Abstract
AbstractScholars commonly hypothesize that enhanced capacity—improved ability to do as agreed—increases states’ compliance with international agreements. In contrast, using a novel dataset that covers 31 states and three decades of cooperation, I find a negative effect of capacity on compliance. To help explain this seemingly counterintuitive finding, I offer a novel conjecture of the capacity–compliance relationship. In particular, I argue that the effect of capacity may vary substantially across states, because states’ intention to comply constitutes a crucial intervening variable. Among reluctant states pursuing policy goals that affect compliance negatively, high capacity may in fact cause noncompliance. I exemplify the conjecture through evidence from a high-capacity noncompliant state (Norway).
Funder
Institute Of Transport Economics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations,Economics and Econometrics
Reference50 articles.
1. Aakre, S., Helland, L., & Hovi, J. (2016). When does informal enforcement work? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 60(7), 1312–1340.
2. Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist’s companion. London: Princeton University Press.
3. Barrett, S. (2003). Environment and statecraft. The strategy of environmental treaty-making. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Bennett, A., & Checkel, J. (Eds.). (2014). Process tracing: From metaphor to analytic tool. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Börzel, T. A., Hofmann, T., Panke, D., & Sprungk, C. (2010). Obstinate and inefficient: Why member states do not comply with European law. Comparative Political Studies, 43(11), 1363–1390. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414010376910.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献