The Emergence of the GATT - What do realists and neoliberal institutionalists say?

Table of Contents

Introduction

1. Definitions

1.1 Regime

1.2. The emergence of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)

1.3. Neorealism

1.4. Neoliberal Institutionalism

2. How can Neorealism and Neoliberal Institutionalism explain the Emergence of GATT?

2.1. Neorealism’s approach

2.1.1. Theory of Hegemonic Stability

2.1.2. The United States of America – the hegemonic power after World War II

2.1.3. Incentives for other states to join the cooperation

2.2. Neoliberal Institutionalism’s approach

2.2.1. The Problem of Cheating and Free-riding

2.2.1.1. Exceptions

3. Strengths and Weaknesses of the applied theories

3.1 Neorealism

3.2. Neoliberal Institutionalism

Conclusion

Research Objectives and Themes

The primary objective of this paper is to evaluate the explanatory power of two major international relations theories—Neorealism and Neoliberal Institutionalism—in the context of the emergence of the GATT as a successful case of international cooperation. By examining the specific historical circumstances of 1947 and the roles played by participating states, the paper aims to determine how well the core assumptions of these theories align with historical reality.

• The influence of hegemonic stability on international regime creation.
• The role of common interests and collective action in institutional formation.
• Transaction cost reduction and the mitigation of cheating and free-riding behaviors.
• The impact of post-World War II economic and security requirements on trade policy.
• Comparative effectiveness of institutional governance versus power-based leadership.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

Introduction: Outlines the historical context of the GATT and introduces the central research question regarding the applicability of Neorealist and Neoliberal Institutionalist theories.

1. Definitions: Establishes conceptual frameworks for regimes and provides historical background on the emergence of the GATT, Neorealism, and Neoliberal Institutionalism.

2. How can Neorealism and Neoliberal Institutionalism explain the Emergence of GATT?: Analyzes how each theory accounts for the GATT's formation, specifically focusing on hegemonic stability, incentives, cheating, and free-riding.

3. Strengths and Weaknesses of the applied theories: Critically evaluates the explanatory limitations and successes of both Neorealism and Neoliberal Institutionalism in explaining the GATT's existence.

Conclusion: Synthesizes findings, suggesting that Neorealism provides a more robust explanation for the GATT's emergence while highlighting the theoretical gaps in Neoliberal Institutionalism.

Keywords

GATT, Neorealism, Neoliberal Institutionalism, International Regimes, Hegemonic Stability, Trade Policy, Cooperation, Free-riding, Transaction Costs, Post-World War II, Multilateralism, International Relations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core focus of this research paper?

The paper explores the emergence of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) through the lens of international relations theory, specifically comparing Neorealism and Neoliberal Institutionalism.

Which theoretical frameworks are applied in this work?

The work utilizes Neorealism—specifically the Theory of Hegemonic Stability—and Neoliberal Institutionalism to analyze the motives and structures behind international trade cooperation.

What is the central research question?

The research asks how well the assumptions of Neorealism and Neoliberal Institutionalism regarding state behavior and international systems explain the reality of the GATT's formation.

What methodological approach does the author use?

The author uses a comparative analysis, testing the explanatory power of the two theories against the historical facts of the GATT's establishment in 1947.

What topics are discussed in the main body?

The main body examines definitions of regimes, the role of the U.S. as a hegemon, the problem of cheating and free-riding, and the effectiveness of GATT rules and sanctions.

How is the paper characterized by its key terminology?

The paper is defined by terms such as hegemonic stability, transaction costs, collective action, and regime theory.

Does the author conclude that one theory is superior to the other?

Yes, the author argues that the Neorealistic Theory of Hegemonic Stability offers a stronger explanation for the GATT's emergence, noting that Neoliberal Institutionalism fails to account for the start-up costs of such regimes.

How did U.S. post-war power influence the establishment of the GATT?

The author posits that the U.S. economic and military dominance enabled it to bear the costs of establishing the GATT, using it as an instrument to ensure economic stability and advance its own foreign policy goals.