Abstract

The push for cities to be a part of international legal governance processes is tied to the promise of bridging international law’s democratic deficit. However, the exercise of cities’ personality in international law can end up replicating many of the same democratic deficits with which international law is usually charged. Therefore, cities as agents may be an unsatisfactory way of addressing international law’s democratic deficits. Instead, cities as objects can raise the visibility of cities and the local communities that live therein, but without giving agency to a State actor. This visibility can then pave the way for communities themselves to be directly involved in international legal governance processes. This article uses the example of international heritage law, where cities are very significantly represented in international heritage lists and even a specific instrument (the 2011 Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape) to showcase the limitations and possibilities of the project of cities in international law. I argue that there is a paradox of visibility and agency that permeates international legal possibilities for cities, and placing the city simultaneously in the registers of object and subject ultimately defers the central question of community involvement in international law on global public goods.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call