IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v53y2009i5p698-726.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regime Type and Bilateral Treaty Formalization

Author

Listed:
  • Ana Carolina Garriga

    (Department of Political Science University of Pittsburgh)

Abstract

How does domestic regime type affect bilateral cooperation, and one of its most visible manifestations, bilateral treaties? This article explains how domestic political regime affects bilateral cooperation and, contrary to the expectations of some scholars, why autocracies should be expected to be more likely than democracies to enter into bilateral treaties. If the preferences of a pair of states are not identical, the sets of agreements that each party would consent to (win-sets) need to overlap for a bilateral treaty to be acceptable. Because additional domestic constraints reduce the size of a country’s win-set, autocracies should have broader win-sets than democracies. Therefore, autocratic dyads should be more likely to formalize bilateral treaties than other pairs of states. Based on an original data set, I present empirical evidence showing that pairs of autocracies are more likely than other pairs of states to enter into agreements formalizing bilateral cooperation.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Carolina Garriga, 2009. "Regime Type and Bilateral Treaty Formalization," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(5), pages 698-726, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:53:y:2009:i:5:p:698-726
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002709341403
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002709341403
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002709341403?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edward D. Mansfield & Helen V. Milner & B. Peter Rosendorff, 2015. "Why Democracies Cooperate More: Electoral Control and International Trade Agreements," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Edward D Mansfield (ed.), THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE, chapter 11, pages 227-263, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Pevehouse, Jon & Russett, Bruce, 2006. "Democratic International Governmental Organizations Promote Peace," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(4), pages 969-1000, October.
    3. Downs, George W. & Rocke, David M. & Barsoom, Peter N., 1996. "Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(3), pages 379-406, July.
    4. Edward D. Mansfield & Helen V. Milner & B. Peter Rosendorff, 2015. "Free to Trade: Democracies, Autocracies, and International Trade," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Edward D Mansfield (ed.), THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE, chapter 7, pages 127-143, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Mo, Jongryn, 1995. "Domestic Institutions and International Bargaining: The Role of Agent Veto in Two-Level Games," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(4), pages 914-924, December.
    6. D. Scott Bennett & Allan C. Stam, 2000. "Eugene : A conceptual manual," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 179-204, March.
    7. James Raymond Vreeland, 2008. "The Effect of Political Regime on Civil War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(3), pages 401-425, June.
    8. Anonymous, 1969. "I. United Nations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 971-989, October.
    9. Doyle, Michael W., 1986. "Liberalism and World Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(4), pages 1151-1169, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Antoni Estevadeordal & Kati Suominen, 2007. "Sequencing Regional Trade Integration and Cooperation Agreements: Describing a Dataset for a New Research Agenda," Economie Internationale, CEPII research center, issue 109, pages 53-82.
    12. Antoni Estevadeordal & Kati Suominen, 2008. "Sequencing Regional Trade Integration and Cooperation Agreements," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 112-140, January.
    13. Simmons, Beth A., 2000. "International Law and State Behavior: Commitment and Compliance in International Monetary Affairs," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(4), pages 819-835, December.
    14. Abbott, Kenneth W. & Keohane, Robert O. & Moravcsik, Andrew & Slaughter, Anne-Marie & Snidal, Duncan, 2000. "The Concept of Legalization," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(3), pages 401-419, July.
    15. Helen V. Milner & B. Peter Rosendorff, 1997. "Democratic Politics and International Trade Negotiations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 41(1), pages 117-146, February.
    16. Mansfield, Edward D. & Pevehouse, Jon C., 2006. "Democratization and International Organizations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(1), pages 137-167, January.
    17. Fearon, James D., 1994. "Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(3), pages 577-592, September.
    18. Mansfield, Edward D. & Reinhardt, Eric, 2003. "Multilateral Determinants of Regionalism: The Effects of GATT/WTO on the Formation of Preferential Trading Arrangements," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(4), pages 829-862, October.
    19. Gaubatz, Kurt Taylor, 1996. "Democratic states and commitment in international relations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 109-139, January.
    20. Lake, David A., 1992. "Powerful Pacifists: Democratic States and War," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(1), pages 24-37, March.
    21. repec:cup:apsrev:v:96:y:2002:i:01:p:159-165_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Kaufman, Robert R., 1985. "Democratic and authoritarian responses to the debt issue: Argentina, Brazil, Mexico," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(3), pages 473-503, July.
    23. Kono, Daniel Y., 2006. "Optimal Obfuscation: Democracy and Trade Policy Transparency," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 100(3), pages 369-384, August.
    24. Milner, Helen V. & Kubota, Keiko, 2005. "Why the Move to Free Trade? Democracy and Trade Policy in the Developing Countries," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 59(1), pages 107-143, January.
    25. Iida, Keisuke, 1996. "Involuntary Defection in Two-Level Games," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 89(3-4), pages 283-303, December.
    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. Florencia Montal & Carly Potz-Nielsen & Jane Lawrence Sumner, 2020. "What states want: Estimating ideal points from international investment treaty content," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 679-691, November.
    2. Barbara Dluhosch & Nikolai Ziegler, 2011. "The paradox of weakness in the politics of trade integration," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 325-354, December.

    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. Wagner, Wolfgang, 2007. "Problems of Democratic Control in European Security and Defense Politics – a View from Peace and Conflict Research," Institute of European Studies, Working Paper Series qt65b9q82m, Institute of European Studies, UC Berkeley.
    2. Jonas Tallberg & Thomas Sommerer & Theresa Squatrito, 2016. "Democratic memberships in international organizations: Sources of institutional design," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 59-87, March.
    3. Barbara Dluhosch & Nikolai Ziegler, 2011. "The paradox of weakness in the politics of trade integration," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 325-354, December.
    4. Inken Borzyskowski & Felicity Vabulas, 2019. "Hello, goodbye: When do states withdraw from international organizations?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 335-366, June.
    5. Tobias Böhmelt & Edita Butkutė, 2018. "The self-selection of democracies into treaty design: insights from international environmental agreements," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 351-367, June.
    6. Xinyuan Dai, 2006. "Dyadic Myth and Monadic Advantage," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 267-297, July.
    7. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Jana von Stein & Erik Gartzke, 2008. "International Organizations Count," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(2), pages 175-188, April.
    8. Fiona McGillivray & Alastair Smith, 2005. "The Impact of Leadership Turnover and Domestic Institutions on International Cooperation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(5), pages 639-660, October.
    9. Xinyuan Dai, 2006. "The Conditional Nature of Democratic Compliance," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(5), pages 690-713, October.
    10. Jason S. Davis, 2022. "Screening for losers: Trade institutions and information," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-37, January.
    11. Stephen Nelson, 2010. "Does compliance matter? Assessing the relationship between sovereign risk and compliance with international monetary law," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 107-139, June.
    12. Macartan Humphreys, 2007. "Strategic ratification," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 191-208, July.
    13. Manfred Elsig & Karolina Milewicz & Nikolas Stürchler, 2011. "Who is in love with multilateralism? Treaty commitment in the post-Cold War era," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(4), pages 529-550, December.
    14. Alexander Kentikelenis & Erik Voeten, 2021. "Legitimacy challenges to the liberal world order: Evidence from United Nations speeches, 1970–2018," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 721-754, October.
    15. repec:got:cegedp:94 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Vaclav Vlcek, 2023. "Who cares about the UN General Assembly? National delegations size from 1993 to 2016," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(2), pages 349-360, May.
    17. David Brulé, 2006. "Congressional Opposition, the Economy, and U.S. Dispute Initiation, 1946-2000," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(4), pages 463-483, August.
    18. Ahmer Tarar, 2001. "International Bargaining with Two-Sided Domestic Constraints," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(3), pages 320-340, June.
    19. M. Mahdi Ghodsi, 2018. "Determinants of specific trade concerns raised on technical barriers to trade EU versus non-EU," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 45(1), pages 83-128, February.
    20. Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "How Does Democratic Accountability Shape International Cooperation?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(1), pages 28-55, February.
    21. Terrence L. Chapman, 2007. "International Security Institutions, Domestic Politics, and Institutional Legitimacy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(1), pages 134-166, February.

    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:sae:jocore:v:53:y:2009:i:5:p:698-726. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.