Recent International Relations scholarship offers valuable rational choice explanations for the design of international institutions. However, the rational design literature has relied heavily on institutional outcomes as evidence for testing models. Such studies must be complemented by research designs that analyze the decisions and bargaining that drive design choices in order to expose causal mechanisms and test a wider range of observable implications. I assess an important rational design hypothesis, that uncertainty leads to flexible institutions, by analyzing the negotiations behind the climate change regime and by considering two distinct institutional outcomes across time. While the hypothesis receives considerable support, significant behavior and outcomes do not conform to its logic. I propose refinements for rational design theory in general and work on uncertainty and flexibility in particular. Rational choice theory speaks to the process of institutional design and should not content itself with predicting - and testing itself against - equilibrium outcomes. © The Author(s) 2010.
CITATION STYLE
Thompson, A. (2010). Rational design in motion: Uncertainty and flexibility in the global climate regime. European Journal of International Relations, 16(2), 269–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066109342918
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.