The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The institutional design of joint bodies in trade agreements: monitoring commitments, facilitating negotiations, avoiding ratification
Open accessAbstract
Nearly all preferential trade agreements (PTAs) establish ‘joint bodies’ (JBs), such as a Free Trade Commission or Joint Committee, to facilitate effective implementation. While all joint bodies foresee interactions between governments during implementation, they vary considerably in their degree of institutionalization: Some envisage frequent meetings at more senior levels once the agreement enters into force, and only some are empowered to take binding decisions. What accounts for this variation in institutionalization across joint bodies? We argue that greater institutionalization supports governments by enabling them to better monitor the faithful implementation of commitments, facilitate negotiations over outstanding issues, and reduce the need for renewed domestic ratification during implementation. We find robust support for this argument through a quantitative analysis of original data and a qualitative case study of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA). Our study contributes to the literature on the design of PTAs and international institutions.
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
Coase, R. H. (1937) · Economica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0335.1937.tb00002.x · Cited by 23,972
The Rational Design of International Institutions
Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., & Snidal, D. (2001) · International Organization · doi:10.1162/002081801317193592 · Cited by 2,344
(1984) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781400820269 · Cited by 1,304
Bargaining, Enforcement, and International Cooperation
Fearon, J. D. (1998) · International Organization · doi:10.1162/002081898753162820 · Cited by 1,156
A Complete Data Set of Political Regimes, 1800–2007
Boix, C., Miller, M., & Rosato, S. (2013) · Comparative Political Studies · doi:10.1177/0010414012463905 · Cited by 1,072
Chayes, A. J., & Chayes, A. H. (1993) · International Organization · doi:10.1017/s0020818300027910 · Cited by 1,019
The institutional environment for infrastructure investment
Henisz, W. J. (2002) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/11.2.355 · Cited by 878
A Crash Course in Good and Bad Controls
Cinelli, C., Forney, A., & Pearl, J. (2020) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/00491241221099552 · Cited by 789
The Design of International Trade Agreements: Introducing a New Dataset
Elsig, M., Dür, A., & Baccini, L. (2014) · doi:10.7892/boris.49460 · Cited by 753
Self-citationHanmer, M. J., & Kalkan, K. O. (2012) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2012.00602.x · Cited by 691
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Abbott, K. W. (1993). Trust but verify: The production of information in arms control treaties and other international agreements. Cornell International Law Journal, 26, 1–58.
- Australian Financial Review. (2004). Opponents to fight FTA deal. https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=news&id=urn%3acontentItem%3a55BF-2ST1-JD34-V4VR-00000-00
- Barnett, M., & Finnemore, M. (2004). Rules for the world: International organizations in global politics. Cornell University Press.
- Conte, M., Cotterlaz, P., & Mayer, T. (2021). The CEPII gravity database. CEPII.
- 10.1007/s11558-013-9179-8 · DOI
- Gerring, J. (2007). Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge University Press.
- Hart, O., & Holmström, B. (1986). The theory of contracts (Working paper no. 418). Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
- Mansfield, E. D., & Milner, H. V. (2012). Votes, vetoes, and the political economy of international trade agreements. Princeton University Press.
- Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. Free Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Metadata
- Authors
- Gastinger, M., & Dür, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Salzburg (AT)
- Corresponding author
- Gastinger, Markus
- Venue
- Review of International Political Economy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2026-04-20
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2148-2179
- ISSN
- 0969-2290 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4526
- OpenAlex
- W7155029334
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1
- FWCI
- 19.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Review of International Political Economy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Austrian Science Fund (M 3285-G)
- European Research Council (724107)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › World Trade Organization Law
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Global trade and economics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Keywords
- preferential trade agreements, institutional design, institutionalization, trade agreement implementation, trade negotiations, ratification, Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement, international institutions
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: The institutional design of joint bodies in trade agreements: monitoring commitments, facilitating negotiations, avoiding ratification. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/09692290.2026.2656366
- The paper
- Gastinger, M., & Dür, A. (2026). The institutional design of joint bodies in trade agreements: monitoring commitments, facilitating negotiations, avoiding ratification. Review of International Political Economy. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2026.2656366
