Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T22:23:58.164Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Patently Misleading: Partial Implementation and Bargaining Leverage in Sino-American Negotiations on Intellectual Property Rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2005

Andrew Mertha  and
Robert Pahre
Andrew Mertha
Affiliation:
Washington University in St. Louis, amertha@artsci.wustl.edu
Robert Pahre
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, pahre@uiuc.edu
Get access

Abstract

We develop a model of international negotiation in which states anticipate that the agreements they sign will only be partly implemented. The results differ significantly from theories of domestic ratification that have previously been applied to this problem. Negotiators do not try to satisfy the implementer and may even choose agreements that the implementer would explicitly reject in a ratification model. Partial implementation also makes it possible for two negotiators to reach agreements outside their usual win-set. This situation may allow one country to make extraordinary concessions, knowing that some provisions will never be fully implemented. We apply these claims to Sino-American negotiations over intellectual property rights, where implementation has been a recurrent issue. The theory enriches the theory of two-level games, which has focused much too narrowly on formal ratification without amendment as the canonical case of domestic influence over international bargaining.An earlier version of this article was presented at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association in Chicago. We would like to thank Aslaug Asgeirsdottir, Brian Gaines, Lisa Martin, two anonymous referees, and attendees at the MPSA panel for their comments. Any errors remain our responsibility.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 59 , Issue 3 , July 2005 , pp. 695 - 729
Copyright
© 2005 The IO Foundation and Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allison, Graham. 1969. Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis. American Political Science Review 63 (3):689–718.Google Scholar
Allison, Graham, and Philip Zelikow. 1999. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. 2d ed. New York: Longman.
Axelrod, Robert. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.
Bardach, Eugene. 1977. The Implementation Game: What Happens After a Bill Becomes Law. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Barnett, A. Doak. 1967. Cadres, Bureaucracy, and Political Power in Communist China. New York: Columbia University Press.
Bates, Robert H., Avner Greif, Margaret Levi, Jean-Laurent Rosenthal, and Barry Weingast. 1998. Analytic Narratives. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Bates, Robert H., Avner Greif, Margaret Levi, Jean-Laurent Rosenthal, and Barry Weingast. 2000. The Analytic Narrative Project. American Political Science Review 94 (3):696–702.Google Scholar
Braumoeller, Bear F., and Gary Goertz. 2000. The Methodology of Necessary Conditions. American Journal of Political Science 44 (4):844–58.Google Scholar
Butler, Christopher K. 2004. Modeling Compromise at the International Table. Conflict Management and Peace Sciences 21 (3):159–78.Google Scholar
Chayes, Abram, and Antonia Handler Chayes. 1993. On Compliance. International Organization 47 (2):175–205.Google Scholar
Checkel, Jeffrey T. 2001. Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change. International Organization 55 (3):553–88.Google Scholar
China Anti-Counterfeiting Coalition (CACC). Report on Counterfeiting in the People's Republic of China (draft), 25 February 1999.
Dion, Douglas. 1998. Evidence and Inference and the Comparative Case Study. Comparative Politics 30 (2):127–45.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon. 2000. Rational Choice History: A Case of Excessive Ambition. American Political Science Review 94 (3):685–95.Google Scholar
Evans, Peter B. 1993. Building an Integrative Approach to International and Domestic Politics: Reflections and Projections. In Double-Edged Diplomacy: International Bargaining and Domestic Politics, edited by Peter B. Evans, Harold K. Jacobson, and Robert D. Putnam, 397–430. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Evans, Peter B., Harold K. Jacobson, and Robert D. Putnam, eds. 1993. Double-Edged Diplomacy: International Bargaining and Domestic Politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Gurowitz, Amy. 1999. Mobilizing International Norms: Domestic Actors, Immigrants, and the Japanese State. World Politics 51 (3):413–45.Google Scholar
Hammond, Thomas H., and Brandon Prins. 1998. Domestic Veto Institutions, International Negotiations, and the Status Quo: A Spatial Model of Two-Level Games with Complete Information. Political Institutions and Public Choice Working Paper 98-05. East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Public Policy and Social Research.
Huang, Yasheng. 1996. Inflation and Investment Controls in China. The Political Economy of Central-Local Relations During the Reform Era. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hug, Simon, and Thomas König. 2002. In View of Ratification: Governmental Preferences and Domestic Constraints at the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference. International Organization 56 (2):447–76.Google Scholar
Iida, Keisuke. 1993. When and How Do Domestic Constraints Matter? Two-Level Games with Uncertainty. Journal of Conflict Resolution 37 (3):403–26.Google Scholar
Jönsson, Christer, and Jonas Tallberg. 1998. Compliance and Post-Agreement Bargaining. European Journal of International Relations 4 (4):371–408.Google Scholar
Kahler, Miles. 1993. Bargaining with the IMF: Two-Level Strategies and Developing Countries. In Double-Edged Diplomacy: International Bargaining and Domestic Politics, edited by Peter B. Evans, Harold K. Jacobson, and Robert D. Putnam, 363–94. Berkeley: University of California Press.
King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Koremenos, Barbara, Charles Lipson, and Duncan Snidal. 2001. The Rational Design of International Institutions. International Organization 55 (4):761–800.Google Scholar
Krauss, Ellis. 1993. US-Japan Negotiations on Construction and Semiconductors, 1985–1988: Building Friction and Relation-Chips. In Double-Edged Diplomacy: International Bargaining and Domestic Politics, edited by Peter B. Evans, Harold K. Jacobson, and Robert D. Putnam, 265–300. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lake, David A., and Robert Powell. 1999. International Relations: A Strategic-Choice Approach. In Strategic Choice and International Relations, edited by David A. Lake and Robert Powell, 3–38. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Lampton, David, ed. 1987. Policy Implementation in Post-Mao China. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lampton, David. 2001. Same Bed, Different Dreams: Managing US-China Relations, 1989–2000. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lardy, Nicholas R. 2002. Integrating China into the Global Economy. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Lax, David A., and James K. Sebenius. 1991. Negotiating Through an Agent. Journal of Conflict Resolution 35 (3):474–93.Google Scholar
Lieberthal, Kenneth. 2004. Governing China: From Revolution Through Reform. 2d ed. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
Lieberthal, Kenneth (with the assistance of James Tong and Sai-cheung Yeung). 1978. Central Documents and Politburo Politics in China. Michigan Papers in Chinese Studies 33, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Lieberthal, Kenneth, and Michel Oksenberg. 1988. Policy Making in China: Leaders, Structures, and Processes. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Lindblom, Charles. 1977. Politics and Markets: The World's Political Economic Systems, New York: Basic Books.
Lipson, Charles. 1991. Why Are Some International Agreements Informal? International Organization 45 (4):495–538.Google Scholar
Lohmann, Susanne, and Sharyn O'Halloran. 1994. Divided Government and U.S. Trade Policy: Theory and Evidence. International Organization 48 (4):595–632.Google Scholar
Lynch, Daniel. 1999. After the Propaganda State: Media, Politics, and Thought Work in Reformed China. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
Milner, Helen V., and B. Peter Rosendorff. 1997. Democratic Politics and International Trade Negotiations: Elections and Divided Government as Constraints on Trade Liberalization. Journal of Conflict Resolution 41 (1):117–46.Google Scholar
Martin, Lisa L. 2000. Democratic Commitments: Legislatures and International Cooperation. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Martin, Lisa L., and Kathryn Sikkink. 1993. US Policy and Human Rights in Argentina and Guatemala, 1973–1980. In Double-Edged Diplomacy: International Bargaining and Domestic Politics, edited by Peter B. Evans, Harold K. Jacobson, and Robert D. Putnam, 330–62. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Mazmanian, Daniel, and Paul Sabatier, eds. 1981. Effective Policy Implementation. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.
Mbaye, Heather A. D. 2001. Why National States Comply with Supranational Law: Explaining Implementation Infringements in the European Union 1972–1993. European Union Politics 2 (3):259–81.Google Scholar
Mertha, Andrew. 2005. The Politics of Piracy: Intellectual Property in Contemporary China. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Mertha, Andrew. Forthcoming. Policy Enforcement Markets: How Bureaucratic Redundancy Contributes to Effective Intellectual Property Policy Implementation in China. Comparative Politics.
Milner, Helen V. 1997. Interests, Institutions, and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Milner, Helen V., and B. Peter Rosendorff. 1997. Democratic Politics and International Trade Negotiations: Elections and Divided Government as Constraints on Trade Liberalization. Journal of Conflict Resolution 41 (1):117–46.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Ronald B. 1994. Regime Design Matters: Intentional Oil Pollution and Treaty Compliance. International Organization 48 (3):425–58.Google Scholar
Mo, Jongryn. 1994. The Logic of Two-Level Games with Endogenous Domestic Coalitions. Journal of Conflict Resolution 38 (3):402–22.Google Scholar
Mo, Jongryn. 1995. Domestic Institutions and International Bargaining: The Role of Agent Veto in Two-Level Games. American Political Science Review 89 (4):914–24.Google Scholar
O'Brien, Kevin, and Lianjiang Li. 1999. Selective Policy Implementation in Rural China. Comparative Politics 31 (2):167–86.Google Scholar
Oye, Kenneth A., ed. 1986. Cooperation Under Anarchy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Pahre, Robert. 1997. Endogenous Domestic Institutions in Two-Level Games: Parliamentary Oversight in Denmark and Elsewhere. Journal of Conflict Resolution 41 (1):147–74.Google Scholar
Pahre, Robert. 2001. Divided Government and International Cooperation in Austria-Hungary, Sweden-Norway, and the European Union. European Union Politics 2 (2):131–62.Google Scholar
Pahre, Robert. 2003. Formal and Informal Ratification in the European Union. Paper Presented at the Biennial Meeting of the European Union Studies Association, March, Nashville, Tenn.
Pahre, Robert. 2005. Formal Theory and Case Studies in European Union Studies. European Union Politics 6 (1):113–46.Google Scholar
Pollack, Mark A. 1999. Delegation, Agency and Agenda Setting in the Treaty of Amsterdam, European Integration Online Papers 3 (6). Available at 〈http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/1999-006a.htm〉. Accessed on 10 March 2005.Google Scholar
Puckett, A. Lynne, and William L. Reynolds. 1996. Rules, Sanctions and Enforcement under Section 301: At Odds with the WTO? American Journal of International Law 90 (4):675–89.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert D. 1988. Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization 42 (3):427–60.Google Scholar
Rosendorff, B. Peter, and Helen Milner. 2001. The Optimal Design of International Institutions: Uncertainty and Escape. International Organization 55(4):829–857.Google Scholar
Schneider, Gerald, and Lars-Erik Cederman. 1993. The Change in Tide in Political Cooperation: A Limited Information Model of European Integration. International Organization 48 (4):633–62.Google Scholar
Schoppa, Leonard J. 1993. Two-Level Games and Bargaining Outcomes: Why Gaiatsu Succeeds in Japan in Some Cases but Not Others. International Organization 47 (3):353–86.Google Scholar
Shannon, Vaughn P. 2000. Norms Are What States Make of Them: The Political Psychology of Norm Violation. International Studies Quarterly 44 (2):293–316.Google Scholar
Shirk, Susan. 1993. The Political Logic of Economic Reform in China. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Simmons, Beth A. 2000. International Law and State Behavior: Commitment and Compliance in International Monetary Affairs. American Political Science Review 94 (4):819–35.Google Scholar
Snidal, Duncan. 1986. The Game Theory of International Politics. In Cooperation Under Anarchy, edited by Kenneth A. Oye, 25–57. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Solinger, Dorothy J. 1996. Despite Decentralization: Disadvantages, Dependence and Ongoing Central Power in the Inland—The Case of Wuhan. The China Quarterly 145:1–34.Google Scholar
Tarar, Ahmer. 2002. International Bargaining with Two-Sided Domestic Constraints. Journal of Conflict Resolution 45 (3):320–40.Google Scholar
Taylor, Michael. 1987. The Possibility of Cooperation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Revised edition of Anarchy and Cooperation, published in 1976 by Wiley.)
Von Stein, Jana. 2003. Treaty Compliance, Endogeneity, and Partisan Politics. Paper Presented at the 61st Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April, Chicago.
Wu, Jianzhong, and Robert Axelrod. 1995. How to Cope with Noise in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution 39 (1):183–89.Google Scholar
Yang, Dali. 1994. Reform and the Restructuring of Central-Local Relations. In China Deconstructs: Politics, Trade, and Regionalism, edited by David S. G. Goodman and Gerald Segal, 59–98. London: Routledge.
Yang, Dali. 1997. Beyond Beijing: Liberalization and the Regions in China. New York: Routledge.
Yarbrough, Beth V., and Robert M. Yarbrough. 1985. Free Trade, Hegemony, and the Theory of Agency. Kyklos 38 (3):348–64.Google Scholar
Zeng, Ka. 2004. Trade Threats, Trade Wars: Bargaining, Retaliation, and American Coercive Diplomacy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.