Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T13:50:26.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Abiding by the Vote: Between-Groups Conflict in International Collective Action

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2013

Christina J. Schneider  and
Branislav L. Slantchev
Christina J. Schneider
Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego. E-mail: [email protected]
Branislav L. Slantchev
Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

We analyze institutional solutions to international cooperation when actors have heterogeneous preferences over the desirability of the action and split into supporters and opponents, all of whom can spend resources toward their preferred outcome. We study how actors can communicate their preferences through voting when they are not bound either by their own vote or the outcome of the collective vote. We identify two organizational types with endogenous coercive enforcement and find that neither is unambiguously preferable. Like the solutions to the traditional Prisoners' Dilemma these forms require long shadows of the future to sustain. We then show that cooperation can be sustained through a noncoercive organization where actors delegate execution to an agent. Even though this institution is costlier, it does not require any expertise by the agent and is independent of the shadow of the future, and thus is implementable when the others are not.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 67 , Issue 4 , October 2013 , pp. 759 - 796
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, Kenneth W., and Snidal, Duncan. 1998. Why States Act Through Formal International Organizations. Journal of Conflict Resolution 42 (1):3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aghion, Philippe, and Bolton, Patrick. 2003. Incomplete Social Contracts. Journal of the European Economic Association 1 (1):38–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axelrod, Robert. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Bernheim, B. Douglas, Peleg, Bezalel, and Whinston, Michael D.. 1987. Coalition-Proof Nash Equilibria I. Concepts. Journal of Economic Theory 42 (1):1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, George W., Rocke, David M., and Barsoom, Peter N.. 1998. Managing the Evolution of Multilateralism. International Organization 52 (2):397–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evangelista, Matthew. 1990. Cooperation Theory and Disarmament Negotiations in the 1950s. World Politics 42 (4):502–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James D. 1998. Bargaining, Enforcement, and International Cooperation. International Organization 52 (2):269–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilligan, Michael J. 2004. Is There a Broader-Deeper Trade-Off in International Multilateral Agreements? International Organization 58 (3):459–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, Lloyd. 2000. Ruling the World: Power Politics and the Rise of Supranational Institutions. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Johns, Leslie, and Rosendorff, B. Peter. 2009. Dispute Settlement, Compliance, and Domestic Politics. In Frontiers of Economics and Globalization. Vol. 6, , edited by Hartigan, James C., 139–63. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Koremenos, Barbara, Lipson, Charles, and Snidal, Duncan. 2001. The Rational Design of International Institutions. International Organization 55 (4):761–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, Deborah. 1987. Crisis Prevention and the Austrian State Treaty. International Organization 41 (1):27–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maggi, Giovanni, and Morelli, Massimo. 2006. Self-Enforcing Voting in International Organizations. American Economic Review 96 (4):1137–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Lisa L. 1992. Interests, Power, and Multilateralism. International Organization 46 (4):765–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Lisa L., and Simmons, Beth A.. 1998. Theories and Empirical Studies of International Institutions. International Organization 52 (4):729–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oye, Kenneth. 1985. Explaining Cooperation Under Anarchy. World Politics 38 (1):1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, Carolyn. 1989. Reciprocity in Trade: The Utility of a Bargaining Strategy. International Organization 43 (2):273–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosendorff, B. Peter. 2005. Stability and Rigidity: Politics and Design of the WTO's Dispute Settlement Procedure. American Political Science Review 99 (3):389–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosendorff, B. Peter. 2006. Domestic Politics and Enforcement of International Agreements. Political Economist 13 (2):7–13.Google Scholar
Rosendorff, B. Peter, and Milner, Helen V.. 2001. The Optimal Design of International Trade Institutions: Uncertainty and Escape. International Organization 55 (4):829–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slantchev, Branislav L. 2005. Territory and Commitment: The Concert of Europe as Self-Enforcing Equilibrium. Security Studies 14 (4):565–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snidal, Duncan. 1985. Coordination Versus Prisoners' Dilemma: Implications for International Cooperation. American Political Science Review 79 (4):923–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, Arthur. 1982. Coordination and Collaboration: Regimes in an Anarchic World. International Organization 36 (2):299–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, Randall W. 2002. Lending Credibility: The International Monetary Fund and the Post-Communist Transition. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svolik, Milan. 2006. Lies, Defection, and the Pattern of International Cooperation. American Journal of Political Science 50 (4):909–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, Robert, Stokman, Frans N., Achen, Christopher H., and König, Thomas, eds. 2006. The European Union Decides. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voeten, Erik. 2005. The Political Origins of the UN Security Council's Ability to Legitimize the Use of Force. International Organization 59 (3):527–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zamora, Stephen. 1980. Voting in International Economic Organizations. American Journal of International Law 74 (3):566–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar