Do states take court decisions into account when formulating policies? If so, how do they process... more Do states take court decisions into account when formulating policies? If so, how do they process new judicial input and make policies in response to them? While self-interest and incentives are the usual elements involved in a rational choice explanation of policymaking, behavioralist scholarship casts doubt on whether decisionmakers are able to identify and pursue their interests in a rational manner. We draw on rational and behavioral approaches to formulate different expectations about the process of policymaking and updating in the context of maritime delimitation. We focus on how states formulate policies about the appropriate method of maritime delimitation given relevant decisions of the International Court of Justice. Using a dataset of continental shelf delimitation policies, we find evidence that at least some states change policies in line with court decisions. However, we are unable to distinguish between mechanisms consistent with rational choice and those suggested by...
The eastern Mediterranean has seen a number of disputes over gas exploration and maritime boundar... more The eastern Mediterranean has seen a number of disputes over gas exploration and maritime boundaries. Moritz Neubert and Umut Yuksel write that jurisdictional ambiguity lies at the heart of the problem. However, despite the legal uncertainty and contradictory interpretations that exist between states, there remains a judicial way out.
Do states take court decisions into account when formulating policies? If so, how do they process... more Do states take court decisions into account when formulating policies? If so, how do they process new judicial input and make policies in response to them? While self-interest and incentives are the usual elements involved in a rational choice explanation of policymaking, behavioralist scholarship casts doubt on whether decisionmakers are able to identify and pursue their interests in a rational manner. We draw on rational and behavioral approaches to formulate different expectations about the process of policymaking and updating in the context of maritime delimitation. We focus on how states formulate policies about the appropriate method of maritime delimitation given relevant decisions of the International Court of Justice. Using a dataset of continental shelf delimitation policies, we find evidence that at least some states change policies in line with court decisions. However, we are unable to distinguish between mechanisms consistent with rational choice and those suggested by...
The eastern Mediterranean has seen a number of disputes over gas exploration and maritime boundar... more The eastern Mediterranean has seen a number of disputes over gas exploration and maritime boundaries. Moritz Neubert and Umut Yuksel write that jurisdictional ambiguity lies at the heart of the problem. However, despite the legal uncertainty and contradictory interpretations that exist between states, there remains a judicial way out.
Uploads
Papers by Umut Yüksel