Who makes the rules? Why the United States succeeds or fails in shaping the global agenda

Among other characteristics, one facet of the unipolar world that clearly differentiates it from previous eras is the degree to which interactions between states are increasingly institutionalized. While the United States continues to play an integral role in the formation of new agreements, a variety of global institutions have been established in recent years in the face of opposition from the United States. Though the literature on institutional formation is rich and diverse, much of it suggests that the formation of institutions in the face of opposition from the world's most powerful state should be highly unlikely. As such, the existence of "outliers" suggests that existing theoretical paradigms on institutional formation may need to be reassessed and reapplied to better take the dynamics of unipolarity into account.;How do institutions form in the face of hegemonic opposition? Why has the United States lost control over the agenda in many post cold-war international treaty negotiations? What were the tipping points that changed the negotiation dynamics? Where, when and how could the United States have intervened to alter the outcome? What are the implications for international relations theory and practice? This dissertation attempts to shed light on these and other related questions.;Drawing on descriptive quantitative data and a range of case studies including the Ottawa Treaty on Landmines, Kyoto Protocol and International Criminal Court, this dissertation tests a theoretical model aimed at explaining the post-Cold War emergence of global international institutions that do not reflect the United States' preferences. The results of the case studies suggest that a variety of factors including ineffective diplomacy, changes in the structure of the international system and the emergence of new methods of institutional formation have ultimately led to the creation of institutions that the United States opposes. These findings have important implications for international relations theory and practice.