Can the Rational Design of International Institutions Solve Cooperation Problems? Insights from a Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

Global governance challenges highlight the role of international institutions as problem-solving structures. Institutional design is, more than ever, relevant in this context. The academic literature on this issue is characterized by the existence of consolidated debates such as that of rationalism vs. constructivism, with a focus on making specific contributions to the rational design of international institutions. Koremenos, Lipson, and Snidal (2001) elaborated upon a series of cause-effect conjectures linking cooperation problems, considered independent variables, with institutional design features, considered dependent variables. This research aims to highlight the empirical evidence of the existing debate on this work by conducting a systematic review. Twenty-one quantitative research studies were collected through a screening and selection procedure and were subject to systematization. The findings showed asymmetric approaches to the rational design project, and agreements were the type of international institution that received the most attention from academia. Rationalism was supported by most of the body of literature. However, a broad subgroup of articles complemented this rational approach with other variables or schools of thought, such as those of constructivism and historical institutionalism. The results have relevance for the international institution design literature, as future avenues of potential research are underlined.

Economic and Spatial Restructuring in the Aras Economic Zone: The Impact of Cross-Border Cooperation

“…Regional imbalances are increasing due to economic development and spatial restructuring. Locals continue to prefer BRI strategies despite The results in AFTZ showed spatial heterogeneity, which, paradoxically, has tended to increase spatial inequalities [32], land use conflict [33,34], and inconsistency [72,73]; hence, careful planning is required. Any intervention that focuses solely on physical upgrading will have little influence; instead, a place syntax is required to communicate notions such as social interaction, networks, or social ties, much as it was for settlement transformation [74].…”

“…Despite the existence of perspectives that are overlooked by obsessive administrators and community planners [78], an integrated stakeholder engagement method is necessary for development and implementation to unify information disclosure and community consultation activities [14], which this study partially covered. Feasibility analysis and resource mobilization are necessary as prerequisites for decision-making [72] and providing possible directions for development plans. Local governments, the general public, and non-governmental groups all contribute to and coordinate favorable public policies [30] for CBC in support of BRI strategies.…”

“…The results regarding RSSDI revealed a maximum potential 5.13-fold increase in SSDI As demonstrated in Figure 4, determined values for SSDI spatial concentration and divers confirm inner SEZs and separate areas' dependency on CBC as a main cause for imbalances in economic and spatial restructuring. The results in AFTZ showed spatial heterogeneity, which, paradoxically, has tended to increase spatial inequalities [32], land use conflict [33,34], and inconsistency [72,73]; hence, careful planning is required. Any intervention that focuses solely on physical upgrading will have little influence; instead, a place syntax is required to communicate notions such as social interaction, networks, or social ties, much as it was for settlement transformation [74].…”