Time to Consensus in International Negotiations

Contemporary international relations, anchored in the principles of multipolarity, frequently employ consensus-based decision-making, which prioritizes respect for all negotiating parties and ensures that the views of all participants are considered equally. While consensus remains a core mechanism...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: I. Z. Aronov, O. V. Maksimova
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MGIMO University Press 2024-09-01
Series:Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.vestnik.mgimo.ru/jour/article/view/3740
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832579370643881984
author I. Z. Aronov
O. V. Maksimova
author_facet I. Z. Aronov
O. V. Maksimova
author_sort I. Z. Aronov
collection DOAJ
description Contemporary international relations, anchored in the principles of multipolarity, frequently employ consensus-based decision-making, which prioritizes respect for all negotiating parties and ensures that the views of all participants are considered equally. While consensus remains a core mechanism for many international organizations, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), it has increasingly come under criticism for its inefficiency and substantial time requirements. This highlights the importance of examining the factors that influence the time needed to reach consensus. Utilizing formal mathematical modeling based on a modified DeGroot model, this article explores how variables such as the size of the negotiating group, the level of authoritativeness, dominance dynamics within the group, and coalition formation affect the time required to achieve consensus. The findings indicate that an increase in group size, on its own, results in only a minor increase in the time needed to reach consensus, becoming a significant factor only when paired with high levels of authoritativeness among the participants. Conversely, the presence of a highly authoritative member within a negotiating group significantly prolongs decision-making time, even in smaller groups, and the formation of coalitions (e.g., due to multiple highly authoritative members) can make reaching consensus impossible. The "consensus minus k" rule, intended to break deadlocks, is found to be ineffective for international organizations with numerous participants and divergent interests. In hierarchical structures, consensus is typically achieved through preliminary negotiations within subgroups, which further prolongs the consensusbuilding process.
format Article
id doaj-art-dc8489690b5249a9bb502eefd000a8f9
institution Kabale University
issn 2071-8160
2541-9099
language English
publishDate 2024-09-01
publisher MGIMO University Press
record_format Article
series Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta
spelling doaj-art-dc8489690b5249a9bb502eefd000a8f92025-01-30T12:16:18ZengMGIMO University PressVestnik MGIMO-Universiteta2071-81602541-90992024-09-011748310010.24833/2071-8160-2024-4-97-83-1002607Time to Consensus in International NegotiationsI. Z. Aronov0O. V. Maksimova1MGIMO UniversityYu.A. Izrael Institute of Global Climate and Ecology (IGCE); National University of Science and Technology «MISIS»Contemporary international relations, anchored in the principles of multipolarity, frequently employ consensus-based decision-making, which prioritizes respect for all negotiating parties and ensures that the views of all participants are considered equally. While consensus remains a core mechanism for many international organizations, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), it has increasingly come under criticism for its inefficiency and substantial time requirements. This highlights the importance of examining the factors that influence the time needed to reach consensus. Utilizing formal mathematical modeling based on a modified DeGroot model, this article explores how variables such as the size of the negotiating group, the level of authoritativeness, dominance dynamics within the group, and coalition formation affect the time required to achieve consensus. The findings indicate that an increase in group size, on its own, results in only a minor increase in the time needed to reach consensus, becoming a significant factor only when paired with high levels of authoritativeness among the participants. Conversely, the presence of a highly authoritative member within a negotiating group significantly prolongs decision-making time, even in smaller groups, and the formation of coalitions (e.g., due to multiple highly authoritative members) can make reaching consensus impossible. The "consensus minus k" rule, intended to break deadlocks, is found to be ineffective for international organizations with numerous participants and divergent interests. In hierarchical structures, consensus is typically achieved through preliminary negotiations within subgroups, which further prolongs the consensusbuilding process.https://www.vestnik.mgimo.ru/jour/article/view/3740decision-makingconsensustime to reach consensusauthoritativenessnegotiationcoalitionsnemawashi
spellingShingle I. Z. Aronov
O. V. Maksimova
Time to Consensus in International Negotiations
Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta
decision-making
consensus
time to reach consensus
authoritativeness
negotiation
coalitions
nemawashi
title Time to Consensus in International Negotiations
title_full Time to Consensus in International Negotiations
title_fullStr Time to Consensus in International Negotiations
title_full_unstemmed Time to Consensus in International Negotiations
title_short Time to Consensus in International Negotiations
title_sort time to consensus in international negotiations
topic decision-making
consensus
time to reach consensus
authoritativeness
negotiation
coalitions
nemawashi
url https://www.vestnik.mgimo.ru/jour/article/view/3740
work_keys_str_mv AT izaronov timetoconsensusininternationalnegotiations
AT ovmaksimova timetoconsensusininternationalnegotiations