IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/woraff/v181y2018i2p161-180.html

Achieving Effective International Cooperation: How Institutional Formalization Shapes Intergovernmental Negotiations

Author

Listed:
  • Hartmut Lenz

Abstract

This article explores how formalization of institutions and domestic constraints influence the outcomes of international cooperation and negotiation processes—particularly in a regional setting like the European Union (EU) or the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Examining different forms of institutional setup along the formal‐informal continuum, this study evaluates their impact on the successes and failures of intergovernmental negotiation processes. While some scholars have been vocal about the importance of institutional setting on negotiation outcomes, there has not yet been any systematic analysis of the impact of institutional variations on the actual negotiation process. This project specifies under what conditions domestic actors constrain governments, and how these conditions depend on institutional structures. I analyze the impact of institutional variations, concentrating on negotiation failure and deadlock situations, to form a framework that can differentiate between various bargaining situations and to understand their impact on the possibility to facilitate successful negotiation outcomes. The central argument highlights the need for more nuanced connections between institutional design, domestic constraints, and the level of formalization to understand the likelihood of success or failure of intergovernmental negotiation processes. Este artículo explora cómo la formalización de las instituciones, así como otras restricciones de contexto, influye en resultados de cooperación internacional y procesos de negociación—particularmente en un entorno regional. Examino las diferentes formas de arreglo institucional (ejemplificadas en la negociación formal del sistema de la Unión Europea, y en las estrategias menos formales empleadas por la asociación de naciones del sureste asiático, o ASEAN) y la influencia que tienen sobre los resultados y fallas de sus procesos de negociación. Mientras que algunos académicos han discutido sobre variaciones en la negociación, no habido ningún análisis sistemático del impacto de variaciones institucionales en el proceso de negociación actual. Un primer paso en este proyecto es intentar especificar bajo qué condiciones los actores domésticos restringen a los gobiernos y cómo éstas condiciones dependen de estructuras institucionales. Investigo el impacto de ciertas variaciones institucionales, concentrándome en el fracaso en la negociación y las situaciones de estancamiento. El objetivo es comenzar a formar un marco que pueda diferenciar entre varias situaciones de negociación y entender su impacto sobre la posibilidad de facilitar resultados de negociación exitosos. El argumento central ilumina la necesidad de conexiones nítidas entre diseño institucional y otras restricciones contextuales así como el nivel de formalización en el proceso de negociación. 本文探索了制度环境和机构设置的差异如何能影响国际合作结果和谈判过程——尤其是在区域背景的情况下。笔者考察了机构设置的不同形式(例如,欧盟的正式谈判体制和东盟的相对非正式策略)、以及这些形式对谈判过程的成败所产生的影响。尽管一些学者对谈判和合作上的差异有所评论,但目前对于”体制差异对实际谈判过程造成的影响”一事还没有任何的系统性分析。本文作为研究此事的首篇文章,试图确定在何种情况下国内行动者会对政府造成限制,以及这些情况如何依附于体制结构。笔者调查了某些体制差异造成的影响,并聚焦于谈判失败和僵持场景。笔者特别研究了不确定性和信息不对称等问题。此举目的是形成一个能区分不同谈判场景的框架,同时理解各场景对”促成成功谈判结果的可能性”的影响。

Suggested Citation

  • Hartmut Lenz, 2018. "Achieving Effective International Cooperation: How Institutional Formalization Shapes Intergovernmental Negotiations," World Affairs, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 181(2), pages 161-180, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:woraff:v:181:y:2018:i:2:p:161-180
    DOI: 10.1177/0043820018791644
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0043820018791644
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0043820018791644?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. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 97-109, January.
    2. Muthoo,Abhinay, 1999. "Bargaining Theory with Applications," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521576475, August.
    3. Andrew Moravcsik, 1993. "Preferences and Power in the European Community: A Liberal Intergovernmentalist Approach," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 473-524, December.
    4. 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.
    5. Austin P. Johnson, 2018. "Global Governance, Tax Treaties, and Credible Commitments," World Affairs, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 181(1), pages 69-98, March.
    6. Gourevitch, Peter Alexis, 1996. "Squaring the Circle: The Domestic Sources of International Cooperation," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 349-373, April.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Gourevitch, Peter, 1978. "The second image reversed: the international sources of domestic politics," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(4), pages 881-912, 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. Sam Maesschalck, 2024. "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. Or can you?: How cyberspace operations impact international security," World Affairs, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 187(1), pages 24-36, 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. Han Dorussen & Jongryn Mo, 2001. "Ending Economic Sanctions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(4), pages 395-426, August.
    2. Christopher K. Butler, 2004. "Modeling Compromise at the International Table," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(3), pages 159-177, July.
    3. Hartmut Lenz & Han Dorussen & Hugh Ward, 2007. "Public commitment strategies in intergovernmental negotiations on the EU Constitutional Treaty," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 131-152, June.
    4. Simon Hug & Tobias Schulz, 2007. "Referendums in the EU’s constitution building process," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 177-218, June.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Elias Tsakas & Nikolas Tsakas & Dimitrios Xefteris, 2021. "Resisting persuasion," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 72(3), pages 723-742, October.
    9. Jean-Pierre P. Langlois & Catherine C. Langlois, 2004. "Holding Out for Concession: The Quest for Gain in the Negotiation of International Agreements," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(3), pages 261-293, April.
    10. Alessandro Innocenti, 2008. "Linking Strategic Interaction and Bargaining Theory: The Harsanyi-Schelling Debate on the Axiom of Symmetry," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 111-132, Spring.
    11. Ahmer Tarar, 2005. "Constituencies and Preferences in International Bargaining," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(3), pages 383-407, June.
    12. Tony Mueller, 2023. "When policy entrepreneurs drift between levels: The creation of the International Renewable Energy Agency," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(4), pages 588-599, September.
    13. Macartan Humphreys, 2007. "Strategic ratification," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 191-208, July.
    14. Thomas Konig & Jonathan Slapin, 2004. "Bringing Parliaments Back in," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 357-394, July.
    15. Xinyuan Dai, 2006. "Dyadic Myth and Monadic Advantage," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 267-297, July.
    16. Callaghan, Helen, 2008. "How multilevel governance affects the clash of capitalisms," MPIfG Discussion Paper 08/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    17. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco, 2005. "Alliances and negotiations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 128-141, March.
    18. Hwang Joongsan, 2025. "Veto Bargaining with Incomplete Information and Risk Preference: An Analysis of Brinkmanship," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 31(3), pages 259-303.
    19. Agnieszka Rusinowska & Ahmet Ozkardas, 2015. "On equilibrium payoffs in wage bargaining with discount rates varying in time," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 181-199, October.
    20. Qian, Dong & Guo, Ju’e, 2014. "Research on the energy-saving and revenue sharing strategy of ESCOs under the uncertainty of the value of Energy Performance Contracting Projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 710-721.

    More about this item

    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:wly:woraff:v:181:y:2018:i:2:p:161-180. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.