Suchergebnisse

Abstract
Regional regime complexity has long been on the rise and carries a series of potential negative effects, such as waste of resources or reduced effectiveness of regional governance. This article investigates a specific strategy of how states cope with regime complexity, namely by exiting regional international organizations (RIOs). We develop hypotheses on how different types of regional regime complexity influence the chances for exits to occur and theorize interaction effects. The analysis reveals that higher levels of membership- and competency-based regime complexity as well as RIO incompatibility increase the likelihood of state withdrawals. In addition, state characteristics moderate this effect and influence who leaves which organization. Most importantly, smaller rather are less able to shape RIO policies and activities and have fewer capacities to implement them and are thus more likely to exit one of the organizations when being member in many overlapping RIOs. By contrast, powerful states can better navigate regime complexity and avoid negative side-effects and are therefore less inclined to withdraw from RIOs in situations of high regional regime complexity.

AbstractSince 1945, there have been more than 120 instances of states threatening to withdraw from international organizations with regional membership criteria (RIOs) and over 50 cases in which states in fact left RIOs. Recent examples include withdrawal threats by Qatar toward the Gulf Cooperation Council and Brazil toward MERCOSUR, as well as the actual exits of the United Kingdom from the European Union (EU) and of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger from the Economic Community of West African States. Withdrawal threats and exits represent shocks with potentially significant implications for RIOs and their integration projects. While existing research has focused on the future of EU integration after Brexit, this paper is the first to analyze the effects of threats to leave and the realization thereof on RIOs and regional integration from a broader comparative perspective. RIOs can respond to exit-related challenges through institutional change, which can take the form of institutional strengthening or weakening. Having conducted a series of explorative qualitative case studies, we find that while (1) the extent of problem pressure induced through exit-related challenges influences institutional change, (2) the materialization and directionality of these changes also depends on other factors, such as external windows of opportunity and the distribution of power and preferences within the RIO. Furthermore, (3) institutional change often takes the form of institutional strengthening, indicating the general resilience of international organizations in the context of exit-related challenges.