Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:46:04.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part III

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 March 2018

Edited by
Theresa Squatrito ,
Oran R. Young ,
Andreas Follesdal  and
Geir Ulfstein
Theresa Squatrito
Affiliation:
University of Liverpool
Oran R. Young
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Barbara
Andreas Follesdal
Affiliation:
Universitetet i Oslo
Geir Ulfstein
Affiliation:
Universitetet i Oslo
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals , pp. 371 - 433
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

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.)

References

References

Ahram, Ariel I. 2013. “Concepts and Measurement in Multimethod Research,” Political Research Quarterly 66(2): 280–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barabas, Jason and Jerit, Jennifer. 2010. “Are Survey Experiments Externally Valid?,” American Political Science Review 104(2): 226–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basch, Fernando, Filippini, Leonardo, Laya, Ana, Nino, Mariano, Rossi, Felicitas, and Schreiber, Bárbara. 2010. “The Effectiveness of the Inter-American System of Human Rights Protection: A Quantitative Approach to Its Functioning and Compliance with Its Decisions,” Sur International Journal of Human Rights 12(7): 9–25.Google Scholar
Bechtel, Michael M. and Sattler, Thomas. 2015. “What Is Litigation in the World Trade Organization Worth?,” 69(2): 375–403.Google Scholar
Behn, Daniel. 2018. “The Performance of Investment Treaty Arbitration,” this volume.Google Scholar
Bennett, Andrew and Elman, Colin. 2007. “Case Study Methods in the International Relations Subfield,” Comparative Political Studies 40(2): 170–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg-Schlosser, Dirk, De Meur, Gisèle, Rihoux, Benoît, and Ragin, Charles C. 2009. “Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) as an Approach,” in Rihoux, Benoît and Ragin, Charles (eds.), Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
Blauberger, Michael. 2012. “With Luxembourg in Mind … The Remaking of National Policies in the Face of ECJ Jurisprudence,” Journal of European Public Policy 19(1): 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bown, Chad P. 2004. “On the Economic Success of GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement,” Review of Economics and Statistics 86(3): 811–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brutger, Ryan and Morse, Julia. 2015. “Balancing Law and Politics: Judicial Incentives in WTO Dispute Settlement,” Review of International Organizations 10(2): 179–205.Google Scholar
Burke-White, William W. 2008. “The Domestic Influence of International Criminal Tribunals: The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the Creation of the State Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina,” Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 46(2): 279–350.Google Scholar
Busch, Marc L. and Pelc, Krzysztof J. 2010. “The Politics of Judicial Economy at the World Trade Organization,” International Organization 64(2): 257–279.Google Scholar
Busch, Marc L. and Reinhardt, Eric. 2000. “Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: Early Settlement in GATT/WTO Disputes,” Fordham International Law Journal 24(1): 158–172.Google Scholar
Busch, Marc L., and Reinhardt, Eric. 2003. “Developing Countries and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement,” Journal of World Trade 37(4): 719–735.Google Scholar
Busch, Marc L., and Reinhardt, Eric. 2006. “Three’s a Crowd: Third Parties and WTO Dispute Settlement,” World Politics 58(3): 446–477.Google Scholar
Busch, Marc L., Reinhardt, Eric, and Shaffer, Gregory. 2009. “Does Legal Capacity Matter? A Survey of WTO Members,” World Trade Review 8(4): 559–577.Google Scholar
Börzel, Tanja A., Hofmann, Tobias, and Panke, Diana. 2012. “Caving in or Sitting It Out? Longitudinal Patterns of Non-Compliance in the European Union,” Journal of European Public Policy 19(4): 454–471.Google Scholar
Capoccia, Giovanni and Kelemen, R. Daniel. 2007. “The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative, and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism,” World Politics 59(3): 341–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrubba, Clifford J. and Gabbel, Matthew J. 2014. International Courts and the Performance of International Agreements: A General Theory with Evidence from the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carrubba, Clifford J., Gabel, Matthew, and Hankla, Charles. 2008. “Judicial Behavior under Political Constraints: Evidence from the European Court of Justice,” American Political Science Review 102(4): 435–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cichowski, Rachel A. 2007. The European Court and Civil Society: Litigation, Mobilization and Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cingranelli, David and Richards, David 2015. “The Cingranelli-Richards (Ciri) Human Rights Dataset.” Available at: www.humanrightsdata.org (accessed June 2017).Google Scholar
Clark, Tom S. and Kastellec, Jonathan P. 2015. “Source Cues and Public Support for the Supreme Court,” American Politics Research 43(3): 504–535.Google Scholar
Conant, Lisa. 2002. Justice Contained: Law and Politics in the European Union. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Cottle, Cindy C., Lee, Ria J., and Heilbrun, Kirk. 2001. “The Prediction of Criminal Recidivism in Juveniles,” Criminal Justice and Behavior 28(3): 367–394.Google Scholar
Creamer, Cosette D. and Strezhnev, Anton. 2018. “Court Performance within the Multilateral Trade Regime,” Chapter 2 in this volume.Google Scholar
Dacombe, Rod. 2017. “Systematic Reviews in Political Science: What Can the Approach Contribute to Political Research?,” Political Studies Review. Online first, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929916680641.Google Scholar
Davis, Christina. 2012. Why Adjudicate?: Enforcing Trade Rules in the WTO. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N., Green, Donald P., Kuklinski, James H., and Lupia, Arthur. 2011a. “Experimentation in Political Science,” in Druckman, James N., Green, Donald P., Kuklinski, James H., and Lupia, Arthur (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–12.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N., Green, Donald P., Kuklinski, James H., and Lupia, Arthur. 2011b. “Experiments: An Introduction to Core Concepts,” in Druckman, James N., Green, Donald P., Kuklinski, James H., and Lupia, Arthur (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 15–26.Google Scholar
Dunoff, Jeffrey L. 2007. “The Many Dimensions of Softwood Lumber,” Alberta Law Review 45(2): 319–356.Google Scholar
Dunoff, Jeffrey L. and Pollack, Mark A. 2018. “International Judicial Performances and the Performance of International Courts,” Chapter 8 in this volume.Google Scholar
Eck, Kristine and Hultman, Lisa 2007. “One-Sided Violence against Civilians in War: Insights from New Fatality Data,” Journal of Peace Research 44(2): 233–246.Google Scholar
Escribà-Folch, Abel and Wright, Joseph. 2015. “Human Rights Prosecutions and Autocratic Survival,” International Organization 69(02): 343–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fattore, Christina. 2013. “The Influence of Legal Capacity on WTO Dispute Duration,” International Trade Journal 27(5): 450–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faude, Benjamin. 2018. “How the Fragmentation of the International Judiciary Affects the Performance of International Judicial Bodies,” Chapter 7 in this volume.Google Scholar
Fearon, James D. 1991. “Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political Science,” World Politics 43(2): 169–195.Google Scholar
Franck, Susan D. 2014. “Conflating Politics and Development? Examining Investment Treaty Arbitration Outcomes,” Virginia Journal of International Law 55(1): 13–71.Google Scholar
Gabel, Matthew J., Carrubba, Clifford J., Ainsley, Caitlin, and Beaudette, Donald M. 2012. “Of Courts and Commerce,” Journal of Politics 74(4): 1125–1137.Google Scholar
Gaines, Brian J., Kuklinski, James H., and Quirk, Paul J. 2017. “The Logic of the Survey Experiment Reexamined,” Political Analysis 15(1): 1–20.Google Scholar
Gerring, John. 2007. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Geys, Benny. 2006. “Explaining Voter Turnout: A Review of Aggregate-Level Research,” Electoral Studies 25(4): 637–663.Google Scholar
Gibney, Mark, Cornett, Linda, Wood, Reed, Haschke, Peter, and Arnon, Daniel. 2015. “The Political Terror Scale 1976–2015.” Available at: www.politicalterrorscale.org (accessed July 2017).Google Scholar
Gibson, James L., Gottfried, Jeffrey A., Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Jamieson, Kathleen Hall. 2011. “The Effects of Judicial Campaign Activity on the Legitimacy of Courts,” Political Research Quarterly 64(3): 545–558.Google Scholar
Giorgetti, Chiara. 2018. “What Happens after a Judgment is Given? Judgment Compliance and the Performance of International Courts and Tribunals,” Chapter 10 in this volume.Google Scholar
Glass, Gene V. 1976. “Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research,” Educational Researcher 5(10): 3–8.Google Scholar
Gleditsch, Nils Petter, Wallensteen, Peter, Eriksson, Mikael, Sollenberg, Margareta, and Strand, Håvard. 2002. “Armed Conflict 1946–2001: A New Dataset,” Journal of Peace Research 39(5): 615–637.Google Scholar
Goertz, Gary, Diehl, Paul F., and Balas, Alexandru Balas. 2016. The Puzzle of Peace: The Evolution of Peace in the International System. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Judith L. and Steinberg, Richard H. 2008. “Negotiate or Litigate? Effects of Wto Judicial Delegation on U.S. Trade Politics,” Law and Contemporary Problems 71(1): 257–282.Google Scholar
Grewal, Sharanbir and Voeten, Erik. 2015. “Are New Democracies Better Human Rights Compliers?,” 69(2): 497–518.Google Scholar
Grinols, Earl L. and Perrelli, Roberto. 2006. “The WTO Impact on International Trade Disputes: An Event History Analysis,” Review of Economics and Statistics 88(4): 613–624.Google Scholar
Grynaviski, Eric and Hsieh, Amy. 2015. “Hierarchy and Judicial Institutions: Arbitration and Ideology in the Hellenistic World,” 69(3): 697–729.Google Scholar
Guzman, Andrew and Simmons, Beth A. 2005. “Power Plays and Capacity Constraints: The Selection of Defendants in World Trade Organization Disputes,” Journal of Legal Studies 34(2): 557–598.Google Scholar
Hathaway, Oona. 2002. “Do Human Rights Treaties Make a Difference?,” Yale Law Journal 111(8): 1934–2042.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Darren and Jacoby, Wade. 2010. “Partial Compliance: A Comparison of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights,” Journal of International Law & International Relations 6(1): 35.Google Scholar
Helfer, Laurence R. and Voeten, Erik. 2014. “International Courts as Agents of Legal Change: Evidence from Lgbt Rights in Europe,” International Organization 68(1): 77–110.Google Scholar
Helfer, Laurence and Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 1997. “Towards a Theory of Effective Supranational Adjudication,” Yale Law Journal 107(2): 273–391.Google Scholar
Hillebrecht, Courtney. 2014. Domestic Politics and International Human Rights Tribunals: The Problem of Compliance, Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Horn, Henrik, Nordström, Håkan, and Mavroidis, Petros C. 1999. “Is the Use of the WTO Dispute Settlement System Biased?,” CEPR Discussion Paper 2340.Google Scholar
Hume, Robert J. 2013. Courthouse Democracy and Minority Rights: Same-Sex Marriage in the States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Huneeus, Alexandra. 2013. “Compliance with Judgments and Decisions,” in Romano, Cesare, Alter, Karen, and Shany, Yuval (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 437–463.Google Scholar
Imbeau, Louis, Pétry, François, and Lamari, Moktar. 2001. “Left-Right Party Ideology and Government Policies: A Meta-Analysis,” European Journal of Political Research 40(1): 1–29.Google Scholar
Ingadottir, Thordis. 2004. “The Financing of Internationalized Criminal Courts and Tribunals,” in Romano, Cesare P. R., Nollkaemper, André, and Kleffner, Jann K. (eds.), Internationalized Criminal Courts: Sierra Leone, East Timor, Kosovo, and Cambodia. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 271–289.Google Scholar
Jo, Hyeran, Radtke, Mitchell, and Simmons, Beth A. 2018. “Assessing the International Criminal Court,” Chapter 6 in this volume.Google Scholar
Jo, Hyeran and Simmons, Beth A. 2016. “Can the International Criminal Court Deter Atrocity?,” International Organization 70(3): 443–475.Google Scholar
Kapiszewski, D. and Taylor, M. M. 2012. “Compliance: Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Explaining Adherence to Judicial Rulings,” Law and Social Inquiry 38(4): 803–835.Google Scholar
Keller, Helen, Forowicz, Magdalena, and Engi, Lorenz. 2011. Friendly Settlements before the European Court of Human Rights: Theory and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kim, Hunjoon and Sikkink, Kathryn. 2010. “Explaining the Deterrence Effect of Human Rights Prosecutions for Transitional Countries,” International Studies Quarterly 54(4): 939–963.Google Scholar
Kim, Moonhawk. 2015. “Enduring Trade Disputes: Disguised Protectionism and Duration and Recurrence of International Trade Disputes,” Review of International Organizations 11(3): 283–310.Google Scholar
Larsson, Olof and Naurin, Daniel. 2016. “Judicial Independence and Political Uncertainty: How the Risk of Override Affects the Court of Justice of the EU,” International Organization 70(2): 377–408.Google Scholar
Larsson, Olof, Naurin, Daniel, Derlén, Mattias, and Lindholm, Johan. 2017. “Speaking Law to Power. The Strategic Use of Precedent of the Court of Justice of the European Union,” Comparative Political Studies 50(7): 879–907.Google Scholar
Lau, Richard R., Sigelman, Lee, Heldman, Caroline, and Babbitt, Paul. 1999. “The Effects of Negative Political Advertisements: A Meta-Analytic Assessment,” American Political Science Review 93(4): 851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lau, Richard R., Sigelman, Lee, and Rovner, Ivy Brown. 2007. “The Effects of Negative Political Campaigns: A Meta-Analytic Reassessment,” Journal of Politics 69(4): 1176–1209.Google Scholar
Lebow, Richard Ned. 2000. “What’s So Different About a Counterfactual?,” World Politics 52(4): 550–585.Google Scholar
Lieberman, Evan S. 2005. “Nested Analysis as a Mixed-Method Strategy for Comparative Research,” American Political Science Review 99(3): 435–452.Google Scholar
Lupu, Yonatan and Voeten, Erik. 2012. “Precedent in International Courts: A Network Analysis of Case Citations by the European Court of Human Rights,” British Journal of Political Science 42(2): 413–439.Google Scholar
Mahoney, J. 2010. “After KKV: The New Methodology of Qualitative Research,” World Politics 62(1): 120–147.Google Scholar
Meernik, James D., Nichols, Angela, and King, Kimi L. 2010. “The Impact of International Tribunals and Domestic Trials on Peace and Human Rights after Civil War,” International Studies Perspectives 11(4): 309–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nettelfield, Lara J. 2013. Courting Democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Hague Tribunal’s Impact in a Postwar State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Olsen, Tricia D., Payne, Leigh A., and Reiter, Andrew G. 2010. “The Justice Balance: When Transitional Justice Improves Human Rights and Democracy,” Human Rights Quarterly 32(4): 980–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panke, Diana. 2010. The Effectiveness of the European Court of Justice: Why Reluctant States Comply. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, Joost and Elsig, Manfred. 2014. “The Politics of Treaty Interpretation: Variations and Explanations across International Tribunals,” in Dunoff, Jeffrey and Pollack, Mark (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 445–474.Google Scholar
Pelc, Krzysztof J. 2014. “The Politics of Precedent in International Law: A Social Network Application,” American Political Science Review 108(03): 547–564.Google Scholar
Pinello, Daniel R. 1999. “Linking Party to Judicial Ideology in American Courts: A Meta-Analysis,” The Justice System Journal 20(3): 219–254.Google Scholar
Pratt, Travis C. 1998. “Race and Sentencing: A Meta-Analysis of Conflicting Empirical Research Results,” Journal of Criminal Justice 26(6): 513–523.Google Scholar
Ragin, Charles C. 1987. The Comparative Method: Moving Byeond Qaulitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ragin, Charles C. 2000. Fuzzy-Set Social Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ragin, Charles C. 2008. Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romano, Cesare. 2005. “The Price of International Justice,” Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 4(2): 281–328.Google Scholar
Shelton, Dinah. 2018. “Performance of Regional Human Rights Courts,” this volume.Google Scholar
Sikkink, Kathryn and Walling, Carrie. 2007. “The Impact of Human Rights Trials in Latin America,” Journal of Peace Research 44(4): 427–445.Google Scholar
Simmons, Beth A. 2014. “Bargaining over Bits, Arbitrating Awards: The Regime for Protection and Promotion of International Investment,” World Politics 66(1): 12–46.Google Scholar
Smets, Kaat and Van Ham, Carolien. 2013. “The Embarrassment of Riches? A Meta-Analysis of Individual-Level Research on Voter Turnout,” Electoral Studies 32(2): 344.Google Scholar
Squatrito, Theresa. 2016. “Domestic Legislatures and International Human Rights Law: Legislating on Religious Symbols in Europe,” Journal of Human Rights 15(4): 550–570.Google Scholar
Stockemer, Daniel. 2016. “What Affects Voter Turnout? A Review Article/Meta-Analysis of Aggregate Research,” Government and Opposition: 1–25.Google Scholar
Stone Sweet, Alec. 2000. Governing with Judges: Constitutional Politics in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stone Sweet, Alec and Brunell, Thomas L. 2012. “The European Court of Justice, State Noncompliance, and the Politics of Override,” American Political Science Review 106(1): 204–213.Google Scholar
Terris, Daniel, Romano, Cesare P. R., and Swigart, Leigh. 2007. The International Judge: An Introduction to the Men and Women Who Decide the World’s Cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Van Harten, Gus. 2012. “Arbitrator Behaviour in Asymmetrical Adjudication: An Empirical Study of Investment Treaty Arbitration,” Osgoode Hall Law Journal 50(1): 211–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yildirim, Aydin B. 2016. “Domestic Political Implications of Global Value Chains: Explaining EU Responses to Litigation at the World Trade Organization,” Comparative European Politics. Online first, DOI: https//doi:10.1057/s41295-016–0085-3.Google Scholar

References

Alter, Karen J. 2014. The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Biermann, Frank. 2014. Earth System Governance: World Politics in the Anthropocene. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Davies, Jeremy. 2016. The Birth of the Anthropocene. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Young, Oran R. 2017. Governing Complex Systems: Social Capital for the Anthropocene. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×