A low rule of law (Regulatory Enforcement),  would reduce the effectiveness of which political risk treatment strategy?

A low rule of law (Regulatory Enforcement) would reduce the effectiveness of the political risk treatment strategy known as "Contractual and Legal Protections". Here's why:

1. Contractual Agreements: In a country with low rule of law, contractual agreements may not be effectively enforced. This means that even if a company has a contract that should protect it from certain political risks, it may not be able to rely on that contract for protection.

2. Legal Protections: Similarly, legal protections may not be effective in a country with low rule of law. If the legal system is not reliable or is subject to corruption, then legal protections may not provide much actual protection.

3. Dispute Resolution: In a country with low rule of law, dispute resolution mechanisms may be ineffective or biased. This can make it difficult for a company to resolve disputes and protect its interests.

4. Enforcement of Rights: Even if a company has certain rights under the law, it may not be able to effectively enforce those rights in a country with low rule of law.

5. Uncertainty and Instability: Low rule of law can create a climate of uncertainty and instability, which can make any political risk treatment strategy less effective.

Therefore, in such environments, companies might need to consider other strategies such as political risk insurance, joint ventures with local partners, or lobbying for favorable policies.