Veto players and the design of preferential trade agreements

References

• Acharya, A. and Johnston, A. I. (2007) Crafting Cooperation: Regional International Institutions in Comparative Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Allee, T. and Elsig, M. (2016) ‘Are the contents of international agreements copied-and-pasted? Evidence from preferential trade agreements’, World Trade Institute, NCCR Working Paper 2016/8, pp. 1–42.
   Google Scholar
• Allee, T. and Elsig, M. (2015) ‘Dispute settlement provisions in PTAs: New data and new concepts’, in A. Dür and M. Elsig ( eds) Trade Cooperation: The Purpose, Design and Effects of Preferential Trade Agreement, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 319–52.
   Google Scholar
• Allee, T. and Elsig, M. (2016) ‘Why do some international institutions contain strong dispute settlement provisions? Evidence from preferential trade agreements’, Review of International Organizations 11(1): 89–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allee, T. and Lugg, A. (2016) ‘Who wrote the rules for the trans-pacific partnership?’, Research & Politics 3(3): 1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allee, T. and Peinhardt, C. (2014) ‘Evaluating three explanations for the design of bilateral investment treaties’, World Politics 66(1): 47–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, J. and Montinola, G. (2004). ‘Veto players and the rule of law in emerging democracies’, Comparative Political Studies 37(1): 55–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andriamananjara, S. and Schiff, M. (2001) ‘Regional cooperation among microstates’, Review of International Economics 9(1): 42–51.
   Google Scholar
• Baccini, L. and Dür, A. 2015. ‘Investment discrimination and the proliferation of preferential trade agreements’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 59(4): 617–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baccini, L., Dür, A. and Elsig, M. (2015) ‘The politics of trade agreement design: revisiting the depth-flexibility nexus’, International Studies Quarterly 59(4): 765–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baldwin, R. (1993) ‘A Domino theory of regionalism’, NBER Working Paper No. 4465, Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/papers/w4465
   Google Scholar
• Baldwin, R. E. (1985) The Political Economy of U.S. Import Policy, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barbieri, K. and Keshk, O. (2012) Correlates of War Project Trade Data Set Codebook, Correlates of War Project, Version 3.0. Accessed at http://www.correlatesofwar.org/data-sets/bilateral-trade
   Google Scholar
• Becher, M. (2010) ‘Constraining ministerial power: the impact of veto players on labor market reforms in industrial democracies, 1973–2000’, Comparative Political Studies 43(1): 33–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bown, C. P. (2011) ‘Taking stock of antidumping, safeguards and countervailing duties, 1990–2009’, World Economy 34(12): 1955–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bown, C. P. (2014) Global Antidumping Database, Washington, DC: The World Bank, June; accessed at http://econ.worldbank.org/ttbd/gad/
   Google Scholar
• Bown, C. and Pauwelyn, J. ( eds) (2010) The Law, Economics and Politics of Retaliation in WTO Dispute Settlement, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crepaz, M. M. L. (2001) ‘Veto players, globalization and the redistributive capacity of the state: a panel study of 15 OECD countries’, Journal of Public Policy 21(1): 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, D. E. (2006) ‘Veto players and civil war duration’, American Journal of Political Science 50(4): 875–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downs, G. W., Rocke, M. D., and Barsoom, P. N. (1996) ‘Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation?’, International Organization 50(3): 379–406.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dür, A. (2007) ‘EU trade policy as protection for exporters: the agreements with Mexico and Chile’, Journal of Common Market Studies 45(4): 833–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dür, A., Baccini, L. and Elsig, M. (2014) ‘The design of international trade agreements: introducing a new database’, Review of International Organizations 9(3): 353–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elsig, M. (2016) ‘Comment on Weinberg’, ISQ Blog, 26 September 2016; accessed at http://www.isanet.org/Publications/ISQ/Posts/ID/5327/Comments-on-Weinberg
   Google Scholar
• Elsig, M. and Dupont, C. (2012) ‘European union meets South Korea: bureaucratic interests, exporter discrimination and the negotiations of trade agreements’, Journal of Common Market Studies 50(3): 492–507
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernandez, R. and Portes, J. (1998) ‘Returns to regionalism: an analysis of nontraditional gains from regional trade agreements’, World Bank Economic Review 12(2): 197–220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finger, J. (ed.) (1991) Antidumping: How It Works and Who Gets Hurt, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gehlbach, S. and Malesky, E. J. (2010) The contribution of veto players to economic reform. Journal of Politics 72(4): 957–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gleditsch, K. (2002) ‘Expanded trade and GDP data’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 46(5): 712–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ha, E. (2008) ‘Globalization, veto players, and welfare spending’, Comparative Political Studies 41(6): 783–813.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hafner-Burton, E. (2005) ‘Trading human rights: how preferential trade agreements influence government repression’, International Organization 59(3): 593–629.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haftel, Y. (2013) ‘Commerce and institutions: trade, scope and the design of regional economic organizations’, Review of International Organizations 8(3): 389–414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henisz, W. J. (2002) ‘The institutional environment for multinational investment’, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 16(2): 334–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henisz, W. J. (2004) ‘Political institutions and policy volatility’, Economics and Politics 16(1): 1–27.
   Google Scholar
• Hicks, R., and Kim, S. Y. (2012) ‘Reciprocal trade agreements in Asia: credible commitment to trade liberalization or paper tigers?’, Journal of East Asian Studies 12(1): 1–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyman, J. E. C. (2011) ‘Veto players, nuclear energy, and nonproliferation: domestic institutional barriers to a Japanese bomb’, International Security 36(2): 154–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaggers, K. and Gurr, T. R. (1995) ‘Tracking democracy's third wave with the polity III data’, Journal of Peace Research 32(4): 469–82.
   Web of Science ®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): 1041–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kastner, S. and Rector, C. (2003) ‘International regimes, domestic veto-players, and capital control policy stability’, International Studies Quarterly 47(1): 1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keefer, P. and Stasavage, D. (2003) ‘The limits of delegation: veto players, Central Bank independence, and the credibility of monetary policy’, American Political Science Review 97(3): 407–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kono, D. Y. (2006) ‘Optimal obfuscation: democracy and trade policy transparency’, American Political Science Review 100(3): 369–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koremenos, B. (2016) The Continent of International Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kucik, J. (2012) ‘The domestic politics of institutional design: producer preferences over trade agreement rules’, Economics and Politics 24(2): 95–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kucik, J. and Reinhardt, E. (2008) ‘Does flexibility promote cooperation? An application to the global trade regime’, International Organization 62(3): 477–505.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohmann, S. and O'Halloran, S. (1994) ‘Divided government and U.S. trade policy: theory and evidence’, International Organization 48(4): 595–632.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long, J. S. and Freese, J. (2005) Regression Models for Categorical Outcomes using Stata, Stata Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maggi, G. and Rodriguez-Clare, A. (2007) ‘The value of trade agreements in the presence of political pressures’, Journal of Political Economy 106(3): 574–601.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manger, M. (2009) Investing in Protection: The Politics of Preferential Trade Agreements Between North and South, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mankiw, G. N. and Swagel, P. (2005) ‘Antidumping: the third rail of trade policy’, Foreign Affairs 84(4): 107–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansfield, E. D., Milner, H. V. and Pevehouse, J. C. (2007) ‘Vetoing cooperation: the impact of veto players on preferential trading arrangements’, British Journal of Political Science 37(3): 403–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansfield, E. D. and Milner, V. H. (2012) Votes, Vetoes, and the Political Economy of International Trade Agreements, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mansfield, E. D., Milner, V. H. and Pevehouse, J. C. (2008) ‘Democracy, veto players, and the depth of regional integration’, World Economy 31(1): 67–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansfield, E. D., Milner, H. V. and Rosendorff, B. (2002) ‘Why democracies cooperate more: electoral control and international trade agreements’, International Organization 56(3): 477–513.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer, F. W. (1992) ‘Managing Domestic Differences in International Negotiations: The Strategic Use of Internal Side-Payments’, International Organization 46(4): 793–818.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer, F. W. (1998) Interpreting NAFTA, New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• O'Reilly, R. F. (2005) ‘Veto points, veto players, and international trade policy’, Comparative Political Studies 38(6): 652–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelc, K. J. (2009) ‘Seeking escape: the use of escape clauses in international trade agreements’, International Studies Quarterly 53(2): 349–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. D. (1988) ‘Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games’, International Organization 42(3): 427–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogowski, R. (1987) ‘Trade and the variety of democratic institutions’, International Organization 41(2): 203–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulze, K. (2014) ‘Do parties matter for international environmental cooperation? An analysis of environmental treaty participation by advanced industrial democracies’, Environmental Politics 23(1): 115–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spilker, G. and Böhmelt, T. (2013) ‘The impact of preferential trade agreements on government repression revisited’, Review of International Organizations 8(3): 343–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsebelis, G. (1995) ‘Decision making in political systems: veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism, and multipartyism’, British Journal of Political Science 25(3): 289–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsebelis, G. (1999) ‘Veto players and law production in parliamentary democracies: an empirical analysis’, American Political Science Review 93(3): 591–608.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsebelis, G. (2002) Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weymouth, S. (2011) ‘‘Political institutions and property rights: veto players and foreign exchange commitments in 127 countries’, Comparative Political Studies 44(2): 211–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, J. K. and Dugan, L. (2011) ‘Veto players and terror’, Journal of Peace Research 48(1): 19–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar