条约保留和《维也纳公约》第21条第1款的经济学

F. Parisi, Catherine Ševčenko
{"title":"条约保留和《维也纳公约》第21条第1款的经济学","authors":"F. Parisi, Catherine Ševčenko","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.307279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study of the use of reservation in multi-lateral treaties reveals two striking phenomena: 1) the law of reservations, enshrined in Articles 19-21 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, favors the reserving state; and 2) the number of reservations attached to international treaties is relatively low in spite of that natural advantage. The article draws on game theory to explain the states' behavior concerning reservations to international treaties and posits that Article 21 (1) of the Vienna Convention is a good place to search for an explanation. This provision establishes the concept that reservations are reciprocal: between a reserving state and a state that objects to the reservation, that provision of the treaty will not be in force. Therefore, if a state wants to exempt itself from a treaty obligation, it must be willing to let other nations escape that same burden as well. By considering different kinds of treaties in light of various game theory models, the article considers why most treaties have relatively few reservations, whereas human rights treaties present a notable, and disappointing, exception to this general rule.","PeriodicalId":325917,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley Journal of International Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Treaty Reservations and the Economics of Article 21 (1) of the Vienna Convention\",\"authors\":\"F. Parisi, Catherine Ševčenko\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.307279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The study of the use of reservation in multi-lateral treaties reveals two striking phenomena: 1) the law of reservations, enshrined in Articles 19-21 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, favors the reserving state; and 2) the number of reservations attached to international treaties is relatively low in spite of that natural advantage. The article draws on game theory to explain the states' behavior concerning reservations to international treaties and posits that Article 21 (1) of the Vienna Convention is a good place to search for an explanation. This provision establishes the concept that reservations are reciprocal: between a reserving state and a state that objects to the reservation, that provision of the treaty will not be in force. Therefore, if a state wants to exempt itself from a treaty obligation, it must be willing to let other nations escape that same burden as well. By considering different kinds of treaties in light of various game theory models, the article considers why most treaties have relatively few reservations, whereas human rights treaties present a notable, and disappointing, exception to this general rule.\",\"PeriodicalId\":325917,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Berkeley Journal of International Law\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-04-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Berkeley Journal of International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.307279\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Berkeley Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.307279","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

摘要

对多边条约中保留使用的研究揭示了两个惊人的现象:1)《维也纳条约法公约》第19-21条所载的保留法有利于保留国;2)尽管具有这种天然优势,但附加在国际条约上的保留意见数量相对较少。本文运用博弈论来解释国家对国际条约保留的行为,并认为《维也纳公约》第21条第1款是一个很好的解释。这一规定确立了保留是互惠的概念:在保留国和反对保留的国家之间,条约的这一规定将不生效。因此,如果一个国家想要免除自己的条约义务,它必须愿意让其他国家也逃避同样的负担。根据不同的博弈论模型,本文考虑了不同类型的条约,考虑了为什么大多数条约都有相对较少的保留,而人权条约则是这一一般规则的一个显著的、令人失望的例外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Treaty Reservations and the Economics of Article 21 (1) of the Vienna Convention
The study of the use of reservation in multi-lateral treaties reveals two striking phenomena: 1) the law of reservations, enshrined in Articles 19-21 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, favors the reserving state; and 2) the number of reservations attached to international treaties is relatively low in spite of that natural advantage. The article draws on game theory to explain the states' behavior concerning reservations to international treaties and posits that Article 21 (1) of the Vienna Convention is a good place to search for an explanation. This provision establishes the concept that reservations are reciprocal: between a reserving state and a state that objects to the reservation, that provision of the treaty will not be in force. Therefore, if a state wants to exempt itself from a treaty obligation, it must be willing to let other nations escape that same burden as well. By considering different kinds of treaties in light of various game theory models, the article considers why most treaties have relatively few reservations, whereas human rights treaties present a notable, and disappointing, exception to this general rule.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Maritime Interdiction of North Korean Ships under UN Sanctions The South China Sea as a Challenge to International Law and to International Legal Scholarship Back in the Game: International Humanitarian Lawmaking by States International Law and Corporate Participation in Times of Armed Conflict Reversing the Two Wrong Turns in the Economic Analysis of International Law: A Club Goods Theory of Treaty Membership & European Integration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1