Abstract：In the field of ICT standard-setting,private rules constructed by consortium alliances are increasingly eroding the regulatory space of traditional international standardization bodies.It is often assumed that the core reason for consortia to replace traditional ISOs is that they are more responsive to the governance needs of technological autonomy and market competition.However,when exploring the game between the United States and Europe over international standard-setting power from the standpoint of geopolitical competition in the digital age,it is necessary to use the analytical tools of discursive institutionalism to dismantle the simplified historical narrative under the ideology of Silicon Valley.In the face of the privatization of the standards system,the U.S.has not only made use of the concept of “multi-stakeholder”to defend its dominant standards-setting system,but also reshaped the legitimacy framework through the “constructive ambiguity”of the provisions of the TBT Agreement,and promoted the recognition of international standards from the concept “constructive ambiguity”to the concept of “multi-stakeholder”.At the same time,through the “constructive ambiguity”of the provisions of the TBT Agreement,the legitimacy framework has been reshaped,and the recognition of international standards has been shifted from ‘formalism’to “materialism”.At present,as China's scientific and technological strength improves,how to participate in or even lead the formulation of international standards has become an urgent challenge.Whether to compete within the traditional international standard system or to create a new international standard-setting body following the historical experience of the United States needs to be carefully weighed.In this regard,China should,on the basis of strengthening its scientific and technological hard power,systematically carry out knowledge production and theory construction in response to the legal discourse challenge of Western countries at the level of legality and legitimacy.
徐申. 国际标准制定体系分化的成因检视与话语制度分析——以信息与通信技术标准为例[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2025(9): 125-135.
Xu Shen. Cause and Discourse Analysis of the Differentiation in International Standard-Setting Systems ——Taking ICT Standard as an Example. , 2025(9): 125-135.
[1]WINN J K.Globalization and standards:The logic of two-level games[J].I/S:Journal of Law and Politic for the Information Society,2008,156 (5):185. [2]孙浦阳.技术标准引领与中国贸易新优势构建[J].中国社会科学,2025 (2):41-62. [3]CODDIN J R G A.The international telecommunications union:130 years of telecommunications regulation[J].Denver Journal International Law and Policy,1994,23 (3):501-511. [4]JAYAKAR K.Globalization and the legitimacy of international telecommunications standard-setting organizations[J].Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies,1998,5 (2):711-738. [5]KANEVSKAIA O.Governance of ICT standardization:Due process in technocratic decision-making[J].The North Carolina Journal of International Law,2020,45 (3):549-618. [6]CARL F.CARGIL L,Information technology standardization:Theory,process,and organizations[M].Bedford,MA:Digital Press,1989. [7]JONATHAN M.BARNET T,SEAN M.O'connor,5G and beyond:Intellectual property and competition policy in the internet of things[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2024. [8]DELCAMP H,LEIPONEN A.Innovating standards through informal consortia:The case of wireless telecommunications[J].International Journal of Industrial Organization,2014,36 (1):36-47. [9]BLIND K,GAUCH S.Trends in ICT standards:The relationship between European standardisation bodies and standards consortia[J].Telecommunications Policy,2008,32 (7):503-513. [10]HAWKIN R.The rise of consortia in the information and communication technology industries:Emerging implications for policy[J].Telecommunications Policy,1999,23 (2):159-173. [11]BLIND K,GAUCH S.Trends in ICT standards:The relationship between European standardisation bodies and standards consortia[J]Telecommunications Policy,2008,32 (7):503-513. [12]JWINN J,JONDET N.A “New Approach”to standards and consumer protection[J].Journal of Consumer Policy,2008,31 (4):459-472. [13]BENOLIEL D.Technological standards,inc:Rethinking cyberspace regulatory epistemology[J].California Law Review,2004,92 (4):1069-1116. [14]涂尔干.社会分工论[M].渠敬东,译,北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2017年. [15]尼克拉斯·卢曼.法社会学[M].宾凯,赵春燕,译,上海:上海人民出版社2013年版. [16]TEUBNER G.Substantive and reflexive elements in modern law[J].Law and Society Review,1983,17 (2):239-285. [17]PETERS A,KOECHLIN L.Non-state actors as standard setters[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2009. [18]TIMMERMANS S,EPSTEIN S.A world of standards but not a standard world:Toward a sociology of standards and standardization[J].Annual Review of Sociology,2010,36 (1):69-89. [19]HAWKINS R.The rise of consortia in the information and communication technology industries:Emerging implications for policy[J].Telecommunications Policy,1999,23 (2):159-173. [20]DELCAMP H,LEIPONEN A.Innovating standards through informal consortia:The case of wireless telecommunications[J].International Journal of Industrial Organization,2014,36 (1):36-47. [21]EGYEDI T M.Beyond consortia,Beyond standardisation? New case material and policy threads[R].The Netherlands:Final Report for the European Commission,2001. [22]HENK J,VRIES D.Standardization:A business approach to the role of national standardization organizations[M].New York:Springer Science+Business Media,LLC,1999. [23]GEOFFREY C.BOWKE R,LEIGH S,Sorting things out:Classification and its consequences[M].Cambridge:The MIT Press,1999. [24]DANIEL W.Drezner,all politics is global:Explaining international regulatory regimes[M].Princeton:Princeton University Press,2007. [25]BUTHE T,MATTLI W,The new global rulers:The privatization of regulation in the world economy[M].Princeton:Princeton University Press,2011. [26]刘国柱.数字标准的地缘政治论析:基于大国竞争的视角[J].社会科学文摘,2023 (6):75-77. [27]方琳,周树华,于俊.印度最新国家标准化战略解读[J].标准科学,2018 (12):64-69. [28]刘思妤,马洪超,张敬,等.俄罗斯联邦标准化体系改革的动因[J].中国标准化,2020 (13):9-11. [29]SCHMIDT V A.Discursive institutionalism:The explanatory power of ideas and discourse[J].Annual Review of Political Science,2008,11 (1):303-326. [30]SCHMIDT V A.Speaking to the markets or to the people? A discursive institutionalist analysis of the EU's sovereign debt crisis[J].The British Journal of Politics and International Relations,2014,16 (1):188-209. [31]ALMEIDA V,GETSCHKO D,AFONSO C.The origin and evolution of multistakeholder models[J].IEEE Internet Computing,2015,19 (1):74-79. [32]TAGGART J,ABRAHAM K J.Norm dynamics in a post-hegemonic world:Multistakeholder global governance and the end of liberal international order[J].Review of International Political Economy,2024,31 (1):354-381. [33]HEMMATI M,HOHNEN P.The world commission on dams as a multi-stakeholder process:Some future challenges[J].Politics and the Life Sciences,2002,21 (1):63-66. [34]HAHN R,WEIDTMANN C.Transnational governance,deliberative democracy,and the legitimacy of ISO 26000 analyzing the case of a global multistakeholder process[J].Business & Society,2016,55 (1),90-129. [35]MING D U,The regulation of product standards in world trade law[M].Oxford:Hart Publishing,2020. [36]TBT Committee.Second Triennial Review of the Operation and Implementation of The Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade[EB/OL]. (2000-11-13)[2025-03-15].https:www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/tbt_com_e.htm. [37]DELIMATSIS P.The evolution of transnational rule-akers through crise[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press & Assessment,2023.
2025, 
