ABSTRACT
This chapter develops a series of testable propositions about the conditions under which states can be expected to implement a non-compliant, minimalist, or strict interpretation of the 1988 Basel Accord rules. The propositions endeavor to provide probabilistic statements that explain why states that were committed to the Accord chose to implement the strict or loose interpretations that they did and why, or why not, those interpretations may have converged or diverged over time from 1988 to 2000. This chapter aims to contribute to a broader theoretical perspective in which to understand the effects of an international regime on state behavior in an issue area – financial services – that has not been extensively considered in previous research. The hypotheses derived in this chapter will receive a quantitative testing in Chapters 4 and 5 and will form part of the qualitative analyses of implementation in Part III.
