Hostname: page-component-5d84bcc8dc-z5cqj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-08-12T13:20:48.522Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Regionalism and diffusion revisited: From final design towards stages of decision-making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2016

Francesco Duina  and
Tobias Lenz
Francesco Duina
Affiliation:
Professor and Chair of Sociology, Bates College
Tobias Lenz*
Affiliation:
Max Weber Fellow, European University Institute
*
*Correspondence to: Tobias Lenz, Max Weber Fellow at the European University Institute, and Assistant Professor at Göttingen University and the GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies. Author’s email: tobias.lenz@eui.eu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An emerging research programme on diffusion across regional international organisations (RIOs) proposes that decisions taken in one RIO affect decision-making in other RIOs. This work has provided a welcome corrective to endogenously-focused accounts of RIOs. Nevertheless, by focusing on the final design of policies and institutional arrangements, it has been conceptually overly narrow. This has led to a truncated understanding of diffusion’s impact and to an unjustified view of convergence as its primary outcome. Drawing on public policy and sociological research, we offer a conceptual framework that seeks to remedy these weaknesses by disaggregating the decision-making process on the ‘receiving’ side. We suggest that policies and institutional arrangements in RIOs result from three decision-making stages: problematisation (identification of something as a political problem), framing (categorisation of the problem and possible solutions), and scripting (design of final solutions). Diffusion can affect any combination of these stages. Consequently, its effects are more varied and potentially extensive than is currently recognised, and convergence and persistent variation in scripting are both possible outcomes. We illustrate our framework by re-evaluating research on dispute settlement institutions in the EEC, NAFTA, and SADC. We conclude by discussing its theoretical implications and the conditions that likely promote diffusion.

Keywords

Comparative RegionalismConvergenceDiffusionInstitutional DesignRegional Organisation

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , October 2016 , pp. 773 - 797
Copyright
© British International Studies Association 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

The order of authors’ names reflects alphabetical convention; both authors have contributed equally to all work.

References

1 Jetschke, Anja and Lenz, Tobias, ‘Does regionalism diffuse? A new research agenda for the study of regional organizations’, Journal of European Public Policy, 20:4 (2013), pp. 626–637 Google Scholar.

2 See Beckert, Jens, ‘Institutional isomorphism revisited: Convergence and divergence in institutional change’, Sociological Theory, 28:2 (2010), pp. 150–166 Google Scholar.

3 See, for example, Anderson, James, Public Policymaking (New York: Praeger, 1975)Google Scholar.

4 Acharya, Amitav, ‘How ideas spread: Whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism’, International Organization, 58:2 (2004), pp. 239–275 Google Scholar; Klingler-Vidra, Robyn and Schleifer, Philip, ‘Convergence more or less: Why do practices vary as they diffuse?’, International Studies Review, 16:2 (2014), pp. 264–274 Google Scholar; Lenz, Tobias, ‘EU normative power and regionalism: Ideational diffusion and its limits’, Cooperation and Conflict, 48:2 (2013), pp. 211–228 Google Scholar.

5 Solingen, Etel, ‘Of dominoes and firewalls: the domestic, regional, and global politics of international diffusion’, International Studies Quarterly, 56:4 (2012), p. 632 Google Scholar.

6 Alter, Karen J., ‘The global spread of European style international courts’, West European Politics, 35:1 (2012), pp. 135–154 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Alter, Karen J., The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014)Google Scholar; Lenz, Tobias, ‘Spurred emulation: the EU and regional integration in Mercosur and SADC’, West European Politics, 35:1 (2012), pp. 155–174 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Osiemo, Onsando, ‘Lost in translation: the role of African regional courts in regional integration in Africa’, Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 41:1 (2014), pp. 87–122 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Elkins, Zachary and Simmons, Beth, ‘On waves, clusters, and diffusion: a conceptual framework’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598 (2005), p. 35 Google Scholar; see also Gilardi, Fabrizio, ‘Transnational diffusion: Norms, ideas and policies’, in Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth A. Simmons (eds), Handbook of International Relations (London: Sage, 2012), pp. 453–477 Google Scholar. There is some disagreement in the literature over whether centralised coordination and coercion should form part of the definition of diffusion. We opt for a narrower definition of diffusion as a decentralised process to avoid using it as catch-all concept for almost any form of outside influence. This also allows us to disaggregate it more easily into separate stages that can be investigated with some precision.

8 See Jahn, Detlef, ‘Globalization as “Galton’s Problem”: the missing link in the analysis of diffusion patterns in welfare state development’, International Organization, 60:2 (2006), pp. 401–431 Google Scholar.

9 Baccini, Leonardo and Dür, Andreas, ‘The new regionalism and policy interdependence’, British Journal of Political Science, 42:1 (2012), pp. 57–79 Google Scholar; Jupille, Joseph, Joliff, Brandy, and Wojcik, Stefan, ‘Regionalism in the World Polity’, Social Science Research Network (28 March 2013)Google Scholar, available at: {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2242500}; Mansfield, Edward and Milner, Helen, Votes, Vetoes, and the Political Economy of International Trade Agreements (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012)Google Scholar; Mattli, Walter, The Logic of Regional Integration: Europe and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Allee, Todd and Elsig, Manfred, ‘Are the contents of international treaties copied-and-pasted? evidence from preferential trade agreements’, paper presented at the 8th Annual Conference on the Political Economy of International Organizations, Berlin, Germany, 12–14 February 2015, p. 3 Google Scholar, emphasis added.

11 Alter, Karen J., Helfer, Laurence R., and Saldías, Osvaldo, ‘Transplanting the European Court of Justice: the experience of the Andean Tribunal of Justice’, American Journal of Comparative Law, 60:3 (2012), pp. 629–664 Google Scholar; Börzel, Tanja and Risse, Thomas, ‘From Europeanization to diffusion: Introduction’, West European Politics, 35:1 (2012), pp. 1–19 Google Scholar; Börzel, Tanja and van Hüllen, Vera (eds), Governance Transfer by Regional Organizations: Patching Together a Global Script (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015)Google Scholar; Jetschke, Anja, ‘Institutionalizing ASEAN: Celebrating Europe through network governance’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 22:3 (2009), pp. 407–426 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dri, Clarissa F., ‘Limits of the institutional mimesis of the European Union: the case of the Mercosur parliament’, Latin American Policy, 1:1 (2010), pp. 52–74 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rüland, Jürgen and Bechle, Karsten, ‘Defending state-centric regionalism through mimicry and localization: Regional parliamentary bodies in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and Mercosur’, Journal of International Relations and Development, 17:1 (2014), pp. 61–88 Google Scholar.

12 Acharya, ‘How ideas spread’; Grugel, Jean, ‘Democratization and ideational diffusion: Europe, Mercosur and social citizenship’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 45:1 (2007), pp. 43–68 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Katsumata, Hiro, ‘Mimetic adoption and norm diffusion: “Western” security cooperation in Southeast Asia?’, Review of International Studies, 37:2 (2011), pp. 557–576 Google Scholar; Rüland, Jürgen, ‘The limits of democratizing interest representation: ASEAN’s regional corporatism and normative challenges’, European Journal of International Relations, 20:1 (2014), pp. 237–261 Google Scholar.

13 Baccini, Leonardo, Dür, Andreas, and Haftel, Yoram, ‘Imitation and innovation in international governance: the diffusion of trade agreement design’, in Andreas Dür and Manfred Elsig (eds), Trade Cooperation: The Purpose, Design and Effects of Preferential Trade Agreements (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), pp. 167–194 Google Scholar; Duina, Francesco, ‘Frames, scripts, and the making of regional trade agreements’, in Rawi Abdelal, Mark Blyth, and Craig Parsons (eds), Constructing the International Economy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2010), pp. 93–113 Google Scholar; Vleuten, Anna van der, van Eerdewijk, Anouka, and Roggeband, Conny (eds), Gender Equality Norms in Regional Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014)Google Scholar. For an excellent overview of this literature, see Risse, Thomas, ‘The diffusion of regionalism, regional institutions, and regional governance’, in Tanja Börzel and Thomas Risse (eds), Oxford Handbook of Comparative Regionalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming)Google Scholar.

14 Börzel, Tanja and Risse, Thomas, ‘When Europeanisation meets diffusion: Exploring new territory’, West European Politics, 35:1 (2012), p. 194 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Baccini and Dür, ‘New regionalism and policy interdependence’; Mattli, ‘Logic of regional integration’; Jetschke, Anja and Murray, Philomena, ‘Diffusing regional integration: the EU and Southeast Asia’, West European Politics, 35:1 (2012), pp. 174–191 Google Scholar.

16 Alter, ‘The global spread of European style international courts’.

17 Ibid., p. 145.

18 See Alter, The New Terrain of International Law.

19 Ibid., p. 90.

20 See, for example, Smith, James McCall, ‘The politics of dispute settlement design: Legalism in regional trade pacts’, International Organization, 54:1 (2000), pp. 137–180 Google Scholar.

21 Acharya, , ‘How ideas spread’, p. 241 Google Scholar; Klingler-Vidra, and Schleifer, , ‘Convergence more or less’, p. 264 Google Scholar.

22 Elkins, and Simmons, , ‘On waves, clusters and diffusion’, pp. 35–36 Google Scholar; Gilardi, ‘Transnational diffusion’.

23 Solingen, ‘Of dominoes and firewalls’; Solingen, Etel and Börzel, Tanja, ‘Introduction to presidential issue: the politics of international diffusion – a symposium’, International Studies Review, 16:2 (2014), pp. 173–187 Google Scholar.

24 This three-fold division is akin to the distinction between institutional change, institutional choice, and institutional design in recent works on institutions that use rational choice theory. See Jupille, Joseph, Mattli, Walter, and Snidal, Duncan (eds), Instititional Choice and Global Commerce (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Koremenos, Barbara, Lipson, Charles, and Snidal, Duncan, ‘The rational design of international institutions’, International Organization, 54:4 (2001), pp. 761–799 Google Scholar.

25 Kingdon, John, Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policy (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1984), p. 3 Google Scholar; See also Simon, Herbert, ‘Political research: the decision-making framework’, in David Easton (ed.), Varieties of Political Theory (Englewood Cliff: Prentice-Hall, 1966), pp. 15–24 Google Scholar.

26 See, for example, Pierson, Paul, Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004)Google Scholar, ch. 1.

27 Cohen, Michael D., March, James G., and Olsen, Johan P., ‘A garbage can model of organizational choice’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 17:1 (1972), p. 125 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Powell, Walter and DiMaggio, Paul (eds), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Spector, Malcolm and Kitsuse, John I., Constructing Social Problems (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2001)Google Scholar.

28 Kingdon, Agendas, p. 95.

29 See Gray, Julia and Slapin, Jonathan, ‘How effective are preferential trade agreements? Ask the experts’, Review of International Organizations, 7:3 (2012), pp. 309–333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 Blumer, Herbert, ‘Social problems as collective behavior’, Social Problems, 18:3 (1971), p. 302 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, emphasis?added.

31 Weinberg, Darin, ‘On the social construction of social problems and social problems theory: a contribution to the legacy of John Kitsuse’, American Sociologist, 40:1/2 (2009), pp. 61–78 Google Scholar; Barnett, Michael and Finnemore, Martha, Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

32 Ocasio, William, ‘The enactment of economic adversity: a reconciliation of theories of failure-induced change and threat-rigidity’, Research in Organizational Behavior, 17 (1995), pp. 287–331 Google Scholar; Ocasio, William, ‘Toward an attention-based view of the firm’, Strategic Management Journal, 18:S1 (1997), pp. 187–206 Google Scholar.

33 Arnold, Christian and Rittberger, Berthold, ‘The legalization of dispute resolution in Mercosur’, Journal of Politics in Latin America, 5:3 (2013), p. 115 Google Scholar.

34 Katzenstein, Suzanne, ‘In the shadow of crisis: the creation of international courts in the twentieth century’, Harvard Journal of International Law, 55:1 (2014), pp. 188 Google Scholar, 165.

35 Paterson, William E. and Sloan, James, ‘Learning from the West: Policy transfer and political parties’, Journal of Communist Studies & Transition Politics, 21:1 (2005), pp. 33–47 Google Scholar; Hall, Peter A., ‘Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain’, Comparative Politics, 25:3 (1993), pp. 275–296 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 DiMaggio, Paul and Powell, Walter, ‘The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields’, American Sociological Review, 48:2 (1983), p. 148 Google Scholar; Meyer, John and Rowan, Brian, ‘Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony’, American Journal of Sociology, 83:2 (1977), pp. 340–363 Google Scholar.

37 Alter, Helfer, and Saldías, ‘Transplanting the European Court of Justice’, pp. 629–632 Google Scholar.

38 Pelkmans, Jacques, ‘Asean’s institutional requirements with special reference to Afta’, in Pearl Imada and Seiji Naya (eds), Afta: The Way Ahead (Singepore: Institute for Southeast Asian Studies, 1992), pp. 126–129 Google Scholar; Langhammer, Rolf, ‘What can Asean learn from the experience of European integration? An EU perspective’, in Siow Yue Chia and Joseph Tan (eds), Asean & EU: Forging New Linkages and Strategic Alliances (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1997), pp. 234–256 Google Scholar.

39 Benford, Robert D. and Snow, David A., ‘Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment’, Annual Review of Sociology, 26 (2000), pp. 611–639 Google Scholar.

40 Reese, Ellen and Newcombe, Garnett, ‘Income rights, mothers’ rights, or workers’ rights? Collective action frames, organizational ideologies, and the American Welfare Rights Movement’, Social Problems, 50:2 (2003), pp. 294–318 Google Scholar; Snow, David and Benford, Robert, ‘Master frames and cycles of protest’, in Aldon D. Morris and Carol McClurg Mueller (eds), Frontiers in Social Movement Theory (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992), pp. 133–155 Google Scholar.

41 Duina, ‘Frames, scripts, and the making of regional trade agreements’, p. 100.

42 Barnett, and Finnemore, , Rules for the World, pp. 31–32 Google Scholar.

43 Smith, Jackie, ‘Bridging global divides?’, International Sociology, 17:4 (2002), pp. 505–528 Google Scholar.

44 Boli, John and Thomas, George M., ‘Introduction’, in John Boli and George M. Thomas (eds), Constructing World Culture: International Nongovernmental Organizations since 1875 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999), p. 4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tarrow, Sidney, ‘Mentalities, political cultures, and collective action frames: Constructing meanings through action’, in Aldon D. Morris and Carol McClurg Mueller (eds), Frontiers in Social Movement Theory (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992), pp. 174–202 Google Scholar.

45 Zald, Mayer, ‘Culture, ideology, and strategic framing’, in Dough McAdam, John MacCarthy, and Mayer Zald (eds), Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 261–274 Google Scholar.

46 Francesco Duina, ‘Making sense of the legal and judicial architectures of regional trade agreements worldwide’, Regulation and Governance, doi: 10.1111/rego.12081.

47 Alter, , Helfer, , and Saldias, , ‘Transplanting the European Court of Justice’, p. 643 Google Scholar.

48 Ibid.

49 Duina, ‘Frames, scripts, and the making of regional trade agreements’, p. 100.

50 Börzel and van Hüllen (eds), Governance Transfer by Regional Organizations.

51 Lenz, , ‘Spurred emulation’, p. 168 Google Scholar; Arnold, and Rittberger, , ‘The legalization of dispute resolution in Mercosur’, p. 122 Google Scholar.

52 Frank, David John, Hironaka, Ann, and Schofer, Evan, ‘The nation-state and the natural environment over the twentieth century’, American Sociological Review, 65:1 (2000), pp. 96–116 Google Scholar.

53 Boli, and Thomas, , ‘Introduction’, pp. 1–10 Google Scholar.

54 Duina, Francesco and Nedergaard, Peter, ‘Learning in international governmental organizations: the case of social protection’, Global Social Policy, 10:2 (2010), pp. 193–217 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Finnemore, Martha, ‘International organizations as teachers of norms: the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization and science policy’, International Organization, 47:4 (1993), pp. 565–597 Google Scholar.

56 This is not to deny that some scholars, especially those interested in localisation processes, tend to frame their inquiries into diffusion in terms of translation and adaptation rather than convergence. This rhetorical move notwithstanding, these scholars are hard-pressed to deny that if diffusion takes place, even when transferred models are extensively adjusted to fit local conditions, this increases similarity between the respective units in final designs when compared to the status quo antes, and therefore can be labelled a form of convergence.

57 Some of these bodies changed subsequently. SADC, for example, later created a second dispute settlement mechanism in the context of the SADC Trade Protocol, and it disbanded the SADC Tribunal in 2012 following a controversial ruling against the Zimbabwian government. For an extended discussion of the latter, see Karen Alter, James Thuo Gathii, and Laurence Helfer, ‘Backlash against international courts in West, East and South Africa: Causes and consequences’, iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 21 (2015).

58 Solingen, , ‘Of dominoes and firewalls’, p. 633 Google Scholar.

59 Koremenos, Barbara and Betz, Timm, ‘The design of dispute settlement procedures in international agreements’, in Jeffrey A. Dunnoff and Mark A. Pollack (eds), International Law and International Relations: Synthesizing Insights from Interdisciplinary Scholarship (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 371–393 Google Scholar.

60 Alter, ‘The global spread of European style international courts’; Alter, The New Terrain of International Law; Tobias Lenz, ‘Spurred emulation’; Osiemo, ‘Lost in translation’.

61 Rasmussen, Hjalte, On Law and Policy in the European Court of Justice (Dordecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1986), p. 207 Google Scholar.

62 Smet, Anne Boerger-De, ‘Negotiating the foundations of European law, 1950–57: the legal history of the treaties of Paris and Rome’, Contemporary European History, 21:3 (2012), pp. 342–343 Google Scholar.

63 Rasmussen, , On Law and Policy in the European Court of Justice, p. 208 Google Scholar.

64 Boerger-De Smet, ‘Negotiating the foundations of European law’, p. 346.

65 Rasmussen, Hjalte, ‘The origins of a legal revolution: the early history of the European Court of Justice’, Journal of European Integration History, 14:2 (2008), p. 86 Google Scholar.

66 Ibid., p. 80.

67 Ibid.

68 Ibid.

69 Boerger-De Smet, ‘Negotiating the foundations of European law’, p. 349.

70 Rasmussen, , ‘The origins of a legal revolution’, p. 82 Google Scholar.

71 Ibid., p. 87.

72 Boerger-De Smet, ‘Negotiating the foundations of European law’, p. 349.

73 Ibid.

74 Tamm, Ditlev, ‘The history of the Court of Justice of the European Union since its origin’, in Allan Rosas, Egils Levits, and Yves Bot (eds), The Court of Justice and the Construction of Europe: Analyses and Perspectives on Sixty Years of Case-Law (The Hague: TMC Asser Press, 2013), p. 16 Google Scholar.

75 Sweet, Alec Stone, ‘The European Court of Justice’, in Paul Craig and Grainne De Burca (eds), The Evolution of EU Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 122 Google Scholar.

76 Boerger-De Smet, ‘Negotiating the foundations of European law’, p. 351.

77 Ibid.

78 Article 177; Shapiro, Martin, ‘The European Court of Justice’, in Alberta M. Sbragia (ed.), Euro-Politics: Politics and Policymaking in the ‘New’ European Community (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1992), p. 126 Google Scholar.

79 Tamm, , ‘The history of the Court of Justice, pp. 19–20 Google Scholar.

80 The Commission, Assembly (later Parliament), and Council.

81 For a list of cases, see {http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/topics-domaines/disp-diff/nafta.aspx} accessed 5 September 2015.

82 Dumberry, Patrick, ‘The NAFTA investment dispute settlement mechanism: a review of the latest case-law’, The Journal of World Investment, 2:1 (2001), p. 151 Google Scholar; Oelstrom, Kristin L., ‘A treaty for the future: the dispute settlement mechanisms of the NAFTA’, Law and Policy in International Business, 25 (1993), p. 799 Google Scholar.

83 Rugman, Alan M. and Gestrin, Michael, ‘NAFTA’s treatment of foreign investment’, in Alan M. Rugman (ed.), Foreign Investment and NAFTA (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1994), pp. 48–50 Google Scholar.

84 Jones, Ray, ‘NAFTA Chapter 11 investor-to-state dispute resolution: a shield to be embraced or a sword to be feared?’, Brigham Young University Law Review, 22:2 (2002), pp. 527–559 Google Scholar.

85 Legum, Barton, ‘The innovation of investor-state arbitration under NAFTA’, Harvard International Law Journal, 43:2 (2002), pp. 531–539 Google Scholar.

86 Clement, Norris C. et al., North American Economic Integration: Theory and Practice (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 1999)Google Scholar.

87 Cameron, Maxwell A. and Tomlin, Brian W., The Making of NAFTA: How the Deal Was Done (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2000), p. 1 Google Scholar.

88 Ibid.

89 , Oelstrom, ‘A treaty for the future’, pp. 799–802 Google Scholar.

90 Heindl, Jennifer A., ‘Toward a history of NAFTA’s Chapter Eleven’, Berkeley Journal of International Law, 24:2 (2006), p. 680 Google Scholar.

91 Ibid.

92 , Heindl, ‘Toward a history of NAFTA’s Chapter Eleven’, pp. 682–683 Google Scholar.

93 Chapter 19; see Taylor, Cherie O’Neil, ‘Dispute resolution as a catalyst for economic integration and an agent for deepening integration: NAFTA and MERCOSUR?’, Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 17:1 (1997), p. 854 Google Scholar.

94 Heindl, , ‘Toward a history of NAFTA’s Chapter Eleven’, pp. 680–681 Google Scholar.

95 Oelstrom, , ‘A treaty for the future’, p. 800 Google Scholar.

96 Legum, ‘The innovation of investor-state arbitration under NAFTA’; Oelstrom, ‘A treaty for the future’.

97 Jones, ‘NAFTA Chapter 11 investor-to-state dispute resolution’, p. 530.

98 Hufbauer, Gary Clyde and Schott, Jeffrey J., NAFTA Revisited: Achievements and Challenges (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 2005), p. 202 Google Scholar.

99 Hufbauer, and Schott, , NAFTA Revisited, p. 214 Google Scholar.

100 Mandaza, Ibbo and Tostensen, Arne, Southern Africa: In Search of a Common Future. From the Conference to a Community (Gaborone: SADC Secretariat, 1994), pp. 38–39 Google Scholar.

101 South African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC) Council of Ministers, Record of the Council of Ministers Held in Arusha, Tanzania on the 22nd and 23rd of August (1991), p. 379.

102 Ibid.

103 Sidaway, James, ‘The (geo)politics of regional integration: the example of the Southern African Development Community’, Environment and Planning D, 16:5 (1998), p. 564 Google Scholar.

104 SADCC, ‘Towards economic integration’, The Proceedings of the 1992 Annual Consultative Conference Held in Maputo, Mozambique, 29–31 January (1992), pp. 41–42 Google Scholar.

105 SADCC Council, Record of the Council of Ministers Held in Arusha, p. 35, emphasis added.

106 Elsig, Manfred, and Eckardt, Jappe, ‘The creation of the multilateral trade court: Design and experiential learning’, World Trade Review, 14:S1 (2015), p. S25 Google Scholar.

107 SADCC Council, Record of the Council of Ministers Held in Arusha, p. 379.

108 SADCC Council, Record of the Council of Ministers, 28 August (1991), p. 361.

109 SADCC, ‘Towards economic integration’, p. 35.

110 Lenz, ‘Spurred emulation’, pp. 165–6.

111 Alter, , ‘The global spread of European Style International Courts’, p. 145 Google Scholar; see also Alter, The New Terrain of International Law.

112 See Lenz, , ‘Spurred emulation’, pp. 166–167 Google Scholar.

113 For a crique of this view in sociology, see Beckert, , ‘Institutional isomorphism revisited’; Elkins and Simmons, ‘On waves, clusters, and diffusion’, p. 36 Google Scholar.

114 Thelen, Kathleen, ‘Historical institutionalism in comparative politics’, Annual Review of Political Science, 2 (1999), pp. 369–404 Google Scholar; Pierson, Politics in Time.

115 Barnett, and Finnemore, , Rules for the World, p. 2 Google Scholar.

116 Solingen and Börzel, ‘Introduction’, p. 9.

117 For example Risse, , ‘The diffusion of regionalism’, pp. 5–6 Google Scholar.

118 Schneiberg, Marc and Clemens, Elisabeth, ‘The typical tools for the job: Research strategies in institutional analysis’, Sociological Theory, 24:3 (2006), p. 200 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

119 See fns 3 and 11.

120 Jo, Hyeran and Namgung, Hyun, ‘Dispute settlement mechanisms in preferential trade agreements: Democracy, boilerplates, and the multilateral trade regime’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56:6 (2012), pp. 1041–1068 Google Scholar.

121 Lenz, ‘EU normative power and regionalism’.

122 Strang, David, ‘Adding social structure to diffusion models’, Sociological Methods and Research, 19:3 (1991), p. 325 Google Scholar.

123 This is an important element of Finnemore and Sikkink’s norm cycle. See Finnemore, Martha and Sikkink, Kathryn, ‘International norm dynamics and political change’, International Organization 52:4 (1998), pp. 887–917 Google Scholar.

124 DiMaggio, and Powell, , ‘The iron cage revisited’, p. 156 Google Scholar.

125 Alter, Karen and Hooghe, Liesbet, ‘Regional dispute settlement’, in Tanja Börzel and Thomas Risse (eds), Oxford Handbook of Comparative Regionalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming)Google Scholar; Smith, ‘The politics of dispute settlement design’.