Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T13:01:30.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploring the Causes for Change in Regional Third Party Dispute Settlement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2015

JEANINE BEZUIJEN
JEANINE BEZUIJEN*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Free University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
*
*Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

What explains change in third party dispute settlement in regional international organizations (RIOs)? This paper confronts this question by exploring the extent to which different explanations of institutional change hold in the context of trade RIO third party dispute settlement. The paper considers the role of three variables in explaining dispute settlement reform: the balance of power, the level of trade interdependence between member states and the nature of the organization's founding contract. A truth table reveals that although power and trade interdependence can explain some cases of institutional reform, the nature of the organization's founding contract is the strongest predictor for change in dispute settlement. Nevertheless, the analysis shows that not all cases can be explained, and that the influence of other institutions on the same issue can also play an important role. A case study of the Latin American Free Trade Association illustrates the importance of the institutional environment in which the RIO operates for institutional reform.

Type
Review Article
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 14 , Special Issue S1: Judicial Politics in International Trade Relations , July 2015 , pp. S59 - S81
Copyright
Copyright © Jeanine Bezuijen 2015 

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, K. W. and Snidal, D. (2000), ‘Hard and Soft Law in International Governance’, International Organization, 54(3): 421–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acharya, A. (2004), ‘How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? Norm Localization and Institutional Change in Asian Regionalism’, International Organization, 58(2): 239–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aitken, N. and Lowry, W. (1972), ‘A Cross-Sectional Study of the Effects of LAFTA and CACM on Latin American Trade’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 11(4): 326–336.Google Scholar
Allee, T. L. and Huth, P. K. (2006), ‘Legitimizing Dispute Settlement: International Legal Rulings as Domestic Political Cover’, American Political Science Review, 100(2): 219–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alter, K. J. (2006), ‘Private Litigants and the New International Courts’, Comparative Political Studies, 39(1): 22–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alter, K. J. (2011), ‘The Evolving International Judiciary’, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 7: 387–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alter, K. J. (2012), ‘The Global Spread of European Style International Courts’, West European Politics, 35(1): 135–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alter, K. J. (2014), The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, C. A. and Kelley, J. G. (2008), ‘The Concept of International Delegation’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 71(1): 1–36.Google Scholar
Caporaso, J. (1998), ‘Regional Integration Theory: Understanding our Past and Anticipating our Future’, Journal Of European Public Policy, 5(1): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chayes, A. and Chayes, A. Handler (1993), ‘On Compliance’, International Organization, 47(2): 175–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooley, A. and Spruyt, H. (2009), Contracting States: Sovereign Transfers in International Relations, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Deutsch, K. W. (1966 [1953]), Nationalism and Social Communication: An Enquiry in the Foundations of Nationality, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Duina, F. (2011), ‘The EU as Provider of Frames and Scripts: Evidence on Law and Courts from Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Americas’, Biennial European Union Studies Association Conference, Boston.Google Scholar
Ferrere, D. M. (1985), ‘New Trends in Latin American Foreign Trade: The LAIA and Its Work’, International Lawyer, 19: 933–948.Google Scholar
Fredriksen, H. H. (2010), ‘The EFTA Court 15 Years On’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 59(3): 731–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, E. B. (1961), ‘The European and the Universal Process’, International Organization, 15(3): 366–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haftel, Y. Z. (2013), ‘Commerce and Institutions: Trade, Scope and the Design of Regional Economic Organizations’, Review of International Organizations, 8(3): 389–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haftel, Y. Z. and Thompson, A. (2006), ‘The Independence of International Organizations: Concept and Applications’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50(2): 253–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, P. A. and Taylor, R. C. R. (1996), ‘Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms’, Political Studies, 44(5): 936–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helfer, L. R. (2006), ‘Understanding Change in International Organizations: Globalization and Innovation in the ILO’, Vanderbilt Law Review, 59(3): 649–726.Google Scholar
Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2014), ‘Delegation and Pooling in International Governmental Organizations’, Review of International Organizations, DOI 10.1007/s11558-014-9194-4.Google Scholar
Iapadre, L. P. and Plummer, M. (2011), ‘Statistical Measures of Regional Trade Integration’, in de Lombaerde, P., Flores, R. G., Iapadre, L. P., and Schulz, M. (eds.), The Regional Integration Manual, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jo, H. and Namgung, H. (2012), ‘Dispute Settlement Mechanisms in Preferential Trade Agreements: Democracy, Boilerplates, and the Multilateral Trade Regime’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56(6): 1041–1068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (1982), ‘The Demand for International Regimes’, International Organization, 36(2): 325–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (1984), After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O., Moravcsik, A., and Slaughter, A.-M. (2000), ‘Legalized Dispute Resolution: Interstate and Transnational’, International Organization, 54(3): 457–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R. O. and Martin, L. L. (1995), ‘The Promise of Institutionalist Theory’, International Security, 20(1): 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kono, D. Y. (2007), ‘Making Anarchy Work: International Legal Institutions and Trade Cooperation’, Journal of Politics, 69(3): 746–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koremenos, B. (2007), ‘If Only Half of International Agreements Have Dispute Resolution Provisions, Which Half Needs Explaining?’, The Journal of Legal Studies, 36(1): 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., and Snidal, D. (2001), ‘The Rational Design of International Institutions’, International Organization, 55(4): 761–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lake, D. A. (1996), ‘Anarchy, Hierarchy, and the Variety of International Relations’, International Organization, 50(1): 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfield, E. D. and Pevehouse, J. C. (2000), ‘Trade Blocs, Trade Flows, and International Conflict’, International Organization, 54(4): 775–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, G., Lenz, T., Ceka, B., and Burgoon, B. (2014), ‘Discovering Cooperation: A Contractual Approach to Institutional Change in Regional International Organizations’, unpublished manuscript, http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/31551/RSCAS_2014_65.pdf?sequence=1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, G., Hooghe, L., Lenz, T., Bezuijen, J., Ceka, B., and Derderyan, S. (forthcoming), Scale and Community: The Purpose and Design of International Organizations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marotta Rangel, V. (2008), ‘International Law, Regional Developments: Latin America’, in Wolfrum, R. (ed.), Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marx, A., Rihoux, B., and Ragin, C. C. (2014), ‘The Origins, Development, and Application of Qualitative Comparative Analysis: The First 25 Years’, European Political Science Review, 6(1): 115–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattli, W. (1999), The Logic of Regional Integration: Europe and Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCall Smith, J. (2000), ‘The Politics of Dispute Settlement Design: Explaining Legalism in Regional Trade Pacts’, International Organization, 54(1): 137–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nye, J. S. (1968), ‘Comparative Regional Integration: Concept and Measurement’, International Organization, 22(4): 855–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orrego-Vicuña, F. (1976), ‘Economic Integration in Latin America: A Comparative Interlude’, European Community Law and Institutions in Perspective (470).Google Scholar
Padilla, D. J. (1979), ‘The Judicial Resolution of Legal Disputes in the Integration Movements of the Hemisphere’, Lawyer of the Americas, 11: 75–95.Google Scholar
Powers, K. and Goertz, G. (2011), ‘The Economic-Institutional Construction of Regions: Conceptualisation and Operationalisation’, Review of International Studies, 37: 2387–2416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ragin, C. C. (1987), The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Rihoux, B. and Marx, A. (2013), ‘QCA, 25 Years after “The Comparative Method”: Mapping, Challenges, and Innovations ‒ Mini-Symposium’, Political Research Quarterly, 66(1): 167–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sevon, L. (1992), ‘The EEA Judicial System and the Supreme Courts of the EFTA States’, European Journal of International Law, 3(2): 329–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, R. (2010), Controlling Institutions: International Organizations and the Global Economy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stone Sweet, A. and Brunell, T. (1998), ‘Constructing a Supranational Constitution: Dispute Resolution and Governance in the European Community’, American Political Science Review, 92(1): 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone Sweet, A. and Sandholtz, W. (1998), ‘Integration, Supranational Governance, and the Institutionalization of the European Polity’, in Sandholtz, W. and Stone Sweet, A. (eds.), European Integration and Supranational Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sturm, M. and Siegfried, N. (2005), ‘Regional Monetary Integration in the Member States of the Gulf Cooperation Council’, Occasional Paper Series 31, European Central Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wionczek, M. S. (1963), ‘Toward Economic Cooperation’, International Conciliation, 35(5): 3–62.Google Scholar
Yin, R. K. (2014), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, London: Sage.Google Scholar