What factors shape public opinion toward international law? Current research suggests that citizens respond strongly to negative cues, but have found limited effects for information about the potential benefits. We theorize that cues about the reciprocity of international law - that the parties face mutually enforceable obligations - can increase support. We evaluate our theory with a survey experiment in the United States (US) examining views towards Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), a frequently used but controversial dispute settlement mechanism in international investment law. Two findings stand out. First, consistent with previous research, the public is more supportive of international law if their country is the initiator rather than the target of a dispute. Second, when their country is the target, information about the use of ISDS by US firms, which we refer to as specific reciprocity, appears to increase support. More diffuse cues of reciprocity, however, do not affect support. Overall, our findings provide evidence that specific reciprocity cues can increase support for international law even when one's country faces potential costs.
Abstract This study investigates how institutional interactions shape bilateral trade dynamics within the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), focusing on product-level trade composition, diversification, and the role of governance. Despite regional integration efforts, ECOWAS has seen limited export diversification and modest intra-regional growth in trade. Using a gravity model and detailed bilateral trade data, the study examines how the combined governance quality of trading partners influences trade flows, extensive margins (products per partner, and partners per product), and intensive margins (trade volumes, values, and average value per product per partner). The analysis highlights governance complementarities as key drivers of trade structure within the region. Results show that regulatory quality between trading partners is associated with greater product concentration, while complementarities in political stability support broader geographic market reach across trading partners. Reciprocity effects are also observed in the case of political institutions, suggesting that governance alignment reinforces trade ties. Voice and accountability displays a complementarity effect on the average value per product per partner, deepening bilateral trade relationships. These findings highlight the importance of understanding governance and institutions coordination and the interplay in enhancing intra-ECOWAS trade integration and carry broader implications for regional efforts such as the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA).
This article examines the interpretative divergence in China - Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, the first WTO dispute to address whether TRIPS obligations contain an implicit territorial limitation. The Panel adopted a strict territorial reading of Article 1.1, holding that TRIPS disciplines apply only to the implementation of minimum standards within a Member's domestic legal system, and do not extend to measures where the effects are felt abroad. The Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA) arbitrators reversed this approach, introducing a functional, effects-sensitive interpretation under which Members must implement TRIPS in a manner that does not frustrate the enforcement of intellectual property rights in other jurisdictions. The article argues that the Tribunal's expanded interpretation is inconsistent with the text, structure, object and purpose, and negotiating history of the TRIPS Agreement. A close reading of Article 1.1 demonstrates that 'give effect to' refers to domestic legal operability rather than cross-border consequences. The systemic design of TRIPS, establishing a minimum-standards regime primarily concerned with the domestic implementation of intellectual property protection, further confirms that it does not impose transnational enforcement obligations. The article situates the WTO dispute, China - Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights within broader debates on the multilateral governance of intellectual property. While acknowledging that cross-border spillovers are increasingly common in global standard-essential patent (SEP) litigation, it maintains that such challenges are better addressed through institutional cooperation and private ordering than through judicial expansion of treaty obligations. The analysis clarifies the limits of WTO adjudication in the intellectual property (IP) domain and reaffirms territoriality as a foundational principle of the TRIPS regime.
