Play the scramble, avoid the backlash? Partisan dynamics in the negotiation of bilateral investment treaties

Sparked by a proliferation of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) at the turn of the century, the modern international investment regime now faces a backlash from dissatisfied states. We examine the link between these two periods of cooperation at the treaty level. Specifically, we argue that different partisan coalitions within developing countries influence an agreement’s formation with implications for its design and longevity. Left-wing parties are generally reluctant to form BITs, which grants them an advantage in negotiation for the rare agreements they do sign onto. In contrast, right-wing parties embrace BITs with high costs to lock-in pro-business policies. Agreements formed by the left avoid such stringent obligations and developing countries remain satisfied with the treaty’s terms for a longer period of time. We test the argument quantitatively with data on BIT formation, design, and exit from 1980 to 2020, with an emphasis on the inclusion of exit clauses. The paper adds to our understanding of the international investment regime’s present crisis and highlights the understudied role of partisan politics in international cooperation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Review of International Political Economy
Published
2025-11-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2025.2589412
Primary Topic
International Arbitration and Investment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Play the scramble, avoid the backlash? Partisan dynamics in the negotiation of bilateral investment treaties

Andrew C. McWard, Yumi Park
Review of International Political Economy
International Arbitration and Investment Law
article

Play the scramble, avoid the backlash? Partisan dynamics in the negotiation of bilateral investment treaties

Andrew C. McWard, Yumi Park
article en

Abstract

Sparked by a proliferation of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) at the turn of the century, the modern international investment regime now faces a backlash from dissatisfied states. We examine the link between these two periods of cooperation at the treaty level. Specifically, we argue that different partisan coalitions within developing countries influence an agreement’s formation with implications for its design and longevity. Left-wing parties are generally reluctant to form BITs, which grants them an advantage in negotiation for the rare agreements they do sign onto. In contrast, right-wing parties embrace BITs with high costs to lock-in pro-business policies. Agreements formed by the left avoid such stringent obligations and developing countries remain satisfied with the treaty’s terms for a longer period of time. We test the argument quantitatively with data on BIT formation, design, and exit from 1980 to 2020, with an emphasis on the inclusion of exit clauses. The paper adds to our understanding of the international investment regime’s present crisis and highlights the understudied role of partisan politics in international cooperation.

Review of International Political EconomyVol. 33(2)
Copenhagen Business School (DK), Denison University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 49%
International Arbitration and Investment Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.