The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
International Institutions and the Volatility of International Trade
Abstract
During the past half-century, states have established a large number of international trade institutions, both multilateral and regional in scope. The existing literature on this topic emphasizes that these agreements are chiefly designed to liberalize and increase the flow of overseas commerce. Yet such institutions have another function that has been largely ignored by researchers, namely, reducing volatility in trade policy and trade flows. Exposure to global markets increases the vulnerability of a country's output to terms of trade shocks. Governments seek to insulate their economies from such instability through membership in international trade institutions, particularly the World Trade Organization (WTO) and preferential trading arrangements (PTAs). We hypothesize that these institutions reduce the volatility of overseas commerce. We further hypothesize that, because market actors prefer price stability, trade institutions increase the volume of foreign commerce by reducing trade variability. This article conducts the first large-scale, multivariate statistical tests of these two hypotheses, using annual data on exports for all pairs of countries from 1951 through 2001. The tests provide strong support for our arguments. PTAs and the WTO regime significantly reduce export volatility. In so doing, these institutions also increase export levels.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Armed Conflict 1946-2001: A New Dataset
GLEDITSCH, N. P., WALLENSTEEN, P., ERIKSSON, M., SOLLENBERG, M., & STRAND, H. (2002) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343302039005007 · Cited by 3,846 · cited 1×
“1 (Gleditsch et al. 2002). 25 These various measures of volatility are not highly correlated. In particular, the measure normalized by the partner’s GDP exhibits virtually zero correlation with all the others, while the dummy variable measuring a large drop in exports, the absolute change in log exports, and the fitte…”
InfluentialRegional trading blocs in the world economic system
(1998) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-4604 · Cited by 1,045
Cited by
The Design of International Trade Agreements: Introducing a New Dataset
Elsig, M., Dür, A., & Baccini, L. (2014) · doi:10.7892/boris.49460 · Cited by 745
The Empirical Turn in International Legal Scholarship
Shaffer, G., & Ginsburg, T. (2012) · American Journal of International Law · doi:10.5305/amerjintelaw.106.1.0001 · Cited by 346
The Politics of Foreign Direct Investment in Authoritarian Regimes
Bastiaens, I. (2016) · International Interactions · doi:10.1080/03050629.2015.1065699 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Mansfield, E. D., & Reinhardt, E.
- Venue
- International Organization
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2008-10
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 621-652
- ISSN
- 0020-8183 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-5088
- OpenAlex
- W2023128952
- Cited by
- 199
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 24.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: International Institutions and the Volatility of International Trade. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0020818308080223
- The paper
- Mansfield, E. D., & Reinhardt, E. (2008). International Institutions and the Volatility of International Trade. International Organization. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020818308080223
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.