Legal Traditions and Nonbinding Commitments: Evidence From the United Nations' Model Commercial Legislation

Non–legally binding agreements provide an important tool for establishing international cooperation. We know little, however, about the variation in the implementation of such agreements. This article identifies a major cause of this variation: legal tradition. Nonbinding agreements, which may be adapted to local needs and circumstances, are consistent with the gradual, organic evolution of common law; by contrast, they are an uneasy fit with the civil-law tradition that neatly distinguishes between “law” and “nonlaw.” Consequently, common-law countries are more likely to implement nonbinding agreements than civil-law countries. Survival analysis of three nonbinding instruments—United Nations model laws aimed at harmonizing commercial legislation—finds strong support for this argument: common-law countries prove significantly more likely to implement these model laws.

非具有法律约束力的协议是开展国际合作的重要工具。然而，学界对这类协议在实施过程中的差异却知之甚少。本文揭示了造成这一差异的核心动因：法律传统。非约束性协议可根据本地需求与具体情境进行调整，契合普通法（common law）渐进式、内生性的演化逻辑；与之形成鲜明对比的是，这类协议与清晰区分“法律”与“非法律”的大陆法传统却难以适配。因此，相较于大陆法系国家，普通法系国家更倾向于落实非约束性协议。针对三项非约束性文书——旨在统一商事立法的联合国示范法——开展的生存分析（Survival analysis）为本文论点提供了强有力的实证支撑：研究结果显示，普通法系国家采纳上述示范法的概率显著更高。