IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v66y2022i10p1881-1907.html

Institutional Design, Information Transmission, and Public Opinion: Making the Case for Trade

Author

Listed:
  • Ryan Brutger
  • Siyao Li

Abstract

Domestic debates about trade have increased the salience of international economic cooperation among the public, raising the question of whether, and how, domestic support can be rallied in support of international trade agreements. We argue that institutional features of trade agreements provide important cues to domestic audiences that shape support, particularly the membership composition and voting rules for multilateral deals. We use two survey experiments to show that the US public is more supportive of trade when it is negotiated with like-minded countries. We also find that the voting rules shape support for trade agreements, but differently across partisan audiences. Republican voters strongly favor the home country having veto power, whereas Democrats prefer agreements with equal voting rules. These differences are largely driven by perceptions of the agreement’s benefit for the nation and the public’s trust of the negotiators and perceived fairness of the rules.

Suggested Citation

  • Ryan Brutger & Siyao Li, 2022. "Institutional Design, Information Transmission, and Public Opinion: Making the Case for Trade," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 66(10), pages 1881-1907, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:66:y:2022:i:10:p:1881-1907
    DOI: 10.1177/00220027221085072
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00220027221085072
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00220027221085072?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. Davis, Christina L., 2004. "International Institutions and Issue Linkage: Building Support for Agricultural Trade Liberalization," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(1), pages 153-169, February.
    2. Naoi, Megumi & Kume, Ikuo, 2011. "Explaining Mass Support for Agricultural Protectionism: Evidence from a Survey Experiment During the Global Recession," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(4), pages 771-795, October.
    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. Bernd Schlipphak & Constantin Schäfer & Oliver Treib, 2026. "Cosmopolitan identity, authority, and domestic support of international organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 69-88, March.

    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. Eiichi Tomiura & Banri Ito & Hiroshi Mukunoki & Ryuhei Wakasugi, 2016. "Individual Characteristics, Behavioral Biases, and Trade Policy Preferences: Evidence from a Survey in Japan," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1081-1095, November.
    2. Jacob Wood & Gohar Feroz Khan, 2015. "International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 537-556, October.
    3. Randall Stone, 2013. "Informal governance in international organizations: Introduction to the special issue," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 121-136, June.
    4. Paul Poast, 2013. "Issue linkage and international cooperation: An empirical investigation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(3), pages 286-303, July.
    5. Gabriel Felbermayr & Toshihiro Okubo, 2022. "Individual preferences on trade liberalization: evidence from a Japanese household survey," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 158(1), pages 305-330, February.
    6. Ilan Vertinsky & Yingqiu Kuang & Dongsheng Zhou & Victor Cui, 2023. "The political economy and dynamics of bifurcated world governance and the decoupling of value chains: An alternative perspective," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(7), pages 1351-1377, September.
    7. Megumi Naoi & Shujiro Urata, 2013. "Free Trade Agreements and Domestic Politics: The Case of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 8(2), pages 326-349, December.
    8. Daniel Habermacher, 2022. "Information Aggregation in Multidimensional Cheap Talk," Working Papers 169, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    9. Chun-Fang Chiang & Jason M. Kuo & Megumi Naoi & Jin-Tan Liu, 2020. "What Do Voters Learn from Foreign News? Emulation, Backlash, and Public Support for Trade Agreements," NBER Working Papers 27497, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Lasha Chochua & James Lake & Gerald Willmann, 2026. "Plurilateral Trade Agreements: A Complementary Margin to Preferential Liberalization," CESifo Working Paper Series 12564, CESifo.
    11. Ito, Banri & Tanaka, Ayumu & Jinji, Naoto, 2023. "Why do people oppose foreign acquisitions? Evidence from Japanese individual-level data," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    12. Iain Osgood & Yilang Feng, 2018. "Intellectual property provisions and support for US trade agreements," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 421-455, September.
    13. Bernauer, Thomas & Spilker, Gabriele & Umaña, Víctor, 2014. "Different countries same partners: Experimental Evidence on PTA Partner Country Choice from Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Vietnam," Papers 739, World Trade Institute.
    14. Muhammad Kabir, 2019. "The Role of Side Payments in the Formation of Asymmetric Alliances: Forging the US–Pakistan Alliance," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 6(2), pages 162-188, August.
    15. Xie, Yinxi & Xie, Yang, 2017. "Machiavellian experimentation," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 685-711.
    16. Jan Beyers & Marcel Hanegraaff, 2017. "Balancing friends and foes: Explaining advocacy styles at global diplomatic conferences," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 461-484, September.
    17. Ming-Chang Tsai & Hsin-Hsin Pan, 2022. "Protecting Farmers and Workers in Socialist Market Transitions: Mass Attitudes Toward Imports in Asia," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    18. Johannes Urpelainen, 2011. "Domestic reform as a rationale for gradualism in international cooperation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(3), pages 400-427, July.
    19. Frank Geels & Guillermo Ivan Pereira & Jonatan Pinkse, 2021. "Public investments in COVID-19 green recovery packages: A comparative analysis of scale, scope, and implementation in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom," Working Papers 004, The Productivity Institute.
    20. Ito, Banri & Mukunoki, Hiroshi & Tomiura, Eiichi & Wakasugi, Ryuhei, 2019. "Trade policy preferences and cross-regional differences: Evidence from individual-level data of Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 99-109.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:jocore:v:66:y:2022:i:10:p:1881-1907. 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.