The Intergovernmental Network of World Trade: IGO Connectedness, Governance, and Embeddedness1

By Paul Ingram, Jeffrey A. Robinson, M. Busch. American Journal of Sociology, 2005

228 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The crisis of neoliberalism and the future of international institutions: A comparison of the IMF and the WTO (2009, background): “…important and visible role in the formulation of neoliberal prescriptions, to their legitimation, and in their enforcement worldwide.1 1 For more on IMF impact, see Polillo and Guillén 2005; Henisz et al. 2005; Nooruddin and Simmons 2006; Barro and Lee 2002; Vreeland 2003; Ingram et al. 2005.”
The diffusion of foreign divestment from Burma (2014, methodology): “IGO connectedness has been shown to promote trade (Ingram, Robinson, and Busch, 2005), peace (Pevehouse and Russett, 2006) and democracy (Torfason and Ingram, 2010) among countries.”
The International Law and Politics of Climate Change Ratification of the United Nations Framework Convention and the Kyoto Protocol (2008, background): “Along with other scholars (cf. Dorussen and Ward 2008 [this issue]; Hafner-Burton and Montgomery 2006, 2008 [this issue]; Hathaway 2007; Ingram, Robinson, and Busch 2005; Powell and Staton 2007; Raustiala 1997; Ward 2006), I recognize that social links between states and the strength of…”
The Global Rise of Democracy (2010, methodology): “This data was used to construct the network of shared IGO memberships, in which connectedness between a pair of countries is calculated as the total number of IGOs in which both countries are members in a given year (Ingram et al. 2005).”