1990
DOI: 10.1177/0022002790034002004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Dynamic Model of Domestic Political Conflict Process

Abstract: The dynamical behavior of domestic political hostility is modeled in terms of the interaction between hostile (challenger) and ruling (regime) groups. The conditions under which the conflict situation will either settle down in a steady state or evolve in time are derived for various forms of collective action costs. The model presented is a general framework for explaining the various outcomes of the repression/dissent nexus as special cases of the same fundamental process. We also obtain critical parameter v… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…12. For the short run, our model provides microfoundations for cycles of repression and dissent as suggested by Jackson et al (1978), Karmeshu and Mahajan (1990), and Francisco (1995). The clockwise oscillation that appears in Figure 4b around point 1 for small benefits of protest, and the counterclockwise oscillation that appears in Figure 4a around point 1 for large benefits of protest, fits the predator-prey dynamics which Tsebelis and Sprague (1989) suggest, who argue that both clockwise and counterclockwise dynamics are possible.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 56%
“…12. For the short run, our model provides microfoundations for cycles of repression and dissent as suggested by Jackson et al (1978), Karmeshu and Mahajan (1990), and Francisco (1995). The clockwise oscillation that appears in Figure 4b around point 1 for small benefits of protest, and the counterclockwise oscillation that appears in Figure 4a around point 1 for large benefits of protest, fits the predator-prey dynamics which Tsebelis and Sprague (1989) suggest, who argue that both clockwise and counterclockwise dynamics are possible.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 56%
“…In this paper, we have attempted to enlist the possibilities of evolution of superintelligence, based on the extant knowledge available in the literature. These possibilities range from a simplistic evolution of superintelligence as a new technology following S-shaped curve (Bass, 1969), to hostile strategies followed by adversaries (Karmeshu et al , 1990). Our empirical analysis results from the manufacturing, communication and energy sectors suggesting that the technology diffusion model fits well with the data of robotics, telecom and solar installations till date.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different variants of the above models can be used to model the conflicting situations in other types of scenarios. For example, Karmeshu et al (1990) modeled the time-based behavior of domestic political hostility between the hostile (challenger) and ruling (regime) groups. They find the conditions under which the conflict will either stabilize or evolve over time.…”
Section: Dynamic Models Of the Possible Evolution Of Artificial Superintelligencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In both of these cases, the evolution of a resource (respectively, manpower and military expenditure) is described using equations which incorporate both internal and external influences. This general approachclosely related to the Lotka-Volterra model of predator-prey interactionhas since been refined and adapted to apply to a number of different types of conflict [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12] .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%