IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v89y1996i3-4p283-303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Involuntary Defection in Two-Level Games

Author

Listed:
  • Iida, Keisuke

Abstract

Ratification failures are prevalent in international relations but, due to the assumption of unitary actors in international relations theory, theoretical analysis has been underdeveloped. In formalizing R. D. Putnam's metaphor of two-level games, this article shows that incomplete information about the preferences of domestic actors is crucial for understanding ratification failures. Furthermore, institutional mechanisms affect bargaining outcomes through their impact on information revelation. In particular, it is found that two-sided constraints lead to relatively equitable bargaining outcomes and that renegotiation and prenegotiation poll-taking can induce strategic voting by domestic constituents, thereby exacerbating domestic constraints. Copyright 1996 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Iida, Keisuke, 1996. "Involuntary Defection in Two-Level Games," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 89(3-4), pages 283-303, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:89:y:1996:i:3-4:p:283-303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Simon Hug & Tobias Schulz, 2007. "Referendums in the EU’s constitution building process," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 177-218, June.
    2. Thomas Konig & Jonathan Slapin, 2004. "Bringing Parliaments Back in," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 357-394, July.
    3. Köke, Sonja & Lange, Andreas, 2017. "Negotiating environmental agreements under ratification constraints," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 90-106.
    4. Barbara Dluhosch & Nikolai Ziegler, 2011. "The paradox of weakness in the politics of trade integration," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 325-354, December.
    5. Ahmer Tarar, 2005. "Constituencies and Preferences in International Bargaining," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(3), pages 383-407, June.
    6. Bernauer, Thomas & Kalbhenn, Anna & Koubi, Vally & Ruoff, Gabi, 2010. "On commitment levels and compliance mechanisms: Determinants of participation in global environmental agreements," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 94, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    7. Thomas König & Simon Hug, 2000. "Ratifying Maastricht," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 93-124, February.
    8. repec:got:cegedp:94 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Wakako Maekawa & Barış Arı & Theodora-Ismene Gizelis, 2019. "UN involvement and civil war peace agreement implementation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 178(3), pages 397-416, March.
    10. Thomas König & Daniel Finke, 2007. "Reforming the equilibrium? Veto players and policy change in the European constitution-building process," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 153-176, June.
    11. Köke, Sonja & Lange, Andreas, 2013. "Negotiating Environmental Agreements under Ratification Uncertainty," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79952, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Ana Carolina Garriga, 2009. "Regime Type and Bilateral Treaty Formalization," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(5), pages 698-726, October.
    13. Xinyuan Dai, 2006. "Dyadic Myth and Monadic Advantage," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 267-297, July.
    14. Ahmer Tarar, 2001. "International Bargaining with Two-Sided Domestic Constraints," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(3), pages 320-340, June.
    15. Leyla D. Karakas, 2018. "Appeasement and compromise under a referendum threat," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 261-283, August.
    16. Macartan Humphreys, 2007. "Strategic ratification," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 191-208, July.
    17. Arzu Kıbrıs, 2012. "Uncertainty and ratification failure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 439-467, March.

    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:kap:pubcho:v:89:y:1996:i:3-4:p:283-303. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.