2013/04/01 by Yoram Z. Haftel, Alexander Thompson · 130 citations
Business, Management and Accounting · Social Sciences · #Bilateral investment treaty #Business #Context (archaeology) #Economics #Foreign direct investment #International Arbitration and Investment Law #International Law and Human Rights #International investment #International law #International trade #Investment (military) #Law #Law and economics #Political science #Politics #Ratification #Treaty #World Trade Organization Law
paper · doi:10.1017/s0020818313000052
published in International Organization 67(2), 355-387 (University of Cambridge)
openalex publication_date 2013/04/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/25
Abstract Some treaties are signed and then ratified quickly while others languish in legal limbo, unratified by one or more parties. What explains this variation in the time between signature and ratification? The international relations literature has not taken the ratification stage seriously enough, despite its obvious importance from a legal and a political perspective. We offer a systematic study of this question in the context of bilateral investment treaties. We develop and test a set of theoretical propositions related to domestic-level constraints on the executive, the varying ability of governments to rationally anticipate ratification obstacles, and the bilateral relationship between treaty partners. We generally find support for these propositions but report some surprising findings as well. The article presents implications for investment agreements and treaty making more generally, and raises a number of issues for further study at the intersection of international politics and law.