1. 1. References to criticism and a specific reference to the OECD are contained inFratianni, and Pattison[1976 ].
2. 2. There are, however, a number of articles dealing with some aspects of such a theory. See, for example, Olson, and Zeckhauser[1966 ].
3. 3. If trade associations are the industrial counterparts ofIEO's, the analysis of Stigler [1974], exploring the membership of U. S. firms in many trade associations which appear to offer similar products, provides a suggestion for a framework for future research into the motivation and choices of countries in joiningIEO's.
4. 4. For example, the lateHarryJohnson[1970 , p.5 ] noted that 'Official thinking in the IMF and elsewhere in the system divides the world into a few big countries that really matter and hence need to be coddled, and the vast majority that do not matter and hence need to be disciplined'.
5. 5. As initially developed byBuchanan[1965 ] and extended by Ng[1973, 1974].