DRAFTPrepared for delivery at the 2009 Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, February 15-18, 2008.In recent years a growing literature on the resolution of territorial disputes via judicial processes has flourished. Countries willing to settle their maritime and territorial disputes have a plethora of forum options available, including regional and global tribunals. Yet, some states seem to prefer global courts over regional tribunals. What explains this choice of forum? Does the overlap of two or more memberships in international organizations affect their relative use? The article explores forum selection by analyzing Latin American cases of territorial dispute settlement. Evidence from these cases suggests that forum choice is not all strategic bargaining or institutional design. Rather states seek specific courts influenced by regional and cognitive biases, as well as emulation and diffusion patterns
