¹ Colin Scott, Fabrizio Cafaggi & Senden, Linda, The Conceptual and Constitutional Challenge of Transnational Private Regulation, 38 J. of L. & Soc. 1-19 (2011).Google Scholar

² Levi-Faur, David, The Global Diffusion of Regulatory Capitalism 598 Ann. of Amer. Acad. of Polit'l. & Soc. Sci. 12-32 (2005); Giandomenico Majone, The Rise of the Regulatory State in Europe 17 W. Eur'n Pol. 77-101 (1994); Philip Selznick, Focusing Organizational Research on Regulation, in Regulatory Policy and the Social Sciences (Roger Noll ed., 1985).Google Scholar

³ Bartley, Tim, Institutional Emergence in an Era of Globalization: The Rise of Transnational Private Regulation of Labor and Environmental Conditions 113 Amer. J. of Socio'y 297-351 (2007)Google Scholar

⁴ Büthe, Tim & Mattli, Walter, The New Global Rules: The Privatization of Regulation in the World Economy (2011).Google Scholar

⁵ Hale, Robert, Coercion and Distribution in a Supposedly Non-Coercive State 38 Polit'l. Sci. Q. 470-494 (1923).Google Scholar

⁶ Id. at 472.Google Scholar

⁷ Stinchcombe, Arthur, Contracts as Hierarchical Documents, in Organizational Theory and Project Management (Arthur Stinchcombe & Carol Heimer eds., 1985).Google Scholar

⁸ Brunsson, Nils, Organizations, Markets and Standardization, in A World of Standards (Nils Brunsson, Bengt Jacobsson & Associates eds., 2000).Google Scholar

⁹ Council of the European Union, Council Resolution 85/C 136/01 of 7 May 1985 on a New Approach to Technical Harmonization and Standards (Council of the European Union, Brussels 1985).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Biggins, John & Scott, Colin, Public-Private Relations in a Transnational Private Regulatory Regime: ISDA, the State and OTC Derivatives Market Reform, 13 Eur'n Bus. Org. L. Rev. 309-346 (2012).Google Scholar

¹¹ Cashore, Benjamin, Legitimacy and the Privatization of Environmental Governance: How Non-State Market-Driven (NSMD) Governance Systems Gain Rule Making Authority, 15 Governance 503-529 (2002).Google Scholar

¹² European Advertising Standards Alliance, Blue Book 6: Advertising Self-Regulation in Europe and Beyond (EASA, Brussels 2010).Google Scholar

¹³ Black, Julia, Critical Reflections on Regulation 27 Aus. J. of Leg. Phil. 1-35 (2002); Christopher Hood, Henry Rothstein & Robert Baldwin, The Government of Risk (2001).Google Scholar

¹⁴ Curtin, Deirdre & Senden, Linda, Public Accountability of Transnational Private Regulation: Chimera or Reality?, 38 J. of L. and Soc. 163-188 (2011).Google Scholar

¹⁵ Smith, Adam, Wealth of Nations (1970 [orig. publ. 1776]).Google Scholar

¹⁶ Goodin, Robert, Democratic Accountability: The Distinctiveness of the Third Sector, 44 Eur. Arch. of Soc. 359-396 (2003).Google Scholar

¹⁷ Büthe & Mattli, , supra note 3.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Thatcher, Martin, Delegation to Independent Regulatory Agencies: Pressures, Functions and Contextual Mediation 25 W. Eur. Pol. 125-147 (2002).Google Scholar

¹⁹ Calliess, Gralf-Peter, Transnational Consumer Law: Co-Regulation of B2C E-Commerce, in Responsible Business: Self-Governance and Law in Transnational Economic Transactions (Olaf Dilling, Martin Herberg & Gerd Winter eds., 2008); Tony Prosser, Self-regulation, Co-regulation and the Audio-Visual Media Services Directive, 31 J. of Cons. Pol'y 99-113 (2008); Linda Senden, Soft Law, Self-Regulation and Co-Regulation in European Law – Where do they Meet? 9 Elect. J. of Comp. L. (2005).Google Scholar

²⁰ O'Dowd, John, Ireland's New Defamation Act, 1 J. of Med. L. 173-190 (2009).Google Scholar

²¹ Baggott, Rob & Harrison, Larry, The Politics of Self Regulation: The Case For Advertising Control 14 Pol'y and Pol. 145-159 (1986).Google Scholar

²² Prosser, , supra note 17.Google Scholar

²³ European Advertising Standards Alliance, EASA Best Practice Recommendation for a European Industry-wide Self-Regulatory Standard and Compliance Mechanism for Consumer Controls in Online Behavioural Advertising (EASA, Brussels 2011). But see the critical remarks on privacy produced by Article 29 Working Party, comprising the national data protection agencies, operating within the framework of the EU: Article 29 Working Party, Opinion 16/2011 on EASA/IAB Best Practice Recommendation on Online Behavioural Advertising (Article 29 Working Party, Brussels 2011).Google Scholar

²⁴ Article 6 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005/29/EC, OJ 11.06.05, L146/22 provides, inter alia, 2. A commercial practice shall also be regarded as misleading if, in its factual context, taking account of all its features and circumstances, it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision that he would not have taken otherwise, and it involves:Google Scholar

(b) The non-compliance by the trader with commitments contained in codes of conduct by which the trader has undertaken to be bound, where:Google Scholar

(i) the commitment is not aspirational but is firm and is capable of being verified, andGoogle Scholar

(ii) the trader indicates in a commercial practice that he is bound by the code.'Google Scholar

Additionally, Annex 1 blacklists as misleading commercial practices (meaning there is no requirement to demonstrate effects on consumer behavior) false claims to be a signatory to a code, the display of quality mark without authorization, false claims that a code has approval from a public or other body, false claims that a trader or a product has approval from a public or other body.Google Scholar

²⁵ Directive 2001/95/EC Art 3(1).Google Scholar

²⁶ Art. 3(2). But cf. Tim Büthe & Walter Mattli, The New Global Rules: The Privatization of Regulation in the World Economy 221 (2011), noting capacity of national government to restrict circulation of products judged harmful, even though compliant with European technical standards.Google Scholar

²⁷ Biggins, & Scott, , supra note 9.Google Scholar

²⁸ Harlow, Carol, Global Administrative Law: The Quest for Principles and Values, 17 Eur'n J. of Int'L L. 187-214 (2006); Benedict Kingsbury, Nico Krisch & Richard Stewart, The Emergence of Global Administrative Law, 68 L. & Cont. Prob. 15-61 (2005).Google Scholar

²⁹ Curtin, Deirdre & Senden, Linda, Public Accountability of Transnational Private Regulation: Chimera or Reality?, 38 J. of L. & Soc. 163-188, 187-8 (2011); Colin Scott, Reflexive Governance, Regulation and Meta-Regulation: Control or Learning?, in Reflexive Governance: Redefining the Public Interest in a Pluralistic World (Olivier de Schutter & Jacques Lenoble eds., 2010).Google Scholar

³⁰ Black, Julia, Constructing and Contesting Legitimacy and Accountability in Polycentric Regulatory Regimes, Reg. & Gov. 137-164 (2008); Mark Suchman, Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches, 20 Acad. of Mgmt. Rev. 571-610 (1995); Neil Gunningham Regulatory Reform and Reflexive Regulation: Beyond Command and Control, in Reflexive Governance for Global Public Goods (Eric Brousseau, Tom Dedeurwaerdere & Bernd Siebenhüner eds., 2012).Google Scholar

³¹ Parker, Christine, The Open Corporation: Self-Regulation and Democracy (2002); Sharon Gilad, It Runs in the Family: Meta-Regulation and its Siblings, 4 Reg. & Gov. 485-506 (2010).Google Scholar

³² Bomhoff, Jacco & Meuwese, Anne, The Meta-Regulation of Transnational Private Regulation, 38 J. of L. & Soc. 138-162 (2011).Google Scholar

³³ Codes are available on the ISEAL website at: http://www.isealalliance.org (last visited: 1 December 2012). A current initiative at the time of writing is a new set of Credibility Principles which establish minimum requirements to establish and maintain credibility as a sustainability regulator, recognizing the consumers have a choice whether to purchase goods labeled in accordance with codes set down by ISEAL members and that credibility of labeling regimes is critical to market acceptance.Google Scholar