CYIL Vol. 5, 2014

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.