INR6507/06EEM. Leann Brown

INR6507/06EEM. Leann Brown

Fall 2013Office hours: MWF 10:30-11:30

Monday 11:45-2:45333 Anderson Hall

Matherly Hall 4352.352.2398,

GLOBAL INSTITUTIONS

While the international system is anarchic (lacks world government), more cooperation than conflict characterizes the global system. The global environment is replete with institutions of varying levels of formality, complexity, legitimacy, and effectiveness. This course begins by examining how we theorize about the global context within which states and other actors interact to address problems and provide global goods. We then turn our attention to the evolving literatures and debates around the prospects for cooperation in global institutions. Beginning with Meeting 7, we focus on the institutional arrangements associated with four specific issues: economic growth and development, regionalism, the environment, and peace and security. During the final sessions, we return to theoretical considerations of less formal institutions and the concept of “global governance.”

TEXTBOOKS

Grande, E. and Pauly, L.W., eds. 2005. COMPLEX SOVEREIGNTY. University of Toronto Press.

Bernstein, S. and Pauly, L.W., eds. 2007. GLOBAL LIBERALISM AND POLITICAL ORDER. StateUniversity of NY Press.

Drezner, D. W. 2007. ALL POLITICS IS GLOBAL. PrincetonUniversity Press.

Hasenclever, A. et. al. 1997. THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL REGIMES. CambridgeUniversity Press.

Keohane, R. O. 1989. INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND STATE POWER. Westview Press.

Cini, M. and Bourne, A. K. , eds. 2006. EUROPEAN UNION STUDIES. Palgrave.

Walt, S. M. 1987. THE ORIGINS OF ALLIANCES. CornellUniversity Press.

Barton, J.H. et. al. 2006. THE EVOLUTION OF THE TRADE REGIME. PrincetonUniversity Press.

Delmas, M.A. and O. R. Young, eds. 2009. GOVERNANCE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT. CambridgeUniversity Press.

Holton, R. J. 2008. GLOBAL NETWORKS. Palgrave.

Kjaer, A. M. 2004. GOVERNANCE. Polity.

Sabel, C. F. and J. Zeitlin, eds. EXPERIMENTALIST GOVERNANCE IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. OxfordUniversity Press.

E-book:

EVALUATION

two discussion leadership occasions40%

book critiques (10% each) and short theoretical/research papers (20% each)50%

final examination (due Tuesday12/10, 5:30 pm to )10%

DISCUSSION LEADERSHIP

Each student will lead the class discussion on TWO theoretical and/or substantive topics during the course of the semester. These presentations/discussions should address the following questions (at minimum):

• How do you define the primary concepts?
• What are the primary assumptions associated with the topic/perspective? What is the body of thought’s ontological and epistemological orientations?
• Where does it fit chronologically and theoretically into the International Relations/International Institutionssubfield?
• Who are the primary theorists and what is regarded as the seminal literature on the perspective/topic?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of this perspective?
• How important is this topic/perspective to our understanding of global institutions? What would you regard as the future relevance of this topic/perspective?
• What are some potential comprehensive exam questions associated with this topic?

To supplement your presentation, you are expected to provide a discussion outline and reading list of recent(within the last five years) publications for your colleagues’ files. (About ten items, at least half from peer-reviewed journals, will be quite adequate.) Information concerning the recent scholarly work on each topic is available via the library’s online search engines (see e.g. Academic Search Premier, JSTOR). Your presentation materials should be emailed to me for forwarding to the listserv within 24 hours of your presentation.

BOOK CRITIQUES

The textbooks listed above selected for your book critiques. They were requested at the UF bookstore, and copies are on reserve in Library West. Each book critiques should be FIVE, typewritten pages in length and consist generally of these elements:

• a concise statement of the author's thesis
• a discussion of the book’s theoretical, ontological, and epistemological underpinnings
• a discussion of the book’s research design, including itsmethodology and data sources
• a discussion of how the book fits into the existing literature; and
• an evaluation of the book.

In reference to the evaluation, you may wish to comment on the book's theoretical contribution, coherence, clarity, logic, methodology, evidential base, place in the literature, etc. You may choose to compare or contrast the work with other similar material presented in the course or in other courses you have taken. The critique is NOT simply a summary of what the author has to say, but instead is an analysis of the work. Each critique is due in class on the date under which the book is listed in the syllabus.

SHORT THEORETICAL/RESEARCH PAPERS

Each theoretical or research exploration should be TEN, typewritten pages in length. It should, in general, include the elements listed above under “Discussion Leadership.” The bibliography should contain no fewer than ten sources, half of which should be peer-reviewed journal articles. Each theoretical exploration is due in class on the date that the general topic is discussed. Students should plan to earn only one grade per week to guarantee exposure to the breadth of the IO literature.

FINAL EXAM

The final exam for the course is a “take home” essay which must be sent to my email address () by 5:30 pm on Tuesday 12/10. During the last three sessions of class, we will discuss possible exam questions deriving from our work this semester. You will receive the exam question 24 hours before it is due. Each essay should be double-spaced, with one inch margins, 12-point font, and 2,000-2,500 words in length, excluding citations. The purpose of the exam is to encourage you to acquire in-depth, firm, and comprehensive understanding of the theoretical literature, to synthesize your understandings, and to gain experience useful in the written portionof your comprehensive exams.

I. Introduction of the course (August 26)

Presentation assignments

Recommended reading:

Rittberger, V., B. Zangl, and A. Kruck. 2011. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION. Palgrave Macmillan.

Williams, Phil, Donald M. Goldstein, and Jay M. Shafritz, eds. Classic Readings and Contemporary Debates in International Relations. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2006.

Barnett, M. N. and Finnemore, M. 2004. RULES FOR THE WORLD: INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IN

GLOBAL POLITICS. CornellUniversity Press.

Martin, L. and B. Simmons. 1998. “Theories and Empirical Studies of International Institutions.”

International Organization 52: 729-758.

Kratochwil, f and E. D. Mansfield, ed. 1994. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION READER. Harper Collins.

Ruggie, J. G. , ed. 1993. MULTILATERALISM MATTERS. ColumbiaUniversity Press.

Abbott, K. and D. Snidal. 1988. “Why States Act through Formal International Organizations,”

JOURNAL OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION 42: 3-32.

Keohane, R. 1988. “International Institutions: Two Approaches,” INTERNATIONAL STUDIES QUARTERLY

32: 379-96.

Kratochwil, F. and J. G. Ruggie, 1986. “International Organization: A State of the Art ofthe Art of

the State.” International Organization 40: 753-775.

Rochester, J. M. 1986. “The Rise and Fall of International Organization as a Field of Study,”

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION 40/4: 777-813.

II. The Global Contextand International Institutions (September 9)

Anarchy

Sovereignty

Potential Critique: Grande, E. and Pauly, L.W., eds. 2005. COMPLEX SOVEREIGNTY. University of Toronto Press.

Recommended reading:

Anarchy

Parent, J.M and E. Erikson. 2009. Anarchy, hierarchy and order. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol. 22, Issue 1, pp. 129-145.

Schmidt, B. C. 1998. THE POLITICAL DISCOURSE OF ANARCHY: A DISCIPLINARY HISTORY OF

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. Albany: SUNY Press.

Lake, D. 1996. “Anarchy, Hierarchy, and the Variety of International Relations,” INTERNATIONAL

ORGANIZATION 50/1: 1-33.

Buzan, B. et. al. 1993. THE LOGIC OF ANARCHY. OxfordUniversity Press.

Wendt, A. 1992. “Anarchy is what States Make of It.” International Organization 46: 391-426.

Milner, H. 1991. “The Assumption of Anarchy in International Relations Theory: A Critique,” REVIEW

OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES, reprinted in Baldwin, David, ed. 1993. NEOREALISM AND

NEOLIBERALISM. ColumbiaUniversity Press.

Grieco. J 1988. “Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal

Institutionalism,’ INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION 42/3: 485-508.

Oye, K. 1986. COOPERATION UNDER ANARCHY. PrincetonUniversity Press.

Oye, K. 1985. “Explaining Cooperation under Anarchy: Hypotheses and Strategies,” WORLD

POLITICS 38: 1-234.

Bull, H. 1977. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London: Macmillan

Sovereignty

Cooper, S. et al. 2008. “Yielding Sovereignty to International Institutions: BringingSystem Structure Back in,” International Studies Review 10/3: 501-524.

Sinclair, A. and Byers, M. 2007. When US Scholars Speak of ‘Sovereignty’, What Do They Mean? Political Studies, Vol. 55 Issue 2, pp. 318-340.

Hawkins, D. G. et. al. 2006. Delegation and Agency in International Organizations. CambridgeUniversity Press.

Dahbour, O. 2006. “Advocating Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization,” JOURNAL OF SOCIAL

PHILOSOPHY 37/1, pp. 108-124.

Lake, David A. 2004. “The New Sovereignty in International Relations,” INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

REVIEW. 5/3.

Cohen, E. S. 2001. “Globalization and the Boundaries of the State: A Framework for Analyzing the

Changing Practice of Sovereignty,” GOVERNANCE 14/1, pp. 75-97.

Krasner, S. 1999. Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press.

Evans, P. 1997. “The Eclipse of the State? Reflections on Stateness in an Era of Globalization,”

WORLD POLITICS 51/1, 62-87.

Strange, S. 1996. THE RETREAT OF THE STATE: THE DIFFUSION OF POWER IN THE WORLD POLITICAL ECONOMY. CambridgeUniversity Press.

Barkin, S. and B. Cronin. 1994. “The State and the Nation: Changing Norms and the Rules of

Sovereignty in International Relations.” International Organization 48: 107-130.

III. The Prospects and Conditions for Cooperation (September 16)

Liberalism/Idealism

International Law

Potential critique: Bernstein, S. and Pauly, L.W., eds. 2007. GLOBAL LIBERALISM AND POLITICAL ORDER.

Recommended reading:

Liberalism

Ikenberry, G. J. 2009. “Liberal Internationalism 3.0. PERSPECTIVES ON POLITICS. 71/: 71-87.

Richardson, James. Contending Liberalisms in World Politics: Ideology and Power. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner,

2001.

Russett, B. and J. ONeal. 2001. TRIANGULATING PEACE. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

Ashworth, L. M. 1999. CREATING INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: ANGELL, MITRANY AND THE LIBERAL

TRADITION. Ashgate.

Moravcsik, Andrew. “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Relations.” International Organization 51.4 (September 1997): 513–553.

Keohane, R. O. 1989. “International Liberalism Reconsidered,” in J. Dunn, ed. ECONOMIC LIMITS TO

MODERN POLITICS. CambridgeUniversity Press.

Doyle, Michael W. “Liberalism and World Politics.” American Political Science Review 80.4 (December 1986): 1151–1169.

Doyle, M. W. 1983. “Kant, Liberal Legacies and Foreign Affairs,” PHILOSOPHY AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS

12/3 and 4: 205-231, 323-353.

Ruggie, J. G. 1982. “International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the

Postwar Economic Order.” International Organization 36: 379-415.

International Law

Armstrong, D. et. al. 2012. INTERNATIONAL LAW AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. CambridgeUniversity Press.

Kouvo, S. and Pearson, Z. 2011. Feminist Perspectives on Contemporary International Law. Hart Publishing.

Rochester, J.M. 2011. BETWEEN PERIL AND PROMISE: THE POLITICS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW. CQ Press.

Cali, B., ed. 2010. INTERNATIONAL LAW FOR INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. OxfordUniversity Press.

Bellamy, A. J. 2009. When is it Right to Fight? InternationalLaw and Jus ad Bellum.

Journal of Military Ethics, Vol. 8, Issue 3: 231-245.

MacKay, J. 2009. Running dry: internationallaw and the management of Aral Sea depletion.

Central Asian Survey, Vol. 28, Issue 1: 17-27.

Mottershaw, E. 2008. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Armed Conflict: InternationalHuman Rights Lawand International Humanitarian Law.InternationalJournal of Human Rights, Vol. 12, Issue 3: 449-470.

Ssenyonjo, M. 2008. The Applicability of International Human Rights Law to Non-State Actors: What Relevance to Economic, Social and Cultural Rights?InternationalJournal of Human Rights, Vol. 12, Issue 5: 725-760.

Abbott, K.W. et. al. The Concept of Legalization. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION. 54/3: 401-419.

Simmons, B.A. and Steinberg, R.H., eds. 2007. INTERNATIONAL AW AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: AN INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION READER. CambridgeUniversity Press.

Biersteker, T.J. et. al. eds. 2006. INTERNATIONAL LAW AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: BRIDGING THEORY AND PRACTICE. Rouledge.

IV. Realism/Neorealism (September 23)

Hegemonic Stability Theory

Potential book critique: Drezner, D. W. 2007. ALL POLITICS IS GLOBAL. PrincetonUniversity Press.

Suggested reading:

Realism

Barnett, M. and Duvall, R. (eds.) 2005. POWER IN GLOBAL GOVERNANCE. CambridgeUniversity

Press.

Gruber, L. 2000. Ruling the World: Power Politics and the Rise of Supranational Institutions. Princeton

University Press.

Holsti, O. R. 1998. "Models of International Relations: Realist and Neoliberal Perspectives on Conflict

and Cooperation," in C. Kegley and E. Wittkoff, eds. THE GLOBAL AGENDA, 5th ed. New York:

McGraw Hill: 131-44.

Schweller, R. and D. Priess. 1997. “A Tale of Two Realisms: Expanding the Institutions Debate,” Mershon International Studies Review 41/1: 1-32.

Kegley, C. W. 1995. CONTROVERSIES IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY, REALISM AND THE LIBERAL CHALLENGE. St. Martin’s Press.

Mearsheimer, J. 1994-95. “The False Promise of International Institutions.” International Security 19:

5-49.

Baldwin, David, ed. 1993. NEOREALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM. ColumbiaUniversity Press.

Nye, J. S., Jr. 1988. “Neorealism and Neoliberalism,” WORLD POLITICS 40/2: 235-251.

Keohane, R. O., ed. 1984. NEOREALISM AND ITS CRITICS. ColumbiaUniversity Press.

Ruggie, J. G. 1983. “Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward a Neorealist

Synthesis,” WORLD POLITICS 35/2: 261-285.

Hegemonic Stability Theories

Kydd, A. 2005-06. In America We (Used to) Trust: U.S. Hegemony and Global Cooperation. Political

Science Quarterly. Vol. 120 Issue 4, pp. 619-636.

Reuveny, R. and W. Thompson. 2003. Systematic Leadership and Trade Openness. INTERNATIONAL

INTERACTIONS 29: 83-110.

Helen Milner. "International Political Economy: Beyond Hegemonic Stability," Foreign Policy, (1998

Michael C. Webb and Stephen D. Krasner. "Hegemonic Stability Theory: An Empirical Assessment", Review of International Studies (1989) 15, 183–98

Arthur Stein, “The Hegemon’sDilemma: Great Britain, the United States, and international economic order,” International Organization (1984): 355-386.

Keohane, R. O. 1983. AFTER HEGEMONY. PrincetonUniversity Press.

Keohane, R. 1980. “The Theory of Hegemonic Stability and Changes in International Economic Regimes 1967-1977.” In O. R. Holsti et al, eds. CHANGE IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY. Westview Press: 131- 162.

Krasner, Stephen D. 1976. "State Power and the Structure of International Trade," WORLD POLITICS 28 (April), No. 3: 317-345.

V. TheChanging Context and Literature of the 1970s and 1980s (September 30)

Complex interdependence

Regime theories

Potential critique: Hasenclever, A. et. al. 1997. THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL REGIMES.

Recommended reading:

Interdependence

Natsuda, Kaoru. 2009. “States, Multinational Corporations, and Institutional Arrangements: Economic Interdependence between Japan and Southeast Asia,” Japanese Economy, Vol. 36, Issue 3, pp. 96-127.

McMullin, Jaremey. 2009. “Organised Criminal Groups and Conflict: The Nature and Consequences of Interdependence.” Civil Wars, Vol. 11 Issue 1, pp. 75-102.

Risse-Kappen, T. 1995. BRINGING TRANSNATIONAL RELATIONS BACK IN: NON-STATE ACTORS,

DOMESTIC STRUCTURES AND INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, CambridgeUniversity Press.

de Wilde, J. 1991. SAVED FROM OBLIVION: INTERDEPENDENCE THEORY IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE

TWENTIETH CENTURY. Dartmouth.

Jones, R. J. B. and P. Willetts, eds. 1984. INTERDEPENDENCE ON TRIAL. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Tetreault, M. A. 1980. “Measuring Interdependence,” INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION 34/3: 429-443.

Keohane, R. O. and J. S. Nye, Jr. 1977. POWER AND INTERDEPENDENCE. Boston: Little, Brown.

Katzenstein, Peter J. 1975. “International Interdependence: Some Long-term Trends and Recent

Changes,” INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION 29/4.

Keohane, R. O. and J. S. Nye. 1974. “Transgovernmental Relations and International Organizations,”

WORLD POLITICS 27: 39-62.

Rosecrance, R. and A. Stein. 1993. “Interdependence: Myth or Reality?” WORLD POLITICS 26/1.

Cooper, Richard. 1968. THE ECONOMICS OF INTERDEPENDENCE. McGraw-Hill.

Regimes

Esakova, N. 2012. European Energy Security: Analysing the EU-Russia Energy Security Regime in Terms of Interdependence Theory. VS Verlag Fur Sozialwissenschafen.

Joyner, D. H. and M. Roscini. 2012. Non-Proliferation Law as a Special Regime: A Contribution to Fragmentation Theory in International Law. CambridgeUniversity Press.

Rengifo Lozano, A. J. 2011. International Regime Theory and The Law Of Sea A Study Of Fisheries on the High Seas. Universiad Nacionel de Colombia 2011

Babb, Sarah. “Embeddedness, Inflation, and International Regimes: The IMF in the Early Postwar Period.” The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 113, No. 1 (Jul., 2007), pp. 128-164

Detomasi, David. “International Regimes: The Case of Western Corporate Governance.” International Studies Review, Vol. 8, No. 2 (Jun., 2006), pp. 225-251

Rittberger, V. 1995. REGIME THEORY AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. Clarendon Press.

Haggard, Stephan & Beth Simmons. “Theories of International Regimes.” International Organization, Vol. 41, No. 3 (Summer 1987), 491-517

Keohane, R., 1982. The Demand for International Regimes. International Organization, 36(2), 332-355

Krasner, Stephen D., ed. 1983. INTERNATIONAL REGIMES. Ithaca: CornellUniversity Press.

Krasner, Stephen D. 1982. “StructuralCauses and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables.” International Organization 36:185-205.

Strange, S. 1982. “Cave! Hic Dragons: A Critique of Regimes Analysis.” International Organization

36: 479-496.

Stein, A. 1982. “Coordination and Collaboration: Regimes in an Anarchic World,” reprinted in

Baldwin, David, ed. 1993. NEOREALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM. ColumbiaUniversity Press.

VI. Neoliberal institutionalism (October 7)

Neoliberal institutionalism

Enforcement and Compliance

Potential book critique: Keohane, R. O. 1989. INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND STATE POWER. Westview Press.

Recommended reading:

Neoliberal institutionalism

Wendt, A. 2001. Driving with the Rearview Mirror: On the Rational Science of Institutional Design. International Organization, vol. 55, issue 04, pages 1019-1049

THE RATIONAL DESIGN OF INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, special issue of INTERNATIONAL

ORGANIZATION, 55/3 (Autumn 2001).

Sterling-Folker, J. 2000. “Competing Paradigms or Birds of a Feather? Constructivism and

Neoliberalism Compared,” INTERNATIONAL STUDIES QUARTERLY 44/1: 97-119.

Barnett, M. and M. Finnemore. 1999. “The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International

Organization.” International Organization 53: 699-732.

March, J. and J. Olsen. 1998. “The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders.” International Organization 52: 943-969.

Keohane, R. O., et. al., 1995. “The Promise of Institutionalist Theory,” International Security , 20/1,39-51.

Mearsheimer, J. 1994-95. “The False Promise of International Institutions.” International Security 19/3: 5-49.

Ostrom, E. 1991. “Rational Choice Theory and Institutional Analysis: Toward Complementarity,”

AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW 85/1: 237-43.

Beth Yarborough, B. and R. Yarborough. 1990. “International Institutions and the New Economics of

Organizations.” International Organization 44: 235-259.

Grieco, J. “Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism,” International Organization, 42, 3.

Enforcement and Compliance

Mitchell, S. M. and P. Hensel. 2007. “International Institutions and Compliance with Agreements,

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE 51/4.

Choe, J. 2006. “Problems of Enforcement,” HARVARD INTERNATIONAL REVIEW 28/2.

Carrubba, C. 2005. “Courts and Compliance in International Regulatory Regimes,” JOURNAL OF

Politics, 67, 3 (2005).

Fuller, L. “Poverty Relief, Global Institutions, and the Problem of Compliance,” Journal of Moral Philosophy, 2, 3 (2005).

Reeve, R. 2004 Policing International Trade in Endangered Species: The Cites Treaty and Compliance. Royal Institute of International Affairs 2004

Helm, D. and D. Sprinz. 2000. “Measuring the Effectiveness of International Environmental Regimes,”JOURNAL OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION 5: 630-652.

Mitchell, R. 1994. “Regime Design Matters: Intentional Oil Pollution and Treaty Compliance.”

International Organization 48: 425-458.

Chayes, A. and A. H. Chayes. 1993. “On Compliance.” International Organization 47: 175-205.

Young, O.R. 1992. “The Effectiveness of International Institutions: Hard Cases and Critical Variables,”

in J.N. Rosenau and E.O. Czempiel, eds. GOVERNANCE WITHOUT GOVERNMENT. CambridgeUniversity Press.

Keohane, R. “Reciprocity in International Relations,” International Organization, 40: 1-27 (1986).

VII. Institutions for Economic Growth and Development (October 14)

Financial institutions

Trade Institutions

Private regulatory regimes

Potential book critique: Barton, J.H. et. al. 2006. THE EVOLUTION OF THE TRADE REGIME.

Recommended reading:

Financial Institutions

MacNeil, Iain, et. al., eds. 2010. THE FUTURE OF FINANCIAL REGULATION. Hart Publishing.

Helleiner, Gerald K. 2010. “Towards Realistic Governance Reform in International Financial Institutions.”

Global Economy Journal. Volume 10, Issue 3, Article 5.

Rothe, Dawn. 2010. “Facilitating corruption and human rights violations: the role of international financial

institutions.” Crime, Law and Social Change. Vol. 53, Number 5. 457-476.

Riggirozzi, Pia.2009.Advancing governance in the south: what roles for international financial institutions

in developing states?,Basingstoke, UK,Palgrave/Macmillan.

Eriksen, Silja and Syosa, Indra de. 2009. “A Fate Worse Than Debt? International Financial Institutions and

Human Rights, 1981—2003.” Journal of Peace Research.July 2009. vol. 46no. 4485-503.,

Babb, Sarah. “Embeddedness, Inflation, and International Regimes: The IMF in the Early Postwar Period.” The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 113, No. 1 (Jul., 2007), pp. 128-164.

Nielson, D. and D. Tierney. 2003. “Delegation to International Organizations: Agency Theory and