scholarly journals Are the Contents of International Treaties Copied and Pasted? Evidence from Preferential Trade Agreements

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 603-613 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd Allee ◽  
Manfred Elsig

Abstract Most accounts of international negotiations suggest that global agreements are individually crafted and distinct, while some emerging scholarship suggests a heavy reliance on models and templates. In this research, we present a comprehensive test of whether new international treaties are heavily copied and pasted from past ones. We specify several reasons to expect widespread copying and pasting, and argue that both the most and least powerful countries should be most likely to do so. Using text analysis to examine several hundred preferential trade agreements (PTAs), we reveal that most PTAs copy a sizable majority of their content word for word from an earlier agreement. At least one hundred PTAs take 80 percent or more of their contents directly from a single, existing treaty—with many copying and pasting 95 percent or more. These numbers climb even higher when we compare important substantive chapters of trade agreements, many of which are copied and pasted verbatim. Such copying and pasting is most prevalent among low-capacity governments that lean heavily on existing templates, and powerful states that desire to spread their preferred rules globally. This widespread replication of existing treaty language reshapes how we think about international cooperation, and it has important implications for literatures on institutional design, policy diffusion, state power, and legal fragmentation.

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 186
Author(s):  
I Gusti Ngurah Parikesit Widiatedja

<p>International trade has resulted positive impacts, such as alleviating poverty and increasing jobs. All countries then start concluding trade agreements multilaterally, regionally and bilaterally. The existence of preferential trade agreements is increasingly significant due to the deadlock of multilateral trade agreements. Although providing benefits, international trade has adversely affected environment. Some international treaties suggest how countries should include environmental concern in their PTAs. Unlike traditional PTAs, most of modern PTAs have incorporated environmental concern, reconciling the goal of trade liberalization and environmental protection. In Indonesia, there is a link between international trade and environmental harm. This article aims to show the existing Indonesia’s PTAs, analysing how Indonesia has put, and how it should put environmental concern in its PTAs. This article argues that only a few Indonesia’s PTAs have incorporated environmental concern in their provisions. Moreover, when they include environmental concern, there is no further elaboration on how this process should be undertaken. Compare to other existing PTAs, Indonesia should start incorporating environmental concern in its PTAs, and then allow the right of government to impose protective measure in order to preserve environment. </p>


2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 923-937
Author(s):  
Claire Peacock ◽  
Karolina Milewicz ◽  
Duncan Snidal

Abstract New international agreements often recycle language from previous agreements, using boilerplate solutions alongside customized provisions. The presence of boilerplate in international agreements has important implications for understanding how international rules are made. The determinants behind boilerplate in international agreements have not previously been systematically evaluated. Using original data from a sample of 348 preferential trade agreements (PTAs) adopted between 1989 and 2009, we combine novel text analysis measures with Latent Order Logistic (LOLOG) graph network techniques to assess the determinants behind boilerplate in labor and environmental provisions commonly found in PTAs. Our results indicate that whereas boilerplate can be used for both efficiency and distributive purposes, international boilerplate is used primarily for efficiency gains and power-distribution considerations are not systematically important.


Author(s):  
Leonardo Borlini

An increasingly important aspect of EU trade policy since the lifting of its self-imposed moratorium on preferential trade agreements (PTAs) has been the inclusion of WTO+ provisions on subsidies in bilateral agreements negotiated with a number of third countries. This article covers the main bilateral PTAs negotiated after the publication of the Commission’s Communication on ‘Global Europe’ in order to explore the implications of the different subsidy disciplines they set out. It also discusses the questions that arise when examining the legal discipline of public aid provided by such agreements, regarding not only the substantive appropriateness of standards and rules on compatibility, but also the procedural mechanisms designed to guarantee the implementation and the enforcement of such rules. It concludes that the most advanced among the EU PTAs are shaped as competition regulation and go beyond a mere negative function, ensuring that subsidies can contribute to fundamental public goals.


2006 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 896-914 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nuno Limão

Most countries are members of preferential trade agreements (PTAs). The effect of these agreements has attracted much interest and raised the question of whether PTAs promote or slow multilateral trade liberalization, i.e., whether they are a “building block” or “stumbling block” to multilateral liberalization. Despite this long-standing concern with PTAs and the lack of theoretical consensus, there is no systematic evidence on whether they are actually a stumbling block to multilateral liberalization. We use detailed data on U.S. multilateral tariffs to provide the first systematic evidence that the direct effect of PTAs was to generate a stumbling block to its MTL. We also provide evidence of reciprocity in multilateral tariff reductions.


Author(s):  
Christopher S Magee

Abstract This paper provides one of the first assessments of the hypothesis that two countries are more likely to form a preferential trade agreement (PTA) if they are already major trading partners. The paper also tests a number of predictions from the political economy literature about which countries are expected to form regional agreements. The results show that countries are more likely to be preferential trading partners if they have significant bilateral trade, are similar in size, and are both democracies. Finally, the paper measures the effect of preferential agreements on trade volumes while, unlike previous studies, treating PTA formation as endogenous.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document