Scholars have long sought to understand the relationship between trade agreements and democracy. This research note contributes to studying this relationship by presenting a new, comprehensive database on democracy-related provisions in preferential trade agreements (PTAs). The data is unique in its coverage and data creation approach. First, it is the most systematic and in-depth collection of democracy-related provisions in PTAs. It includes obligations to promote democracy, the protection of individual rights, alongside other important democracy-related provisions to increase transparency and stakeholder participation, and to preserve policy space. Second, it combines manual text coding and machine learning approaches to generate the dataset and two types of new indices. The research note first provides an overview of the existing literature on the PTA-democracy nexus. Then, it outlines our conceptualization of how particular PTA provisions are relevant from the viewpoint of democracy. This leads to a new typology covering six dimensions encompassing seventy-two democracy-related provisions. The research note then describes how we combine manual coding and machine learning to create the TRADEM database. We further present descriptive statistics focusing on categories and trends over time and region for a total of 792 PTAs signed between 1949 and 2022. We conclude by outlining potential applications and research avenues.

For years, scholars in international relations have addressed questions related to regime complexity and its effects. However, there is a lack of understanding of how individuals react to clashes of international law obligations when assessing domestic policies. In this article, we study the extent to which citizens are concerned with compliance and noncompliance with international law when their governments design domestic laws to implement international obligations. We are, in particular, interested in whether citizens' reactions to clashes of international obligations are driven by concerns about being exposed internationally for breaching international law or concerns about tangible material costs. Our empirical analysis is based on an experiment embedded in a survey of Swiss citizens' attitudes toward environmental issues. The experiment first shows that individuals react to both information about compliance as well as noncompliance, whereas the shifts are more notable in the case of negative information about noncompliance. Second, we find that information about the country being subject to international adjudication (what we call exposure costs) in case of noncompliance is more consequential than information about material costs (facing retaliation). Durante a & ntilde;os, los acad & eacute;micos del campo de las relaciones internacionales han abordado cuestiones relacionadas con la complejidad de los reg & iacute;menes y sus efectos. Sin embargo, existe una falta de comprensi & oacute;n con respecto a c & oacute;mo reaccionan las personas ante los conflictos con las obligaciones del derecho internacional a la hora de evaluar las pol & iacute;ticas nacionales. En este art & iacute;culo, estudiamos hasta qu & eacute; punto los ciudadanos se preocupan por el cumplimiento y el incumplimiento del derecho internacional cuando sus Gobiernos dise & ntilde;an leyes nacionales que tienen el fin de implementar obligaciones internacionales. En particular, nos interesa saber si las reacciones por parte de los ciudadanos a estos conflictos de intereses con las obligaciones internacionales est & aacute;n impulsadas por una preocupaci & oacute;n con respecto a ser expuestos internacionalmente por violar el derecho internacional o por una preocupaci & oacute;n con relaci & oacute;n a los costes materiales tangibles. Nuestro an & aacute;lisis emp & iacute;rico se basa en un experimento integrado dentro de una encuesta sobre las actitudes de los ciudadanos suizos en materia de cuestiones medioambientales. Nuestro experimento muestra, en primer lugar, que los individuos reaccionan tanto a la informaci & oacute;n sobre el cumplimiento como a la informaci & oacute;n sobre el incumplimiento, mientras que los cambios son m & aacute;s notables en el caso de la informaci & oacute;n negativa sobre el incumplimiento. En segundo lugar, concluimos que la informaci & oacute;n sobre el pa & iacute;s que est & aacute; sujeto a escrutinio internacional (lo que llamamos costes de exposici & oacute;n) en caso de incumplimiento es m & aacute;s importante que la informaci & oacute;n sobre los costes materiales (frente a represalias). Por & uacute;ltimo, destacamos algunas caracter & iacute;sticas espec & iacute;ficas a nivel individual que se desv & iacute;an de los patrones observados, incluyendo las actitudes relacionadas con el r & eacute;gimen, las opiniones generales sobre la globalizaci & oacute;n y los factores relativos a la ubicaci & oacute;n. Des ann & eacute;es durant, les chercheurs en relations internationales ont trait & eacute; des questions li & eacute;es & agrave; la complexit & eacute; des r & eacute;gimes et ses effets. Cependant, nous comprenons encore mal la r & eacute;action des personnes aux conflits avec des obligations du droit international lors de l'& eacute;valuation de politiques nationales. Dans cet article, nous & eacute;tudions la mesure dans laquelle les citoyens se pr & eacute;occupent de la conformit & eacute; et de la non-conformit & eacute; au droit international quand leur gouvernement con & ccedil;oit des lois nationales pour mettre en oe uvre des obligations internationales. Nous nous int & eacute;ressons plus particuli & egrave;rement au fondement de la r & eacute;action des citoyens aux conflits avec des obligations internationales : par souci d'exposition sur le plan international pour violation du droit international ou pour des pr & eacute;occupations relatives aux co & ucirc;ts mat & eacute;riels tangibles ? Notre analyse empirique se fonde sur une exp & eacute;rience int & eacute;gr & eacute;e dans un sondage sur les attitudes des citoyens suisses & agrave; l'& eacute;gard de probl & eacute;matiques environnementales. L'exp & eacute;rience montre d'abord que les personnes r & eacute;agissent tant aux informations relatives & agrave; la conformit & eacute; qu'& agrave; celles portant sur la non-conformit & eacute;, tandis que les changements sont plus notables dans le cas d'informations n & eacute;gatives concernant la non-conformit & eacute;. Ensuite, nous remarquons que les informations relatives & agrave; un pays soumis & agrave; une d & eacute;cision internationale (les << co & ucirc;ts d'exposition >>) dans le cas d'une non-conformit & eacute; sont plus importantes que celles portant sur les co & ucirc;ts mat & eacute;riels (risque de repr & eacute;sailles). Enfin, l'on souligne certaines caract & eacute;ristiques au niveau individuel qui d & eacute;vient des sch & eacute;mas observ & eacute;s, y compris les attitudes relatives au r & eacute;gime, l'avis g & eacute;n & eacute;ral quant & agrave; la mondialisation et les facteurs locaux.

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is one of the most important mega-regional trade agreements signed to date. Yet, it failed to include an Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism in its investment chapter. What explains this omission? To unpack this, we examine international negotiations as a two-step process. In the first stage, we theorize that initial preferences towards ISDS are based on countries' orientation toward foreign direct investment (FDI), experience with ISDS, and past treaty practice. Second, we theorize that during protracted negotiations, adverse regime developments and domestic politics can have a profound impact on treaty design. To test our framework, we examine the RCEP negotiations. Our analysis shows that mounting cases as well as the eroding norm of ISDS in other treaties lowered support for ISDS as the negotiations progressed. Then, a change of government in Malaysia shifted that country's position dramatically, which tipped the balance against ISDS in the final round of negotiations. Our findings have important implications for the international investment regime. They highlight the factors that determine countries' initial preferences while also demonstrating the importance of developments during the negotiations, which can lead to the abandonment of the institutional status quo.

ABSTRACT The investment chapter in the recently signed Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) has the potential to affect investment decisions in the Asia-Pacific region and beyond. Yet, we know relatively little about the pathways through which countries determine the content of investment law in preferential trade agreements (PTAs). In this article, we use quantitative text analysis to test theoretically informed conjectures about the negotiation process. We focus on which of the signatories’ past agreements most influenced RCEP, and whether countries chose to draw more from treaty practice through their previous PTAs or bilateral investment treaties (BITs). Our analyses yield several noteworthy findings. First, we show that no single country dominated the negotiation process, instead RCEP represents an effort to reconcile overlapping agreements around a more common template. Second, contrary to the fears of some observers, we show that larger powers such as China and Japan did not overwhelmingly impact the agreement, instead portions were influenced by Association of Southeast Asian Nations agreements, the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership, and others. Finally, we show that, on average, countries drew more from PTAs than BITs, but that they switch strategically between them to reuse language that they deem important for the development of investment law.

ABSTRACT Scholars and negotiators often assert that model treaty texts published by international institutions (IIs) shape investment treaty design. This paper empirically investigates the reuse of international institutions’ treaty templates. It tracks the imprint of six international institution templates on the text of negotiated international investment agreements (IIAs) using the Electronic Database of Investment Treaties. We find that the overall impact of international institution models has been low. No international investment agreement in our dataset was copied from an international institution’s model wholesale. On average, annual similarity between model texts and negotiated investment treaties is lower than 40% and significantly lower than the influence of international institutions’ models in the structurally similar international tax treaty regime. However, we do find evidence of an impact of international institutions' language on specific salient clauses. For example, the text of key investment protection clauses in the 1967 Draft Convention of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development was reproduced in hundreds of international investment agreements and novel clauses on investor responsibility first introduced in the 2006 International Institute for Sustainable Development model have subsequently been copied verbatim into negotiated international investment agreements. Our work concludes by discussing explanations for the comparatively low imprint of international institutions, notes other pathways for these institutions to influence treaty design, and sketches out an agenda for future research.

Digital trade has become an important driver of global commerce and accounts for an increasing share of many countries' economies. While progress in digital trade-related discussions at the World Trade Organization has been limited until fairly recently, the topic has gradually been gaining importance in preferential trade agreements (PTAs) since the early 2000s. As we also observe that digital trade governance has become increasingly politicized, we know little about these provisions' origins and diffusion in PTAs. This research note discusses novel data and analyzes 91 digital trade-related provisions and 347 trade agreements signed between 2000 and 2019. In this note, we focus primarily on the initiator conditions and how these might lead to differences in diffusion patterns. We find that almost half of digital trade-related provisions were initially introduced by PTAs in which the United States was a signatory. Using negative binomial regressions, we find no evidence, however, that these provisions diffuse relatively more often than provisions first introduced by other countries. Our analysis shows that the diffusion of digital trade-related provisions is influenced by original trade interests and the existence of domestic digital policies at the initiator stage. Interestingly, we find that the initial degree of legalization of the provisions themselves matters for a more substantial diffusion, which contradicts the established view that soft law provisions are the preferred approach for new trade topics. This research note highlights the need to factor in the extent to which new international law obligations are adopted through the treaty networks as a result of initiator conditions addressing a certain blind spot in the diffusion literature. By focusing on the initiating states, we also speak to the literature on how international agreements serve to diffuse leading states' preferred policy options.

This chapter focuses on how recent developments in the trading system can be assessed in light of concepts of (democratic) legitimacy. It addresses input and output legitimacy concerns and discusses how the politics in the World Trade Organization and in the growing network of preferential trade agreements have evolved in recent years. Overall, the chapter argues that the perceived level of legitimacy of venues for international trade regulation has decreased in recent years, starting with the trade policy turn during the Trump Administration. The chapter also provides a cautionary note that increasing US-China rivalry and the rise of populism will further negatively impact on the overall perceived legitimacy of international trade institutions.

For a long time, the World Trade Organization (WTO) has been seen as the privileged multilateral regime to regulate trade. However, given its slow progress in negotiating new trade rules, countries have increasingly shifted their focus to preferential trade agreements (PTAs) since the early 2000s. Focusing on a timely and increasingly important topic (digital trade), we explore how countries' interactions in the WTO impact on their approaches in designing rules in PTAs. Using newly collected data on digital trade-related provisions in almost 350 PTAs signed since 2000, we find that countries' participation in digital trade-related initiatives at the WTO spill over to the design of their PTAs. More precisely, we show that countries which actively participate in the discussions of the WTO Work Programme on Electronic Commerce are more likely to negotiate ambitious commitments on digital trade in their PTAs. Furthermore, our analysis indicates that countries which participate in the WTO-based plurilateral Information Technology Agreement (ITA) are more likely to commit to deeper cooperation in the area of digital trade. More broadly, this article contributes to our understanding of the dynamics of regime complexity and how interaction in the multilateral system spills over to regional and bilateral trade regimes.

The post-Cold War era has seen an unprecedented move towards more legalization in international cooperation and a growth of third-party dispute settlement systems. WTO panels, the Appellate Body and investor-state dispute settlement cases have received increasing attention beyond the core trade and investment constituencies within governments. Scrutiny by business, civil society, academia, and trade and investment experts has been on the rise. This book asks whether we observe a transformation or a demise of existing institutions and mechanisms to adjudicate disputes over trade or investment. It makes a contribution to the question in which direction international economic dispute settlement is heading in times of change, uncertainty and increasing economic nationalism. In order to do so, it brings together chapters written by leading researchers and experts in law and political science to address the challenges of settling disputes in the global economy and to sketch possible scenarios ahead of us.

Abstract What explains the design of international institutions? Existing research has largely neglected how experience in cooperation in one set of international institutions impacts on design choices made by states in other globally-oriented institutions. We contribute to this evolving debate by analyzing spillovers in experience in international trade. We argue that countries' track record of interaction in multilateral trade disputes affects the design of their preferential trade agreements (PTAs). If a country participates in a complaint against a prospective PTA partner at the World Trade Organization (WTO), the challenge in Geneva alerts the defendant's import-competing industries with respect to potential challenges under the planned PTA. As a result, these industries exert pressure on their government to preserve leeway under the future treaty, leading to increased flexibility and a lower level of enforcement in the PTA. We find support for our hypotheses in an empirical analysis of 347 PTAs concluded post 1990.

The chapter explores data-related provisions in preferential trade agreements and analyzes trends and patterns in their evolution based on a comprehensive dataset. The chapter explores in particular indicators aggregated from the data that attempt to capture various salient dimensions of the data flow–related provisions in PTAs and uses those indicators to enquire into the trends over time, exploring the rule-makers' roles through both text-as-data analyses and manual coding of data-related design features. The chapter concludes by outlining possible next research avenues in the area of digital trade governance.

Abstract This article introduces a novel database on investment treaties called the Electronic Database of Investment Treaties (EDIT). We describe the genesis of the database and what makes EDIT the most comprehensive and systematic database to date. What stands out besides the coverage is that treaties are all provided in one single language (English) and in one single format that is machine-readable. In the second part of the article, we provide selected illustrations on how the data can be used to address research questions in international law, international political economy, and international relations by applying text-as-data methods and by extracting and visualizing data based on EDIT.

Most accounts of international negotiations suggest that global agreements are individually crafted and distinct, while some emerging scholarship suggests a heavy reliance on models and templates. In this research, we present a comprehensive test of whether new international treaties are heavily copied and pasted from past ones. We specify several reasons to expect widespread copying and pasting, and argue that both the most and least powerful countries should be most likely to do so. Using text analysis to examine several hundred preferential trade agreements (PTAs), we reveal that most PTAs copy a sizable majority of their content word for word from an earlier agreement. At least one hundred PTAs take 80 percent or more of their contents directly from a single, existing treaty—with many copying and pasting 95 percent or more. These numbers climb even higher when we compare important substantive chapters of trade agreements, many of which are copied and pasted verbatim. Such copying and pasting is most prevalent among low-capacity governments that lean heavily on existing templates, and powerful states that desire to spread their preferred rules globally. This widespread replication of existing treaty language reshapes how we think about international cooperation, and it has important implications for literatures on institutional design, policy diffusion, state power, and legal fragmentation.

This chapter sketches future scenarios of TRIPS implementation in developing countries by looking at past experience, current trends and by comparing historical and cross-country patterns. The chapter focuses on the three largest emerging economies Brazil, India and China (BICs), since they are those with the highest potential to shape the intellectual property regime. Through international contestation, domestic implementation and even novel rule-making, they have been able to ensure that some flexibilities in the implementation of TRIPS remain. Their domestic policies and coalition-building efforts have been followed by many other developing countries. Shifts in the political economies of Brazil and India towards 2025 due to increased patenting and rise in innovation could mean that they will calibrate or even drop their opposition to TRIPS. China will likely be an innovation giant by then and eager to join the club of proponents of strong and enforceable intellectual property (IP) rights. In the area of access and benefit sharing of genetic resources and related traditional knowledge (ABS), the BICs are likely to remain opposed to stringent IP, and could even become active rule-makers. A degree of homologation between the TRIPS and the Nagoya Protocol, which has codified ABS, appears likely. In general, access to health, as one of the typically contentious domains of IP law and policy, is likely to remain a hotly debated issue. Challenges to pharmaceutical patents by developing countries that use TRIPS flexibilities will continue, as will the efforts by industrialized countries to constrain the available flexibilities through bilateral and regional trade agreements. Overall, the domain of IP law and policy is likely to remain complex and dynamic, with different interests colliding. This may reduce the chances of new multilateral law-making for instance in the area of substantive patent law, while increasing the chances of new rule-making through domestic practice by BICs in the shadow of the TRIPS.