IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v26y2014i4p599-628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A strategic theory of effective monitoring arrangements for international institutions

Author

Listed:
  • Thania Sanchez

    (Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA)

  • Johannes Urpelainen

    (Columbia University, New York, NY, USA)

Abstract

States often delegate compliance monitoring to international monitors. It is commomly assumed that these monitors will report accurately on the information they gather. However, the effectiveness of compliance monitors varies widely. Monitors may fail to collect information about non-compliance or even collude with non-compliant states and deliberately fail to report the information they gather. To explain this variation, we present a formal theory of how structural conditions and institutional designs lead to different levels of monitoring efficacy. We show that international institutions can improve monitoring by avoiding ruthless sanctions, and that intrinsically motivated monitors generally achieve better outcomes than neutral bureaucrats. Our theory contributes to the broad literature on international institutional design and treaty effectiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Thania Sanchez & Johannes Urpelainen, 2014. "A strategic theory of effective monitoring arrangements for international institutions," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 26(4), pages 599-628, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:26:y:2014:i:4:p:599-628
    DOI: 10.1177/0951629813511550
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951629813511550
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0951629813511550?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aghion, Philippe & Tirole, Jean, 1997. "Formal and Real Authority in Organizations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(1), pages 1-29, February.
    2. Andrew Kydd, 2003. "Which Side Are You On? Bias, Credibility, and Mediation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(4), pages 597-611, October.
    3. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    4. Paul-Erik Veel, 2009. "Carbon Tariffs and the WTO: An Evaluation of Feasible Policies," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 749-800, September.
    5. repec:ner:ucllon:http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/17678/ is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Weber, Christopher L. & Peters, Glen P., 2009. "Climate change policy and international trade: Policy considerations in the US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 432-440, February.
    7. Mitchell, Ronald B., 1994. "Regime design matters: intentional oil pollution and treaty compliance," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 425-458, July.
    8. Downs, George W. & Rocke, David M. & Barsoom, Peter N., 1996. "Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(3), pages 379-406, July.
    9. Barrett, Scott, 1997. "The strategy of trade sanctions in international environmental agreements," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 345-361, November.
    10. Tallberg, Jonas, 2002. "Paths to Compliance: Enforcement, Management, and the European Union," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 56(3), pages 609-643, July.
    11. Lessmann, Kai & Marschinski, Robert & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2009. "The effects of tariffs on coalition formation in a dynamic global warming game," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 641-649, May.
    12. Schwartz, Warren F & Sykes, Alan O, 2002. "The Economic Structure of Renegotiation and Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organization," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 179-204, January.
    13. Koremenos, Barbara & Lipson, Charles & Snidal, Duncan, 2001. "The Rational Design of International Institutions," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 761-799, October.
    14. Tirole, Jean, 1986. "Hierarchies and Bureaucracies: On the Role of Collusion in Organizations," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 181-214, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Matthias Ecker-Ehrhardt, 2018. "Self-legitimation in the face of politicization: Why international organizations centralized public communication," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 519-546, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stine Aakre, 2016. "The political feasibility of potent enforcement in a post-Kyoto climate agreement," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 145-159, February.
    2. Fabio Franchino & Camilla Mariotto, 2021. "Noncompliance risk, asymmetric power and the design of enforcement of the European economic governance," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 591-610, December.
    3. Lee, Jiwon & Wittgenstein, Teresa, 2017. "Weak vs. Strong Ties: Explaining Early Settlement in WTO Disputes," ILE Working Paper Series 7, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.
    4. Jillienne Haglund & Courtney Hillebrecht, 2020. "Overlapping international human rights institutions: Introducing the Women’s Rights Recommendations Digital Database (WR2D2)," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(5), pages 648-657, September.
    5. Johannes Urpelainen, 2011. "Domestic reform as a rationale for gradualism in international cooperation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(3), pages 400-427, July.
    6. Ryan M. Welch, 2019. "Domestic politics and the power to punish: The case of national human rights institutions," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(4), pages 385-404, July.
    7. Johannes Urpelainen, 2011. "Early birds: Special interests and the strategic logic of international cooperation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 113-140, July.
    8. Christopher Marcoux & Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "Capacity, not constraints: A theory of North-South regulatory cooperation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 399-424, December.
    9. Matthias Kräkel & Anja Schöttner, 2020. "Delegating Pricing Authority to Sales Agents: The Impact of Kickbacks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2686-2705, June.
    10. Steffen Mohrenberg & Vally Koubi & Thomas Bernauer, 2019. "Effects of funding mechanisms on participation in multilateral environmental agreements," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 1-18, February.
    11. Alexandra E. Cirone & Johannes Urpelainen, 2013. "Trade sanctions in international environmental policy: Deterring or encouraging free riding?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(4), pages 309-334, September.
    12. Thomas Bernauer & Anna Kalbhenn & Vally Koubi & Gabriele Spilker, 2013. "Is there a “Depth versus Participation” dilemma in international cooperation?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 477-497, December.
    13. Christopher Marcoux & Johannes Urpelainen, 2013. "Non-compliance by design: Moribund hard law in international institutions," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 163-191, June.
    14. Johannes Urpelainen, 2010. "Enforcing international environmental cooperation: Technological standards can help," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 475-496, December.
    15. Todd Allee & Manfred Elsig, 2016. "Why do some international institutions contain strong dispute settlement provisions? New evidence from preferential trade agreements," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 89-120, March.
    16. Spilker, Gabriele, 2013. "Compliance with WTO Dispute Rulings," Papers 585, World Trade Institute.
    17. Effrosyni Diamantoudi & Eftichios Sartzetakis & Stefania Strantza, 2018. "International Environmental Agreements and Trading Blocks - Can issue linkage enhance cooperation?," Discussion Paper Series 2018_07, Department of Economics, University of Macedonia, revised Jun 2018.
    18. Carsten Hefeker & Michael Neugart, 2016. "Policy deviations, uncertainty, and the European Court of Justice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 547-567, December.
    19. Michael Zürn & Alexandros Tokhi & Martin Binder, 2021. "The International Authority Database," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(4), pages 430-442, September.
    20. Gabriele Spilker & Tobias Böhmelt, 2013. "The impact of preferential trade agreements on governmental repression revisited," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 343-361, September.

    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:sae:jothpo:v:26:y:2014:i:4:p:599-628. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.