This article reviews and analyzes recent research on regional integration. The review is structured along a political economy framework and proceeds in three steps. After analyzing the development of regional integration agreements (RIAs) from a historical perspective, I first discuss regional integration as a consequence of the decision-making calculus of office-motivated political leaders who find themselves under pressure from different societal groups interested in promoting or hindering regional integration. These pressures are conveyed, constrained, and calibrated by domestic institutions, which provide an important context for policy making, and in particular for the choice to enter RIAs. The analysis also highlights the importance of international pressures for regional integration. Second, I summarize the determinants and consequences of variations in regional institutional design. Third, I analyze the normative and strategic consequences of regional integration. The article concludes by outlining opportunities for future research, with emphasis on the domestic politics of regional integration, the causes and consequences of institutional design beyond trade agreements, and the consequences of the increasing number of often overlapping regional agreements.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Acharya A, Johnston AI. 2007. Crafting Cooperation: Regional International Institutions in Comparative Perspective Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  2. Allee T, Elsig M. 2015. Dispute settlement provisions in PTAs: new data and new concepts. See Dür & Elsig 2015 319–54
  3. Alter KJ. 2012. The global spread of European style international courts. West Eur. Polit. 35:1135–54 [Google Scholar]
  4. Alter KJ, Meunier S. 2009. The politics of international regime complexity. Perspect. Polit. 7:113–24 [Google Scholar]
  5. Anderson JJ. 1999. Regional Integration and Democracy. Expanding on the European Experience. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield
  6. Baccini L, Dür A. 2015. Investment discrimination and the proliferation of preferential trade agreements. J. Confl. Resolut. 59:4617–44 [Google Scholar]
  7. Baccini L, Dür A, Elsig M. 2015a. The politics of trade agreement design: revisiting the depth-flexibility nexus. Int. Stud. Q. 59:4765–75 [Google Scholar]
  8. Baccini L, Dür A, Haftel YZ. 2015b. Imitation and innovation in international governance: the diffusion of trade agreement design. See Dür & Elsig 2015 167–94
  9. Baccini L, Pinto P, Weymouth S. 2016. The distributional consequences of preferential trade liberalization: firm-level evidence. Int. Organ. In press
  10. Baccini L, Urpelainen J. 2012. Strategic side payments, preferential trade agreements, economic reform, and foreign aid. J. Polit. 74:4932–49 [Google Scholar]
  11. Baier SL, Bergstrand JH. 2007. Do free trade agreements actually increase members’ international trade?. J. Int. Econ. 71:172–95 [Google Scholar]
  12. Baldwin RE. 1995. A domino theory of regionalism. Expanding Membership of the European Union New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  13. Barnett M, Solingen E. 2007. Designed to fail or failure to design? The origins and legacy of the Arab states.. See Acharya & Johnston 2007 180–220
  14. Bechtel MM, Schneider G. 2010. Eliciting substance from ‘hot air’: financial market responses to EU summit decisions on European defense. Int. Organ. 64:2199–223 [Google Scholar]
  15. Bhagwati J. 1993. Regionalism and multilateralism: an overview. New Dimensions in Regional Integration J de Melo, A Panagariya 22–51 New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  16. Bhagwati JN. 1991. The World Trading System at Risk Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  17. Blake DJ, Payton AL. 2015. Balancing design objectives: analyzing new data on voting rules in intergovernmental organizations. Rev. Int. Organ. 10:377–402 [Google Scholar]
  18. Börzel T. 2012. Comparative regionalism: European integration and beyond. Handbook on International Relations W Carlsnaes, T Risse, BA Simmons 503–30 London: Sage [Google Scholar]
  19. Börzel T, Hofmann T, Panke D, Sprungk C. 2010. Obstinate and inefficient: why member states do not comply with European law. Comp. Polit. Stud. 43:111163–390 [Google Scholar]
  20. Börzel T, Risse T. 2016. Oxford Handbook of Comparative Regionalism Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  21. Busch ML. 2007. Overlapping institutions, forum shopping, and dispute settlement in international trade. Int. Organ. 61:4735–61 [Google Scholar]
  22. Büthe T, Milner HV. 2008. The politics of foreign direct investment into developing countries: increasing FDI through international trade agreements?. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 52:4741–62 [Google Scholar]
  23. Buzan B, Wæver O. 2004. Regions and Powers. The Structure of International Security Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  24. Cameron MA, Tomlin BW. 2002. The Making of NAFTA: How the Deal Was Done Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  25. Carrubba CJ. 2001. The electoral connection in European Union politics. J. Polit. 63:1141–58 [Google Scholar]
  26. Casella A, Frey B. 1992. Federalism and clubs: towards an economic theory of overlapping political jurisdictions. Eur. Econ. Rev. 36:2–3639–49 [Google Scholar]
  27. Checkel JT. 2005. International institutions and socialization in Europe: introduction and framework. Int. Organ. 59:4801–26 [Google Scholar]
  28. Collier P. 1979. The welfare effects of a customs union: an anatomy. Econ. J. 83:84–87 [Google Scholar]
  29. Copelovitch MS, Pevehouse JC. 2013. Ties that bind? Preferential trade agreements and exchange rate policy choice. Int. Stud. Q. 57:2385–99 [Google Scholar]
  30. Crombez C. 2003. The democratic deficit in the European Union: Much ado about nothing?. Eur. Union Polit. 4:1101–20 [Google Scholar]
  31. Dahl R. 1999. Can international organizations be democratic? A skeptic's view. Democracy's Edges I Shapiro, C Hacker-Cordon 19–36 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  32. Donno D. 2013. Defending Democratic Norms. International Actors and the Politics of Electoral Misconduct. New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  33. Downs GW, Rocke DM, Barsoom PN. 1996. Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation?. Int. Organ. 50:3379–406 [Google Scholar]
  34. Downs GW, Rocke DM, Barsoom PN. 1998. Managing the evolution of multilateralism. Int. Organ. 52:2397–419 [Google Scholar]
  35. Dri CF. 2009. Limits of the institutional mimesis of the European Union: the case of the Mercosur parliament. Latin Am. Policy 1:152–74 [Google Scholar]
  36. Dür A, Baccini L, Elsig M. 2014. The design of international trade agreements: introducing a new dataset. Rev. Int. Organ. 9:3353–75 [Google Scholar]
  37. Dür A, Elsig M. 2015. Trade Cooperation. The Purpose, Design and Effects of Preferential Trade Agreements Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  38. Elsig M, Dür A, Baccini L. 2014. The design of international trade agreements: introducing a new dataset. Rev. Int. Organ. 9:3353–75 [Google Scholar]
  39. English C. 2008. Gallup opinion briefing: North American Free Trade Agreement. http://www.gallup.com/poll/113200/opinion-briefing-north-american-free-trade-agreement.aspx
  40. Estevadeordal A, Suominen K, Teh R. 2009. Regional Rules in the Global Trading System Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  41. Frieden JA. 2002. Real sources of European currency policy: sectoral interests and European monetary integration. Int. Organ. 56:4831–60 [Google Scholar]
  42. Gabel MJ, Scheve K. 2007. Mixed messages: party dissent and mass opinion on European integration. Eur. Union Polit. 8:137–59 [Google Scholar]
  43. Gamble A, Payne A. 1996. Regionalism and World Order London: Macmillan
  44. Gehlbach S, Sonin K, Svolik MW. 2016. Formal models of nondemocratic politics. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 19:565–84 [Google Scholar]
  45. Gilligan MJ. 1997. Lobbying as a private good with intra-industry trade. Int. Stud. Q. 41:3455–74 [Google Scholar]
  46. Goertz G, Powers K. 2014. Regional governance: the evolution of a new institutional form WZB Disc. Pap. No. SP IV 2014-106, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin fuer Sozialforschung
  47. Golub J. 1999. In the shadow of the vote? Decision making in the European community. Int. Organ. 53:4733–64 [Google Scholar]
  48. Golub J. 2007. Survival analysis and European Union decision-making. Eur. Union Polit. 8:2155–79 [Google Scholar]
  49. Gowa J, Mansfield ED. 1993. Power politics and international trade. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 87:2408–20 [Google Scholar]
  50. Gray J. 2009. International organization as a seal of approval: European Union accession and investor risk. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 53:4931–49 [Google Scholar]
  51. Gray J. 2013. The Company States Keep. International Economic Organization and Sovereign Risk in Emerging Markets. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  52. Gray J. 2014. Domestic capacity and the implementation gap in regional trade agreements. Comp. Polit. Stud. 47:11–30 [Google Scholar]
  53. Gray J. 2016. Life, death, or zombies? The vitality of international economic organizations Work. pap., Dep. Polit. Sci., Univ. Penn., Philadelphia, PA
  54. Gray J, Slapin JB. 2012. How effective are preferential trade agreements? Ask the experts. Rev. Int. Organ. 7:3309–33 [Google Scholar]
  55. Greenhill B. 2015. Transmitting Rights: International Organizations and the Diffusion of Human Rights Practices Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  56. Grossman G, Helpman E. 1995. The politics of free trade agreements. Am. Econ. Rev. 85:667–90 [Google Scholar]
  57. Haas E. 1958. The Uniting of Europe Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
  58. Haas E. 1961. International integration: the European and the universal process. Int. Organ. 15:3366–92 [Google Scholar]
  59. Hafner-Burton E. 2005. Trading human rights: how preferential trade agreements influence government repression. Int. Organ. 59:3593–629 [Google Scholar]
  60. Hafner-Burton E, Mansfield ED, Pevehouse JC. 2013. Sovereignty costs, human rights institutions, and democratization. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 45:11–27 [Google Scholar]
  61. Hafner-Burton EM, Montgomery AH. 2008. Power or plenty: How do international trade institutions affect economic sanctions?. J. Confl. Resolut. 52:2213–42 [Google Scholar]
  62. Hafner-Burton EM, Schneider CJ. 2016. The dark side of cooperation: how international organizations spread national corruption ILAR Work. Pap. No. 28, Dep. Polit. Sci. and School Glob. Policy Strategy, Univ. Calif San Diego, La Jolla: CA
  63. Haftel YZ. 2007. Designing for peace: regional integration arrangements, institutional variation, and militarized interstate disputes. Int. Organ. 61:1217–37 [Google Scholar]
  64. Haftel YZ. 2012. Regional Economic Institutions and Conflict Mitigation: Design, Implementation and the Promise of Peace Ann Arbor: Univ. Mich. Press
  65. Haftel YZ. 2013. Commerce and institutions: trade, scope, and the design of regional economic organizations. Rev. Int. Organ. 8:389–414 [Google Scholar]
  66. Haftel YZ, Thompson A. 2006. The independence of international organizations. Concept and applications. J. Confl. Resolut. 50:2253–75 [Google Scholar]
  67. Haftel YZ, Thompson A. 2013. Delayed ratification: the domestic fate of bilateral investment treaties. Int. Organ. 67:2355–87 [Google Scholar]
  68. Haggard S. 1997. Regionalism in Asia and the Americas. The Political Economy of Regionalism ED Mansfield, HV Milner 20–49 New York: Columbia Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  69. Hainmueller J, Hiscox MJ. 2006. Learning to love globalization: education and individual attitudes towards international trade. Int. Organ. 60:2469–98 [Google Scholar]
  70. Hemmer C, Katzenstein PJ. 2002. Why is there no NATO in Asia? Collective identity, regionalism, and the origins of multilateralism. Int. Organ. 56:3575–607 [Google Scholar]
  71. Herbst J. 2007. Crafting regional cooperation in Africa. See Acharya & Johnston 2007, pp. 129–44
  72. Hertz R, Leuffen D. 2011. Too big to run? Analyzing the impact of enlargement on the speed of EU decision-making. Eur. Union Polit. 12:2193–215 [Google Scholar]
  73. Hix S, Follesdal A. 2006. Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU: a response to Majone and Moravcsik. J. Common Market Stud. 44:3533–62 [Google Scholar]
  74. Hobolt SB, de Vries CE. 2016. Public support for European integration. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 19:413–32 [Google Scholar]
  75. Hooghe L, Marks G. 2015. Delegation and pooling in international organizations. Rev. Int. Organ. 10:305–28 [Google Scholar]
  76. Hug S. 2003. Endogenous preferences and delegation in the European Union. Comp. Polit. Stud. 36:141–74 [Google Scholar]
  77. Hug S, König T. 2002. In view of ratification: governmental preferences and domestic constraints at the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference. Int. Organ. 56:2447–76 [Google Scholar]
  78. Hummel F, Lohaus M. 2012. MERCOSUR: integration through presidents and paymasters. Roads to Regionalism. Genesis, Design, and Effects of Regional Organizations T Börzel, L Goltermann, M Lohaus, K Striebinger 59–80 Surrey, UK: Ashgate [Google Scholar]
  79. Hurrell A. 2007. On Global Order: Power, Values, and the Constitution of International Society Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  80. Hwee YL. 2010. From AFTA to ASEAN economic community—Is ASEAN moving towards EU-style economic integration?. Comparative Regional Integration F Laursen 215–26 Abingdon, UK: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  81. Inglehart R. 1970. Public opinion and regional integration. Int. Organ. 24:4764–95 [Google Scholar]
  82. Jetschke A, Murray P. 2012. Diffusing regional integration: the EU and Southeast Asia. West Eur. Polit. 35:1174–91 [Google Scholar]
  83. Kahler M. 2000. Legalization as strategy: the Asia-Pacific case. Int. Organ. 54:3549–71 [Google Scholar]
  84. Katzenstein PJ. 2005. A World of Regions: Asia and Europe in the American Imperium Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
  85. Keleman RD, Menon A, Slapin JB. 2014. Wider and deeper? Enlargement and integration in the European Union. J. Eur. Public Policy 21:5647–63 [Google Scholar]
  86. Kirschner V, Stapel S. 2012. Does regime type matter? Regional integration from the nation states’ perspectives in ECOWAS. Roads to Regionalism. Genesis, Design, and Effects of Regional Organizations T Börzel, L Goltermann, M Lohaus, K Striebinger 141–58 Surrey, UK: Ashgate [Google Scholar]
  87. König T. 2007. Divergence or convergence? From ever-growing to ever-slowing European legislative decision making. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 46:3417–44 [Google Scholar]
  88. König T, Mäder L. 2013. The strategic nature of compliance: an empirical evaluation of law implementation in the central monitoring system of the European Union. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 58:1246–63 [Google Scholar]
  89. Kono DY. 2008. Does public opinion affect trade policy?. Bus. Polit. 10:21–19 [Google Scholar]
  90. Krugman PR. 1991. Is bilateralism bad. ? In International Trade and Trade Policy E Helpman, A Razin 9–23 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Google Scholar]
  91. Kucik J. 2012. The domestic politics of institutional design: producer preferences over trade agreement rules. Econ. Polit. 24:295–118 [Google Scholar]
  92. Kucik J. 2015. Trade agreements as protection from risk. See Dür & Elsig 2015 408–32
  93. Lake D, Morgan P. 1997. Regional Orders: Building Security in a New World University Park: Penn. State Univ. Press
  94. Lawrence R. 1996. Regionalism, Multilateralism, and Deeper Integration Washington, DC: Brookings Inst.
  95. Lenz T, Bezuijen J, Hooghe L, Marks G. 2014. Patterns of international organization: task specific versus general purpose. Polit. Vierteljahresschr. 49:131–56 [Google Scholar]
  96. Leuffen D, Hertz R. 2010. If things can only get worse: anticipation of enlargement in European Union legislative politics. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 49:153–74 [Google Scholar]
  97. Lewis J. 2003. Institutional environment and everyday decision making in the European Union. Comp. Polit. Stud. 36:1–297–124 [Google Scholar]
  98. Magee CSP. 2008. New measures of trade creation and trade diversion. J. Int. Econ. 75:349–62 [Google Scholar]
  99. Malamud A. 2005. Mercosur turns 15: between rising rhetoric and declining achievement. Camb. Rev. Int. Aff. 18:3421–36 [Google Scholar]
  100. Malamud A. 2008. The internal agenda of Mercosur. Independence, leadership and institutionalization. Los Nuevos Enfoques de la Integracion: Mas Alla del Regionalismo G Jaramillo 115–35 Quito: FLACSO [Google Scholar]
  101. Manger MS. 2009. Investing in Protection: The Politics of Preferential Trade Agreements Between North and South Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  102. Manger M. 2015. PTA design, tariffs and intra-industry trade. See Dür & Elsig 2015 195–217
  103. Mansfield ED. 1998. The proliferation of preferential trade agreements. J. Confl. Resolut. 42:523–43 [Google Scholar]
  104. Mansfield ED, Milner HV. 1999. The new wave of regionalism. Int. Organ. 53:3589–627 [Google Scholar]
  105. Mansfield ED, Milner HV, Rosendorff P. 2002. Why democracies cooperate more: electoral control and international trade agreements. Int. Organ. 56:477–513 [Google Scholar]
  106. Mansfield ED, Pevehouse JC. 2000. Trade blocs, trade flows, and international conflict. Int. Organ. 54:4775–808 [Google Scholar]
  107. Mansfield ED, Pevehouse JC. 2013. The expansion of preferential trading arrangements. Int. Stud. Q. 57:3592–604 [Google Scholar]
  108. Mansfield ED, Reinhardt E. 2003. Multilateral determinants of regionalism: the effects of GATT/WTO on the formation of preferential trading arrangements. Int. Organ. 57:3829–62 [Google Scholar]
  109. Mattli W. 1999. The Logic of Regional Integration. Europe and Beyond. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  110. Mattli W, Plümper T. 2002. The demand-side politics of EU enlargement: democracy and the application for EU membership. J. Eur. Public Policy 9:4550–74 [Google Scholar]
  111. Mattli W, Plümper T. 2004. The internal value of external options: how the EU shapes the scope of regulatory reforms in transition countries. Eur. Union Polit. 5:3307–30 [Google Scholar]
  112. McKibben H, Western S. 2014. Levels of linkage: across-agreement v. within-agreement explanations of consensus formation among states. Int. Stud. Q. 58:144–54 [Google Scholar]
  113. Milner HV. 1995. Regional economic co-operation, global markets and domestic politics. A comparison of NAFTA and the Maastricht Treaty. J. Eur. Public Policy 2:3337–60 [Google Scholar]
  114. Milner HV. 1997. Interests, Institutions, and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  115. Milner HV, Kubota K. 2005. Why the move to free trade? Democracy and trade policy in the developing countries. Int. Organ. 59:1107–43 [Google Scholar]
  116. Milner HV, Mansfield ED. 2012. Votes, Vetoes and International Trade Agreements: The Domestic and International Politics of Preferential Trade Agreements Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  117. Moravcsik A. 1991. Negotiating the Single European Act: national interests and conventional statecraft in the European Community. Int. Organ. 45:119–57 [Google Scholar]
  118. Moravcsik A. 1998. The Choice for Europe: Social Purposes and State Power from Messina to Maastricht Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
  119. Moravcsik A. 2002. In defense of the ‘democratic deficit’: reassessing legitimacy in the European Union. J. Common Market Stud. 40:4603–24 [Google Scholar]
  120. Mundell R. 1963. A theory of optimal currency areas. Am. Econ. Rev.657–65
  121. Murray P. 2010. Comparative regional integration in the EU and East Asia: moving beyond integration snobbery. Int. Polit. 47:308–23 [Google Scholar]
  122. Nye JS. 1987. Peace in Parts: Integration and Conflict in Regional Organization Lanham, MD: Univ. Press Am.
  123. Okolo JE. 1985. Integrative and cooperative regionalism: the Economic Community of West African States. Int. Organ. 39:1121–53 [Google Scholar]
  124. Pelc K. 2009. Seeking escape: the use of escape clauses in international trade agreements. Int. Stud. Q. 53:2349–68 [Google Scholar]
  125. Pevehouse JC. 2002. With a little help from my friends? Regional organizations and the consolidation of democracy. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 46:3611–26 [Google Scholar]
  126. Pevehouse JC. 2005. Democracy from Above: Regional Organizations and Democratization New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  127. Pevehouse JC, Nordstrom T, Warnke K. 2004. The COW-2 International Organizations Dataset Version 2.0. Confl. Manag. Peace Sci. 21:101–19 [Google Scholar]
  128. Plümper T, Schneider CJ. 2007. Discriminatory EU membership and the redistribution of enlargement gains. J. Confl. Resolut. 51:4568–87 [Google Scholar]
  129. Plümper T, Schneider CJ, Troeger VE. 2006. The politics of EU Eastern enlargement: evidence from a Heckman selection model. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 36:117–38 [Google Scholar]
  130. Pollack MA. 1997. Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European Community. Int. Organ. 51:199–134 [Google Scholar]
  131. Reuters 2016. Survey shows plunging public support for TTIP in U.S. and Germany. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-usa-trade-idUSKCN0XI0AT
  132. Rickard SJ, Kono DY. 2014. Think globally, buy locally: international agreements and government procurement. Rev. Int. Organ. 9:333–52 [Google Scholar]
  133. Rosendorff PB, Milner HV. 2001. The optimal design of international trade institutions: uncertainty and escape. Int. Organ. 54:4829–57 [Google Scholar]
  134. Sbragia A. 2008. Comparative regionalism: What might it be?. J. Common Market Stud. 46:29–49 [Google Scholar]
  135. Scheve KF, Slaughter MJ. 2001. What determines individual trade-policy preferences?. J. Int. Econ. 54:2267–92 [Google Scholar]
  136. Schimmelfennig F, Leuffen D, Rittberger B. 2013. Differentiated Integration. Explaining Variation in the European Union Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan
  137. Schimmelfennig F, Sedelmeier U. 2002. Theorizing EU enlargement: research focus, hypotheses, and the state of research. J. Eur. Public Policy 9:4500–28 [Google Scholar]
  138. Schmidt V. 2006. Democracy in Europe: The EU and National Polities Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  139. Schneider CJ. 2009. Conflict, Negotiations, and EU Enlargement Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  140. Schneider CJ. 2011. Weak states and institutionalized bargaining power in international organizations. Int. Stud. Q. 55:21–25 [Google Scholar]
  141. Schneider CJ. 2013. Globalizing electoral politics: political competence and distributional bargaining in the European Union. World Polit. 65:3452–90 [Google Scholar]
  142. Schneider CJ. 2014. Domestic politics and the widening-deepening trade-off in the European Union. J. Eur. Public Policy 21:5699–712 [Google Scholar]
  143. Schneider CJ, Slantchev BL. 2013. Abiding by the vote: between-groups conflict in international collective action. Int. Organ. 67:4759–96 [Google Scholar]
  144. Schneider CJ, Tobin J. 2013. Interest coalitions and multilateral aid allocation in the European Union. Int. Stud. Q. 57:1103–14 [Google Scholar]
  145. Schneider CJ, Tobin J. 2016. Portfolio similarity and international development aid. Int. Stud. Q. 60647–64
  146. Schneider CJ, Urpelainen J. 2012. Accession rules for international institutions: a legitimacy-efficacy trade off?. J. Confl. Resolut. 56:2290–312 [Google Scholar]
  147. Schneider CJ, Urpelainen J. 2014. Partisan heterogeneity and international cooperation: the case of the European Development Fund. J. Confl. Resolut. 58:120–42 [Google Scholar]
  148. Schulz H, König T. 2000. Institutional reform and decision-making efficiency in the European Union. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 44:4653–66 [Google Scholar]
  149. Schulz M, Söderbaum F, Öjendal J. 2001. Regionalization in a Globalizing World. A Comparative Perspective on Forms, Actors and Processes. London and New York: ZED Books
  150. Slapin JB, Gray J. 2014. Depth, ambition and width in regional economic organizations. J. Eur. Public Policy 21:5730–45 [Google Scholar]
  151. Smith JM. 2000. The politics of dispute settlement design: explaining legalism in regional trade pacts. Int. Organ. 54:1137–80 [Google Scholar]
  152. Söderbaum F. 2004. The Political Economy of Regionalism. The Case of Southern Africa Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan
  153. Stasavage D. 2004. Open-door or closed-door? Transparency in domestic and international bargaining. Int. Organ. 58:3667–703 [Google Scholar]
  154. Tillman ER. 2004. The European Union at the ballot box? European integration and voting behavior in the new member states. Comp. Polit. Stud. 37:5590–610 [Google Scholar]
  155. Tobin JL, Busch ML. 2010. A BIT is better than a lot. Bilateral investment treaties and preferential trade agreements. World Polit. 62:11–42 [Google Scholar]
  156. Tomz M, Goldstein JL, Rivers D. 2007. Do we really know that the WTO increases trade?. Comment Am. Econ. Rev. 97:52005–18 [Google Scholar]
  157. Tsebelis G. 2002. Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  158. Viner J. 1950. The Customs Union Issue New York: Carnegie Endow. Int. Peace

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error