Soft Law

Definition

Ulrika Mörth defines soft law as legitimate rules that may have political and legal effects, although the rules are not legally binding. This means that not every voluntary rule can be regarded as soft law. In cases of noncompliance, the sanctions are social and political rather than legal. A good example of how these social sanctions might look is the peer pressure mechanism in the international body the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). OECD lacks competence to issue legally binding laws. However, it is often argued that the organization has had important influence on the policies of member states, as these concern, for instance, reforms in the public sector, often labeled as the new public management reform. Social and political pressures are put on the member states by “naming and shaming” countries that do not follow the OECD recommendations. The soft law–making processes in the OECD are also characterized as social processes in which there is confidence building, exchanges of experiences, identity building, and socialization among the national officials; this can explain why the member states implement the OECD recommendations.

A classic and often used definition of soft law is that by Francis Snyder, in which he states that they are rules that have no binding force but that they may in any case “have practical effects” (Snyder, 1993, p. 198). A more thorough definition is presented by Karel Wellens and Gustaaf Borchardt (1989). Soft law is