der Universalität keine orignäre Spezialnorm darstellt und eine Teilnahmeberechtigung nicht zu konstituieren vermag.”

El-Erian 1963, pp. 159–185, para 68.

Ibid., para 69.

Schermers and Blokker 2011, §51.

Ibid.

Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, 1975, Article I, para (1) states that “‘international organization’ means an intergovernmental organization.” Moreover, para (2) provides: “‘international organization of a universal character’ means the United Nations, its specialized agencies, the International Atomic Energy Agency and any similar organization whose membership and responsibilities are on a worldwide scale.”

The indicated numbers of members/participants of INTERPOL, GEF and IPU as of 16 September 2017….

Brownlie, I. and G. S. Goodwin-Gill. 1999. “The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU)”. Joint Opinion. Statement 2. http://www.ipu.org/finance-e/opinion.pdf.

“Regional group system within the United Nations—Conditions for admission to a regional group—Consensus—General Assembly resolution 1192 (XII) of 12 Dec. 1957. Letter to the Acting Chief Counsel, O.I.P.C., INTERPOL. United Nations Juridical Yearbook, 2003, Vol. II, Chapter VI, A: Legal Opinions of the Secretariat of the United Nations, 528–529, 529: “The regional group system was established in the late fifties through the process of transformation of the system of unofficial and informal caucuses, based on loose geographical and political affinities, which had emerged following the founding of the United Nations, into a new arrangement. It was first reflected in indirect form in General Assembly resolution 1192 (XII) of 12 Dec. 1957 concerning the composition of the General Committee of the General Assembly. The concept of regional groups has subsequently been endorsed in various decisions of the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council and their subsidiary bodies as the accepted mechanism for distribution of elected places according to the principle of equitable geographical distribution and as the forum for consultations and negotiations on important issue.” (Ibid., 529). http://legal.un.org/docs/?path=../unjuridicalyearbook/pdfs/english/volumes/2003.pdf&lang=E.

United Nations. United Nations Regional Groups of Member States. http://www.un.org/depts/DGACM/RegionalGroups.shtmls.

Constitution of the World Health Organization, Article 44(a) and (b).

African Region, Region of the Americas, South-East Asia Region, European Region, Eastern Mediterranean Region, and Western Pacific Region. See http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/definition_regions/en/.

Clift, C. 2013. “The Role of the World Health Organization in the International System”. Centre on Global Health Security Working Group Papers. Working Group on Governance. Paper 1. London: Chatham House, The Royal Institute of International Affairs.

Charter of the Organization of African Unity, Article I, para 2.

Charter of the Organization of African Unity, Article XXIV, para 1.

In the case of the African Union, the Constituent Act of the African Union was open, in accordance with para. 1 or Art. 27, “for signature, ratification and accession by the Member States of the OAU [Organization of African Union]”. In addition, in accordance with Art. 29 para. 1, “[a]ny African State may, at any time after the entry-in-force of this Act, notify the Chairman of the Commission of its intention to accede to this Act and to be admitted as a Member of the Union.”

http://www.benelux-parlement.eu/en/benelux/geschiedenis.asp.

Cited according to Archer 1992, p. 46.

See Boisson de Chazournes 2010, p. 107.

Treaty on European Union, Article 49. See Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union. Official Journal of the European Union C 326/13 (26.10.2012). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012M/TXT&from=EN.

See Pechstein 2014, p. 835.

As reported by Thomas, the Finnish Foreign Minister stated in 2006 during a press conference: “Please don’t ask me where the borders of Europe are, that’s something we didn’t want to put on the agenda.” Thomas 2017, p. 218.

Thomas 2017, p. 2; citing Severino 2006.

See Thomas 2017, p. 218, with further references.

See http://www.un.org/regionalcommissions/about.html.

Singh 1966, p. 27.

See Singh, who reports that “New Zealand, presumably apprehending anti-colonialist criticism, informed ECOSOC that these territories need not come under the Commission’s region, as the six powers in charge of these colonies had agreed to establish the South Pacific Commission to promote their economic and social development.” Singh 1966, p. 26.

On the background of the establishment of ECAFE, see Wightman 1963.

The best example is Japan which was initially only admitted to associate membership in ECAFE. See Mie 2008, pp. 98–113.

Berthelot 2004, p. 19.

Adedeji 2004, p. 233.

Ibid., 234.

Ibid., 235.

United Nations Economic and Social Council. 1958. Terms of Reference of the Economic Commission for Africa (E.CN.14/1, 22 Oct.). http://repository.uneca.org/pdfpreview/bitstream/handle/10855/16002/Bib-64579.pdf?sequence=1.

Resolution 671A listed Belgium, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as members of the commission.

In addition to the four original African UN members, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, the Sudan, Ghana, and Guinea became members of ECA. Adedeji 2004, p. 236.

See para 5 of the Terms of Reference of the Economic Commission for Africa. Resolution 671 A (XXV) adopted by the Economic and Social Council at its 1017th meeting held on 29 April 1958, as amended. http://repository.uneca.org/bitstream/handle/10855/16002/Bib-64579.pdf?sequence=1.

Destremau et al. 2004, p. 307.

Destremau et al. 2004, p. 310. Egypt is now a member of UNESCWA.

Now referred to as the region of Asia and the Pacific.

Chief Negotiators for Establishing the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Report on the Articles of Agreement of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. 22 May 2015.

Agreement establishing the African Development Bank, signed on 4 August 1963, as amended. https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Legal-Documents/Agreement%20Establishing%20the%20ADB%20final%202011.pdf.

IADB Charter, Article 2, Section 1(a).

IADB Charter, Article 1, Section 1.

EBRD Charter, Article 1.

Ibid.

The current wording of the second sentence of Article 1 of the EBRD Charter reads: “Subject to the same conditions, the purpose of the Bank may also be carried out in Mongolia and in member countries of the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean as determined by the Bank upon the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of the Governors, representing not less than three-fourths of the total voting power of the members.” See Report of the Board of Directors to the Board of Governors on the Geographic Expansion of the Bank’s Region of Operations to the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean. http://www.ebrd.com/downloads/board/Geographic_expansion_recommendation.pdf. On the amendment to the EBRD Charter, see the Foreword to the Basic Documents of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. 2013. http://www.ebrd.com/news/publications/institutional-documents/basic-documents-of-the-ebrd.html.

AIIB Articles of Agreement, Article 3, para 1(a) provides: “Regional members shall be those members listed in Part A of Schedule A and other members included in the Asia region in accordance with para 2 of Article 1. All other members shall be non-regional members.”

AIIB Articles of Agreement, Article 1, para 2 provides that “Wherever used in this Agreement, references to “Asia” and “region” shall include the geographical regions and composition classified as Asia and Oceania by the United Nations, except as otherwise decided by the Board of Governors.”

Federative Republic of Brazil, the Russian Federation, the Republic of India, the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of South Africa.

Agreement on the New Development Bank, Article 2.

See Droesse 2011a, pp. 207–218.

e.g., IADB Articles of Agreement, Article II, Section 2(e).

Different double-weighted voting requirements are contained in other Charter provisions. Thus, the adoption of regulations regarding the election of Executive Directors requires, “a three-fourths majority of the total voting power of the member countries, including, with respect to provisions relating exclusively to the election of directors by nonregional member countries, a two-thirds majority of the governors of the nonregional members, and, with respect to provisions relating exclusively to the number and election of directors by the remaining member countries, by a two-thirds majority of the governors of regional members.” Exceptions from the principle that “None of the elected directors and their alternates may be of the same citizenship” are determined in the case of borrowing member countries “by the governors of the borrowing members pursuant to a three-quarters majority of their total voting power and a two-thirds majority of their total number.” See the IADB Articles of Agreement, Article VIII, Section 3(c)(ii).

Any amendment of the general rules regarding admission of non-regional countries requires “a two-thirds majority of the total number of governors, including two thirds of the governors of nonregional members, representing not less than three fourths of the total voting power of the member countries” [IADB Articles of Agreement, Article II, Section 1(b)]. Moreover, any increase in the authorized capital stock of IADB requires “a three-fourths majority of the total voting power of the member countries, including a three fourths majority of the total number of governors, which includes a two-thirds majority of the governors of regional members.” IADB Articles of Agreement, Article II, Section 2(e).

IADB Articles of Agreement, Article II, Section 2(c)(ii) and Section 4(c); Article III, Section 7(a) and Section 12; Article IV, Section 3(f) and (g) and Section 9(b); Article V, Section 1(e); and Article VII, Section 1(iii) and Section 4(b).

Droesse 2011b, pp. 341–342.

Schermers and Blokker 2011, §§53–56.

Blokker 2004, p. 139.

Verstichel 2009, p. 28.

Ibid., 28.

Ibid., 29.

As indicated in Chap. 7 below, in the case of the GATT, a distinction was made between “CONTRACTING PARTIES, acting jointly—designated by uppercase letters (Article XXV:1) in contrast to the sum of the individual contracting states (contracting parties), designated by lowercase letters—as a rule making organ. [….].”

100

United Nations Treaty Section. Glossary of terms relating to Treaty actions. https://treaties.un.org/pages/overview.aspx?path=overview/glossary/page1_en.xml.

101

As indicated by Oppenheim: “‘Adhesion’ is defined as such entrance of a third party into an existing treaty as takes place, either with regard only to a part of the stipulations, or only with regard to certain principles laid down in the treaty.” However, as indicated by Oppenheim, the above distinction “is one made in theory to which the practice frequently does not correspond.” See Oppenheim 1920, §533.

102

See Chaps. II and III of the Agreement establishing the Corporación Andina de Fomento. https://www.caf.com/media/3610/ConvenioConstitutivoingles.pdf.

103

The Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies, About us. http://www.wassenaar.org/about-us/. See the provisions of the “Scope” of the Wassenaar Arrangement and “Participation”. Wassenaar Arrangement Secretariat. 2017. Public Documents, Vol. I, Founding Documents. Guidelines & Procedures.

104

Berthoud 1970, p. 157.

105

OSCE. 2010. The Legal Framework of the OSCE. http://www.osce.org.

106

See para 16 of the Instrument of the Restructured Global Environment Facility (GEF Instrument). https://www.thegef.org/gef/sites/thegef.org/files/publication/GEF_Instrument-Interior-March23.2015.pdf.

107

See with further references: Copelovitch and Ohls 2012, p. 82.

108

IMF. 2010. “IMF Membership in the Financial Stability Board”, para 16.

109

Ibid., para 21.

110

Ibid., para 23.

111

“IOSCO was created in 1983, when 11 securities regulatory agencies from North and South America agreed to build their inter-American regional association into an international cooperative body. A year later, securities regulators from France, Indonesia, Korea and the United Kingdom become the first non-American agencies to join the new organization. In July 1986, IOSCO held its annual conference in Paris, the first outside the Americas and where members agreed to create a permanent General Secretariat.” OICV-IOSCO. About IOSCO.

112

Ordinary membership comprises national security commissions or similar bodies with “significant authority over securities or derivatives markets” (See IOSCO By-Laws, Section 1, Part 2, Section 6), or where there is no government regulatory body, a “self-regulatory body, such as a stock exchange.” (Ibid., Section 7.1).

113

Associate membership comprises in accordance with IOSCO By-Laws, Section 1, Part 2, 8.1 associations of “public regulatory bodies” and in accordance with Section 8.2, “(a) supranational governmental regulators; (b) subnational governmental regulators where there is a national governmental regulator; (c) intergovernmental international organizations and other international standard-setting bodies; (d) other governmental bodies with an appropriate interest in securities regulation; and (e) national governmental regulators who are not MMoU signatories and who are not ordinary members.”

114

“The following bodies are eligible for affiliate membership of the Organization. (a) self-regulatory organizations (SROs); (b) securities exchanges; (c) financial market infrastructures (including clearing and settlement agencies); (d) international bodies other than governmental organizations with an appropriate interest in securities regulation; (e) investor protection funds and compensation funds; and (f) any other body with an appropriate interest in securities regulation that the IOSCO Board may decide for the purpose of furthering the objectives of the Organization.” IASCO By-Laws, Section 1, Part 2, 9.1.

115

Ruiter 2001, p. 104.

116

Amerasinghe 2005, pp. 125–126.

117

Duxbury 2011, p. 20.

118

Sands and Klein 2009, p. 557.

119

Schermers and Blokker 2011, §238.

120

Verstichel 2009, p. 29 citing Haywood 2000.

121

Ibid., 30.

122

Schermers and Blokker 2011, §66.

123

Global Fund By Laws, Article 7.1.

124

Majid 1996, p. 68.

125

Sands and Klein 2009, p. 557.

126

Schermers and Blokker 2011, §557.

127

Schermers and Blokker 2011, §41.

Adedeji A (2004) The ECA: forging a future for Africa. In: Berthelot Y (ed) Unity and diversity of development ideas. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp 233–306

Amerasinghe CF (2005) Principles of the Institutional Law of International Organizations, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Archer C (1992) International Organizations, 2nd edn. Routledge, London

Bernhard R (1998) Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht und das Recht internationaler Organisationen: Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede. In: Hafner G, Loibl G, Rest A, Sucharipa-Behrmann L, Zermanek K (eds) Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht und das Recht internationaler Organisationen. Liber Amicorum Professor Ignaz Seidl-Hohenveldern in honour of his 80th Birthday. Kluwer International, The Hague, pp 25–35

Berthelot Y (2004) Unity and diversity of development: the regional commissions’ experience. In: Berthelot Y (ed) Unity and diversity in development ideas. Perspectives from the UN Regional Commissions. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp 1–50

Berthoud P (1970) The United Nations Development Programme. Framework and procedures. J World Trade Law 4:155–191

Blockmans S, Prechal S (2006) The European Integration Process: a continuum of ‘deepening’ and ‘widening’. In: Blockmans S, Prechal S (eds) Reconciling the deepening and widening of the European Union. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, pp 1–12

Blokker N (2004) International Organizations and their members. International Organizations belong to all members and to none. Variations on a theme. Int Organ Law Rev 1:139–161CrossRef

Boisson de Chazournes L (2010) Les relations entre organisations régionales et organisations universelles. In: Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol 347, pp 79–406

Copelovitch MS, Ohls D (2012) Trade, institutions, and the timing of GATT/WTO accession in post-colonial states. Rev Int Organ 7:81–107CrossRef

Czerwinsky G (1974) Das Universalitätsprinzip und die Mitgliedschaft in internationalen universalen Verträgen und Organisationen. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin

Destremau B, Saywell A-S, Barroche J (2004) ESCWA: Striving for regional integration. In: Berthelot Y (ed) Unity and diversity of development ideas. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp 307–357

Dominicé C (2001) Co-ordination between universal and regional organizations. In: Blokker NM, Schermers H (eds) Proliferation of International Organizations: legal issues. Kluwer Law International, The Hague, pp 65–84

Droesse G (2011a) Modalities of multilateral concessional financing. In: Droesse G (ed) Funds for development: multilateral channels of concessional financing. ADB, Manila, pp 179–297

Droesse G (2011b) Concessional financing of the Asian Development Bank: The Asian Development Fund and other channels of ADB concessional financing. In: Droesse G (ed) Funds for development: multilateral channels of concessional financing. ADB, Manila, pp 299–398

Duxbury A (2011) The Participation of States in International Organization: The Role of Human Rights and Democracy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

El-Erian A (1963) First report on relations between states and inter-governmental organizations (A/CN.4/161 and Add.1). Yearb Int Law Commission 2:159–185

Goebel RJ (2013) Supranational? Federal? Intergovernmental? The governmental structure of the European Union after the Treaty of Lisbon. Columbia J Eur Law 20:77–142

Haywood A (2000) Key concepts of politics. MacMillan, London

Head JW (1994) Supranational Law: How the move toward multilateral solutions is changing the character of ‘International’ Law. Kansas Law Rev 42:605–666

Jessop B (2004) Multi-level governance and multi-level metagovernance. In: Bache I, Flinders M (eds) Multi-level governance. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 49–74

Klabbers J (2014) The emergence of functionalism in International Institutional Law: Colonial inspirations. Eur J Int Law 25(3):645–675CrossRef

Klabbers J (2015) An introduction to International Organizations law, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Luard E (1977) International Agencies: The emerging framework of interdependence. MacMillan Press, LondonCrossRef

Majid AA (1996) Legal status of International Institutions: SITA, INMARSAT and Eurocontrol examined. Dartmouth Publishing, Aldershot

Mie O (2008) Japan’s entry into ECAFE. In: Makoto I, Rose C, Junko T, West J (eds) Japanese diplomacy in the 1950s. From isolation to integration. Routledge, London, pp 98–113

Mitrany D (1948) The functional approach to world organization. Int Aff (Royal Institute of International Affairs) 24:350–363CrossRef

Oppenheim L (1920) In: Roxburgh RF (ed) International Law. A treatise, 3rd edn, vol 1, §533 (reprint: The Lawbook Exchange, New Jersey)

Pechstein M (2014) Mitgliedschaftsordnung der EU. In: Hatje A, Müller-Graf P-C (eds) Enzyklopädie Europarecht, vol 1. Europäisches Organisations-und Verfassungsrecht. Nomos, Baden Baden, pp 833–890

Ruiter DW (2001) Legal institutions. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

Sands P, Klein P (2009) Bowett’s Law of International Institution, 5th edn. Sweet and Maxwell (Thomson Reuters), London

Schermers HG, Blokker NM (2011) International Institutional Law: Unity within diversity, 5th edn. Martinus Nijhoff, Boston

Severino RC (2006) Southeast Asia in search of an ASEAN Community: Insights from the former ASEAN Secretary-General. ISEAS Publishing, Singapore

Singh LP (1966) The politics of economic cooperation in Asia: A study of Asian International Organizations. University of Missouri Press, Columbia

Stone D (2013) Knowledge actors and transnational governance: The private-public policy nexus in the global agora. Palgrave MacMillan

Thomas DC (2017) Beyond identity: Membership norms and regional organization. Eur J Int Relat 23:217–240CrossRef

Verstichel A (2009) Participation, representation and identity, the right of persons belonging to minorities to effective participation in public affairs: Content, justification and limits. Intersentia, Antwerp

Wightman D (1963) Towards economic cooperation in Asia: The United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East. Yale University Press, New Haven

Williams D (1987) The specialized agencies and the United Nations. The system in crisis. St. Martin’s Press, New York

Title: Concepts of International Organization and Membership
Author: Gerd Droesse
Publisher: T.M.C. Asser Press
Book: Membership in International Organizations
Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-326-9

Electronic ISBN: 978-94-6265-327-6

Copyright Year: 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-327-6_3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"