IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v38y1984i04p733-762_02.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consensual knowledge and international collaboration: some lessons from the commodity negotiations

Author

Listed:
  • Rothstein, Robert L.

Abstract

Consensual knowledge can produce widely varying levels of impact on different international negotiations. In the case of negotiations over UNCTAD's Integrated Program for Commodities, consensual knowledge developed among the experts involved. This consensus tended to support the position taken by the developed countries, thus pointing in a direction already taken for other reasons. Consensus in this case facilitated an agreement, but empirical and theoretical analysis both suggest it may prove to be an incorrect or unstable agreement. The outcome of the commodity negotiations implies that the interaction of key variables, such as uncertainty and the degree of acceptance of the knowledge, might yield different results in other cases. Various specific means might be used more effectively to diffuse expert knowledge among policy makers.

Suggested Citation

  • Rothstein, Robert L., 1984. "Consensual knowledge and international collaboration: some lessons from the commodity negotiations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(4), pages 733-762, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:38:y:1984:i:04:p:733-762_02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S002081830002693X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alexandros Kailis, 2017. "The influential role of consensual knowledge in international environmental agreements: negotiating the implementing measures of the Mediterranean Land-Based Sources Protocol (1980)," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 295-311, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:38:y:1984:i:04:p:733-762_02. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.