The Regulatory Cooperation Chapter of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Institutional Structures and Democratic Consequences


Journal of International Economic Law

2015, vol. 18, pp.625-640

Departments: Tax & Law, GREGHEC (CNRS)

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) has the potential to remake political and legal relationships between the European Union (EU) and the USA and pave the way to a new form of global economic governance based on internationalregulatory cooperation. In particular, TTIP presents an historic opportunity for the EU and the USA to remove regulatory divergence—today’s most prominent obstacle to trade exchanges—thereby increasing economic growth for the citizens of both polities. Yet, the EU and the USA have been attempting to reduce trade barriers since the 1970s. Despite decades of cooperation, EU and US policymakers too often fail to mutually understand each other’s positions, giving rise to regulatory differences. As an international agreement predicted to contain a Horizontal Chapter—an innovative approach to international trade treaty-making containing a framework for future bilateral regulatory cooperation—TTIP has the potential to transform this impasse, if approached correctly. The envisaged chapter would provide a ‘gateway’ for handling sectoral regulatory issues between the EU and the USA, including by addressing both legislation and non-legislative acts, regardless of the level at which they are adopted and by whom. Yet with great promises come challenges too.This article focusses on the structure, scope, discipline, institutional design, enforcement,and implementation of the envisaged horizontal chapter, often defined Regulatory Cooperation Chapter. In so doing, it addresses some of the concerns currently raised by civil society, in particular the fear of a ‘race to the bottom’ that may stem from the operation of this chapter and provides some recommendations

A Configural Approach to Coordinating Expertise in Software Development Teams


MIS Quarterly


Departments: Informations Systems and Operations Management, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Keywords: Software development, software teams, expertise coordination, configuration, centralization, knowledge tacitness, team conflict, coordination success

Despite the recognition of how important expertise coordination is to the performance of software development teams, understanding of how expertise is coordinated in practice is limited. We adopt a configural approach to develop a theoretical model of expertise coordination that differentiates between design collaboration and technical collaboration. We propose that neither a strictly centralized, top-down model nor a largely decentralized approach is superior. Our model is tested in a field study of 71 software development teams. We conclude that because design work addresses ill-structured problems with diverse potential solutions, decentralization of design collaboration can lead to greater coordination success and reduced team conflict. Conversely, technical work benefits from centralized collaboration. We find that task knowledge tacitness strengthens these relationships between collaboration configuration and coordination outcomes and that team conflict mediates the relationships. Our findings underline the need to differentiate between technical and design collaboration and point to the importance of certain configurations in reducing team conflict and increasing coordination success in software development teams. This paper opens up new research avenues to explore the collaborative mechanisms underlying knowledge team performance.

A Legal Analysis of Packaging Standardisation Requirements Under EU Law - The Case of ‘Plain Packaging’ in the United Kingdom


Journal of Business Law


Departments: Tax & Law, GREGHEC (CNRS)

A Mathematical Turn in Business Regulation: The Rise of Legal Indicators


International Journal of Law in Context


Departments: Tax & Law

A Model of Mental Accounting and Reference Price Adaptation


Management Science


Departments: Informations Systems and Operations Management

Keywords: Mental accounting, reference price, loss aversion, sunk-cost fallacy, payment depreciation, reluctance to trade, flat-rate bias.

Achieving High Growth in Policy-Dependent Industries: Differences between Startups and Corporate-Backed Ventures


Long Range Planning


Departments: Strategy & Business Policy, GREGHEC (CNRS)

This research examines which firms achieve high growth in policy-dependent industries. Using the European solar photovoltaic industry as our empirical setting, we investigate the impact of policy support on the growth of independent startups and corporate-backed ventures operating across countries with diverse policy conditions. We find that producers' growth is positively linked to policy generosity, and negatively linked to policy discontinuity. Moreover, corporate-backed ventures are less affected by policy generosity compared to entrepreneurial startups, and less impacted by policy discontinuity as well. Our results underline the importance of country- and firm-level differences in analyzing firms' response to regulatory policies, and point to the need for a better understanding of the unintended consequences of policies designed to support new industries.