This study critically
examines the effectiveness of key rules of Digital Trade Agreements (DTAs)
through a legal analysis of their textual design. Drawing upon theories of behavioural
effectiveness of international agreements from International Relations (IR) and
international law scholarship, the study analyses how, from the perspective of
negotiators and trade policy makers, DTA rules are textually designed to
control the extent to which they influence the behaviour of the parties. By
analysing DTAs concluded by major digital powers – the United States, the
European Union, and China – the study identifies a recurring pattern: in issue
areas where regulatory autonomy is prioritized, such as cross-border data
flows, data localization, and source code, parties are generally reluctant to
adopt legal rules that may significantly affect their domestic regulatory
frameworks. This pattern underscores the limited capacity of DTAs, in their
current form, to mandate behavioural change beyond the existing regulatory
status quo. The key contribution of this research lies in its development of a
conceptual framework for defining and assessing the legal effectiveness of DTAs
from the perspective of negotiators and policy makers. This framework
facilitates the identification of issue areas where effectiveness remains
constrained and those not offers practical guidance for negotiators and policy
makers in drafting more effective and enforceable commitments. In doing so, the
study provides critical insights into how the legal design of DTA rules can be
enhanced to achieve their objectives – addressing the challenges posed by
regulatory fragmentation in digital trade.