Democratic differences: Electoral institutions and compliance with GATT/WTO agreements

European Journal of International Relations

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 711-729

  Rickard, Stephanie J ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

compliance; democracy; electoral rules; GATT WTO; international agreements

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650154802     PISSN: 13540661     EISSN: 14603713     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1354066109346890     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Allee T. (2009) Going to Geneva? Trade protection and dispute resolution under the World Trade Organization. Mimeo, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
2. Allee T., Scalera J. (2009) Getting there is half the fun: The impact of WTO accession on trade. Paper prepared for the 67th Annual Conference of the Midwest Political Science Association.
3. Alt JE, Gilligan M. (1994) The political economy of trading states. Journal of Political Philosophy 2(2): 165-192.
4. Ashworth S., Bueno de Mesquita E (2006) Delivering the goods: Legislative particularism in different electoral and institutional settings. Journal of Politics 68(1): 168-179.
5. Beck T., Clarke G., Groff A.,et al.(2001) New tools in comparative political economy: The database of political institutions. World Bank Economic Review 15(September): 165-176.
6. Boix C. (1999) Setting the rules of the game: The choice of electoral systems in advanced democracies. American Political Science Review 93(3): 609-624.
7. Bown CP (2005) Participation in WTO dispute settlement: Complainants, interested parties, and free riders. World Bank Economic Review 19(2): 287-310.
8. Busch ML, Reinhardt E. (2002) Testing international trade law: Empirical studies of GATT/ WTO dispute settlement. In: Kennedy DM, Southwick JD (eds) The Political Economy of International Trade Law: Essays in Honor of Robert Hudec. New York: Cambridge University Press, 457-481.
9. Cameron CA, Trivedi PK (1998) Regression Analysis of Count Data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Carey JM, Soberg Shugart MS (1995) Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: A rank ordering of electoral formulas. Electoral Studies 14(4): 417-439.
11. Cox GW, McCubbins MD (1986) Electoral politics as a redistributive game. Journal of Politics 48(2): 370-389.
12. Dai X. (2006) Dyadic myth and monadic advantage: Conceptualizing the effect of democratic constraints on trade. Journal of Theoretical Politics 18(3): 267-297.
13. Davis CL (2008) The democratic propensity for adjudication: An analysis of GATT/WTO dispute settlement. Paper prepared for the 3rd Annual Meeting of the International Political Economy Society.
14. Davis CL, Bermeo SB (2009) Who files? Developing country participation in GATT/WTO adjudication. Journal of Politics 71(3): 1033-1049.
15. Davis CL, Shirato Y. (2007) Firms, governments and GATT/WTO adjudication: Japana's selection of WTO disputes. World Politics 59: 274-313.
16. Dixit A., Londregan J. (1996) The determinants of success of special interests in redistributive politics. Journal of Politics 58(4): 1132-1155.
17. Dixon WJ (1993) Democracy and the management of international conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution 37(1): 42-68.
18. Drazen A. (1997) Policy signalling in the open economy: A re-examination. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 5892.
19. Evans CL (2009) A protectionist bias in majoritarian politics: An empirical investigation. Economics and Politics 21(2): 278-307.
20. Fearon JD (1994) Domestic political audiences and the escalation of international disputes. American Political Science Review 88(3): 577-592.
21. Frieden J., Lake DA (2000) International politics and international economics. In: Frieden J, Lake D (eds) International Political Economy. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1-16.
22. Gaubatz KT (1996) Democratic states and commitment in international relations. International Organization 50(1): 109-139.
23. Grossman GM, Helpman E. (2005) A protectionist bias in majoritarian politics. Quarterly Journal of Economics 120(4): 1239-1282.
24. Guzman A., Simmons B. (2005) Power plays and capacity constraints: The selection of defendants in WTO disputes. Journal of Legal Studies 34(2): 557-598.
25. Huber E., Ragin C., and Stephens JD (1993) Social democracy, Christian democracy, constitutional structure and the welfare state. American Journal of Sociology 99: 711-749.
26. Hudec R. (1993) Enforcing International Trade Law: The Evolution of the Modern GATT Legal System. Salem, NH: Butterworth Legal Publishers.
27. Johnson J., Wallack J. (2005) The Electoral Systems and the Personal Vote Database. Available at: http://dss.ucsd.edu/jwjohnso/espv.html.
28. Karol D. (2007) Does constituency size affect elected officialsa' trade policy preferences? Journal of Politics 69: 483-494.
29. Kindleberger C. (1969) American Business Abroad. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
30. King G. (1989) Variance specification in event count models: From restrictive assumptions to a generalized estimator. American Journal of Political Science 33(3): 762-784.
31. King G., Tomz M., and Wittenberg J. (2000) Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science 44(2): 347-361.
32. Leeds BA (2003) Alliance reliability in times of war: Explaining state decisions to violate treaties. International Organization 57(4): 801-827.
33. Lindbeck A., Weibull JW (1987) Balanced-budget redistribution as the outcome of political competition. Public Choice 52: 273-297.
34. Lizzeri A., Persico N. (2001) The provision of public goods under alternative electoral incentives. American Economic Review 91(1): 225-245.
35. Long JS (1997) Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
36. Magee SP, Brock WA, and Young L. (1989) Black Hole Tariffs and Endogenous Policy Theory: Political Economy in General Equilibrium. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. Mahncke H. (2004) US steel tariffs and the WTO dispute resolution mechanism. Leiden Journal of International Law 17(3): 615-624.
38. Mansfield ED, Busch M. (1995) The political economy of nontariff barriers: A crossnational analysis. International Organization 49: 723-749.
39. Mansfield ED, Milner HV, and Rosendorff PB (2002) Why democracies cooperate more: Electoral control and international trade agreements. International Organization 56(3): 477-513.
40. McGillivray F. (2004) Privileging Industry: The Comparative Politics of Trade and Industrial Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41. McGillivray F., Smith A. (2000) Trust and cooperation through agent-specific punishments. International Organization 54(4): 809-824.
42. Milesi-Ferretti GM, Perotti R., and Rostagno M. (2002) Electoral systems and public spending. Quarterly Journal of Economics 117(2): 609-665.
43. Milner HV, Kubota K. (2005) Why the move to free trade? Democracy and trade policy in the developing countries. International Organization 59(1): 107-143.
44. Monroe BL, Rose AG (2002) Electoral systems and unimagined consequences: Partisan effects of districted proportional representation. American Journal of Political Science 46(1): 67-89.
45. Persson T., Tabellini G. (1999) The size and scope of government: Comparative politics with rational politicians. European Economic Review 43: 699-735.
46. Persson T., Tabellini G. (2000) Political Economics: Explaining Economic Policy. London: MIT Press.
47. Persson T., Tabellini G. (2003) The Economic Effects of Constitutions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Petersmann EU (1997) The GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System: International Law, International Organizations and Dispute Settlement. London: Kluwer Law.
49. Powell GB, Vanberg GS (2000) Election laws, disproportionality and median correspondence: Implications for two visions of democracy. British Journal of Political Science 30: 383-411.
50. Read R. (2005) The EU-US WTO steel dispute: The political economy of protection and the efficacy of the WTO dispute settlement understanding. In: Perdikis N, Read R (eds) The WTO and the Regulation of International Trade: Recent Trade Disputes between the European Union and the United States. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 135-176.
51. Reinhardt E. (1996) Posturing parliaments: Ratification, uncertainty, and international bargaining. Mimeo, Columbia University.
52. Remmer KL (1998) Does democracy promote interstate cooperation? Lessons from the Mercosur region. International Studies Quarterly 42(1): 25-52.
53. Rickard SJ (2009) Strategic targeting: The effect of institutions and interests on distributive transfers. Comparative Political Studies 42(5): 670-695.
54. Rogowski R. (1987) Trade and the variety of democratic institutions. International Organization 41(2): 203-223.
55. Rogowski R. (1997) Pork, patronage, and protection: How geographic concentration affects representation of interests in small-district systems. Mimeo, University of California, Los Angeles.
56. Rokkan S. (1970) Citizens, Elections, Parties: Approaches to the Comparative Study of the Process of Development. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
57. Rose AK (2008) GATT/WTO membership and its effect on trade: Where do we stand? Working paper.
58. Simmons BA (2000) International law and state behaviour: Commitment and compliance in international monetary affairs. American Political Science Review 94(4): 819-835.
59. Slaughter A-M (1995) International law in a world of liberal states. European Journal of International Law 6(1): 503-538.
60. Smith A. (1996) To intervene or not to intervene: A biased decision. Journal of Conflict Resolution 40(1): 16-40.
61. Tomz M. (2002) Democratic default: Domestic audiences and compliance with international agreements. Mimeo, Stanford University.
62. Tomz M., Wittenberg J., and King G. (2001) CLARIFY: Software for Interpreting and Presenting Statistical Results. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
63. Waltz K. (1979) Theory of International Politics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
64. Willmann G. (2004) Why legislators are protectionists: The role of majoritarian voting in setting tariffs. Mimeo, Catholic University of Leuven.
65. World Bank (2005) World Development Indicators (WDI). New York: World Bank.
66. World Trade Organization (WTO) (2005) Chronological list of disputes case. Available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_status_e.htm.