CYIL Vol. 5, 2014

NONǧTRADITIONAL NORMS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW new, alternative forms of cross-border cooperation. 20 In many policy fields, moreover, international institutions have taken up active roles in finding international agreement through policy processes, while states have been less active in developing traditional international law. 21 Second, case studies report that non-traditional norms regulate individual behaviour and influence national legal systems. 22 It is broadly accepted that ‘non-law’ stemming from international governance processes may create legal effects at the international and/or domestic level. Non-traditional norms are used to exercise regulatory functions that, previously, were considered to be inherently linked to the function of law in a strict sense of the word. Further research is required to scientifically measure the concrete impact of non-traditional international law in domestic courts and regulatory schemes. 23 Third, a rule of law element pops up. One of the crucial questions when studying global regulatory processes is how to control these. Research repeatedly has shown that informal regulatory processes may suffer from accountability deficits. The absence of judicial review and due process safeguards, even when it is clear that norms may have a deep impact upon individuals, is striking. 24 Consequently, a gap exists in legal research with regard to the conceptualisation and accountability of non-traditional norms. 3. The study of non-traditional international norms The approaches discussed above have offered insight into processes that underlie international lawmaking. Yet, they appear to fall short in grasping the totality of new regulatory developments at the international plane. The doctrine of sources of PIL and approaches derived thereof, at least at this point in time, are unable to assess the complexity of output of public policy processes at the international plane. As a result, alternative methods have been considered to study and order non-traditional norms. A vast body of scholarship has emerged to study the new layer added to normmaking at the global level. The following section critically discusses four recent methodologies that have attempted to fill the gap in legal research. All four draw attention to phenomena in global governance that are considered to be largely neglected by lawyers. Each of them, however, approaches the problem from a different angle. 20 Pauwelyn, J., Wessel, R.A., Wouters, J., “When Structures Become Shackles: Stagnation and Dynamics in International Lawmaking”, European Journal of International Law 2014 (forthcoming). 21 Von Bogdandy, A., Dann Ph., Goldmann, M., “The Exercise of Public Authority by International Institutions”, Beiträge zum ausländischen öffentlichen Recht und Völkerrecht , 2010, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 3-32. 22 Von Bogdandy, A., Dann, Ph., Goldmann, M., “Developing the Publicness of Public International Law: Towards a Legal Framework for Global Governance Activities”, German Law Journal , 2008, Vol. 9, No. 11, pp. 1375-1400. 23 For example, as done in Benvenisti E., Downs, G., “National Courts, Domestic Democracy, and the Evolution of International Law”, European Journal of International Law , 2008, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 59-72. 24 Von Bogdandy, Dann, Goldmann, op. cit. 21 , at 9.