IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgd/935.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technical controversy in international standardization

Author

Listed:
  • Schmidt, Susanne K.
  • Werle, Raymund

Abstract

The development of larger technical systems relies on the coordination of autonomous action of a multitude of individuals and organizations. Institutional settings, often neglected in the analysis of technical development, help to achieve such coordination. Our analysis of international technical standardization in telecommunications highlights an institutionalized process aiming at the creation of compatibility standards as the means for coordination. Formal procedural, membership, and decision rules combined with informal sets of expectations constitute the normative basis of the CCITT, the most prominent international standardization organization in telecommunications. Although scientific, political and economic aspects can be equally important for standards, the CCITT selectively legitimizes a technical perspective. Political and scientific reasoning is restricted, an open economic perspective even completely banned, unless they can be translated into a technical perspective. This increases the capacity to proceed on a consensusal basis and often facilitates reaching a con-sensus in a controversy. Standardization of Videotex and Telefax empirically examplifies this, and at the same time demonstrates the limits of pure technical reasoning to resolve genuine political or economic conflicts.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmidt, Susanne K. & Werle, Raymund, 1993. "Technical controversy in international standardization," MPIfG Discussion Paper 93/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:935
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/43723/1/128561289.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Crane, Rhonda J., 1978. "Communication standards and the politics of protectionism: The case of colour television systems," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 267-281, December.
    2. Putnam, Robert D., 1988. "Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 427-460, July.
    3. Codding, George A., 1991. "Evolution of the ITU," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 271-285, August.
    4. Karl Wärneryd, 1990. "Conventions: An evolutionary approach," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 83-107, September.
    5. Werle, Raymund, 1990. "Telekommunikation in der Bundesrepublik: Expansion, Differenzierung, Transformation," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 6, number 6.
    6. Benz, Arthur & Scharpf, Fritz W. & Zintl, Reinhard, 1992. "Horizontale Politikverflechtung: Zur Theorie von Verhandlungssystemen," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 10, number 10.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Altenstetter, Christa, 1996. "Regulating healthcare technologies and medical supplies in the European Economic Erea," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 33-52, January.
    2. Prei[ss]l, Brigitte, 1995. "Strategic use of communication technology -- diffusion processes in networks and environments," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 75-99, April.
    3. Ryll, Andreas, 1989. "Die Spieltheorie als Instrument der Gesellschaftsforschung," MPIfG Discussion Paper 89/10, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    4. Werle, Raymund, 2000. "Institutional aspects of standardization: Jurisdictional conflicts and choice of standardization organizations," MPIfG Discussion Paper 00/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    5. Niclas Meyer, 2012. "Political Contestation in the Shadow of Hierarchy," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 46, European Institute, LSE.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stefan Niederhafner, 2013. "Comparing functions of transnational city networks in Europe and Asia," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 377-396, December.
    2. Schimank, Uwe & Stucke, Andreas (ed.), 1994. "Coping with Trouble: How Science Reacts to Political Disturbances of Research Conditions," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 14, number 14.
    3. Ethan B Kapstein, 2006. "Architects of stability? International cooperation among financial supervisors," BIS Working Papers 199, Bank for International Settlements.
    4. Simon Hug & Tobias Schulz, 2007. "Referendums in the EU’s constitution building process," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 177-218, June.
    5. Heike Schroeder, 2010. "Agency in international climate negotiations: the case of indigenous peoples and avoided deforestation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 317-332, December.
    6. Koichi Hamada & Asahi Noguchi, 2005. "The Role of Preconceived Ideas in Macroeconomic Policy: Japan's Experiences in the Two Deflationary Periods," Working Papers 908, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    7. Balint, T. & Lamperti, F. & Mandel, A. & Napoletano, M. & Roventini, A. & Sapio, A., 2017. "Complexity and the Economics of Climate Change: A Survey and a Look Forward," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 252-265.
    8. Annie Young Song, 2023. "Beyond intergovernmental cooperation: domestic politics of transboundary air pollution in Korea and Singapore," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 397-413, December.
    9. Gonzalo Escribano, 2006. "Europeanisation without Europe? The Mediterranean and the Neighbourhood Policy," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 19, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    10. Gerald Schneider & Daniel Finke & Stefanie Bailer, 2010. "Bargaining Power in the European Union: An Evaluation of Competing Game‐Theoretic Models," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(1), pages 85-103, February.
    11. Jeffry Frieden & Stefanie Walter, 2019. "Analyzing inter-state negotiations in the Eurozone crisis and beyond," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(1), pages 134-151, March.
    12. Helpman, E., 1995. "Politics and Trade Policy," Papers 30-95, Tel Aviv - the Sackler Institute of Economic Studies.
    13. Kathryn M.E. Dominguez, 1993. "The Role of International Organizations in the Bretton Woods System," NBER Chapters, in: A Retrospective on the Bretton Woods System: Lessons for International Monetary Reform, pages 357-404, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Jasper Krommendijk, 2015. "The domestic effectiveness of international human rights monitoring in established democracies. The case of the UN human rights treaty bodies," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 489-512, December.
    15. Conconi, Paola & Sahuguet, Nicolas & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2018. "Electoral incentives, term limits, and the sustainability of peace," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 15-26.
    16. Lindsey Doyle & Lukas Hegele, 2021. "Talks before the talks: Effects of pre-negotiation on reaching peace agreements in intrastate armed conflicts, 2005–15," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(2), pages 231-247, March.
    17. Fritz W. Scharpf, 1991. "Games Real Actors Could Play: The Challenge of Complexity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 3(3), pages 277-304, July.
    18. Morcillo Laiz, Álvaro, 2018. "Unanimity, Consensus and Peripheral Parties as Determinants of EU Policy Coordination in Federal Member States," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(2), pages 198-223.
    19. Jeroen Warner & Neda Zawahri, 2012. "Hegemony and asymmetry: multiple-chessboard games on transboundary rivers," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 215-229, September.
    20. Mariateresa Fiocca, 2001. "Mediterraneo e Balcani: Due Aree di Crisi e di Opportunità alla periferia dell'unione Europea," ISAE Working Papers 19, ISTAT - Italian National Institute of Statistics - (Rome, ITALY).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:935. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpigfde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.