United Nations Voting Patterns

Newcombe, Hanna; Ross, Michael J.; Newcombe, Alan G.

doi:10.1017/s0020818300017422

Cited by 33 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Most members belong to smaller subgroups within the assembly, through which they are able to engage in collective bargaining (e.g., Meyers ; Newcombe, Ross, and Newcombe ; Vincent ; Haas and Rowe ; Iida ; Holloway ; Kim and Russett ; Panke ). The largest of these groups is the Group of 77 (G77) developing countries, which was established in 1964 and comprises approximately one third of all member states.…”

Section: Participation and Success In The Ungamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Data on the number of members were gathered via the respective homepages (cf. Meyers 1966;Vincent 1970;Haas and Rowe 1973;Holloway 1990;Kim and Russett 1996;Newcombe et al 1970;Young and Rees 2005;Peterson 2008;Panke 2013c). 9.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Meyers ; Vincent ; Haas and Rowe ; Holloway ; Kim and Russett ; Newcombe et al. ; Young and Rees ; Peterson ; Panke ).…”

unclassified

See 2 more Smart Citations

Is Bigger Better? Activity and Success in Negotiations in the United Nations General Assembly

Panke¹

2014

Negotiation Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theorists often claim that being bigger than one's counterparts offers advantages in multilateral negotiations. In this article, I examine that argument using data from negotiations in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). The article analyzes and compares the activity levels of smaller and larger states in international negotiations, and sheds light on the conditions under which the latter “punch below their weight.” My analysis indicates that size directly affects participation, but not success rates. Bigger states can better formulate national positions on a broad range of issues, enabling their diplomats to more actively participate in negotiations, while smaller states are absent more often. Activity is conducive to success, which helps bigger states. But not every negotiation strategy is equally effective. In the UNGA's one‐state, one‐vote context, bigger states are not able to systematically exert disproportionate influence despite their often superior financial resources and bargaining strategies.

show abstract

Section: Participation and Success In The Ungamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is Bigger Better? Activity and Success in Negotiations in the United Nations General Assembly

Panke¹

2014

Negotiation Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By contrast, Latin American countries joined the Western alliance. These differing political tendencies were evident in the United Nations: around 1955, Latin American countries started voting with the West instead of joining the non-aligned group (Newcombe et al 1970). A variety of developmental changes in the two regions can also be traced back to these earlier contrasts in state construction: land reforms and related patterns of inequalities; strategies towards dependence on foreign capital; and the role of national capital and indigenous technology, including trained manpower, in industrialization strategies.…”

Section: Manufactured Exports (%Exports) 2005mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nationalist Versus Dependent Capitalist Development: Alternate Pathways of Asia and Latin America in a Globalized World

Kohli

2009

St Comp Int Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When compared to Latin America, Asian economies since 1980 have grown faster and have done so with relatively modest inequalities. Why? A comparison of Asia and Latin America underlines the superiority of the nationalist capitalist model of development, which has often been pursued more explicitly in Asia, over that of a dependent capitalist model, which has often been pursued in Latin America. In comparison to Latin America, the Asian model has facilitated higher and less volatile rates of economic growth and a greater political room to pursue social democratic policies. The "tap root" of these alternate pathways is relative autonomy from global constraints: states and economies in Asia have been more nationalist and autonomous than in Latin America.Keywords Capitalist development . Washington consensus . Economic performance Cardoso and Faletto's Dependency and Development in Latin America (1979) was a brilliant book then and is a brilliant book now. It provided a sophisticated analysis of diverse responses within Latin America to the shared constraints of a dependent situation. Especially notable was the distinction between enclave economies with limited commodity exports and heavy foreign investment on the one hand, and on the other hand, more complex, diversified economies with a respectable presence of national capital and some indigenous industry. With landed oligarchs and foreign capital controlling states in enclave economies, developmental prospects (both growth and distribution) were limited. By contrast, Cardoso and Faletto suggested that in more diversified economies (such as Brazil), national states in alliance with diverse social classes, were in a better position to promote economic growth, though probably not much redistribution. St Comp Int Dev (2009) 44:386-410

show abstract

“…Although comprehensive voting records such as that for the U.S. Supreme Court are scarce, data on several other voting bodies reveal that divisions typically occur with very different frequencies. This is true of the Supreme Court of Canada (Heard and Swartz 1998), the European Union Council of Ministers (Hayes-Renshaw et al 2006) and the institutions of the United Nations (Newcombe et al 1970). In the next section we show that positive correlations between votes are the primary cause of the observed pattern.…”

Section: The Datamentioning

confidence: 99%