2010
DOI: 10.1177/0265659009352137
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trade and Conflict: Proximity, Country Size, and Measures

Abstract: The effect of trade on military conflict is one of the most important questions in international relations. liberals argue that trade brings peace, neo-realists and neo-Marxists reason that trade brings conflict, while classical realists contend that trade has no impact on conflict. This article investigates theoretically and empirically some of the most important issues that remain in this literature: the roles of geographical proximity, country size, the handling of the trade data, and the conceptualization … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
27
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
1
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In results not presented (due to space concerns, but available from the authors), we find that our results hold when replacing the dyadic rivalry dummy variable with continuous indicators of stability (Specifically, Signorino and Ritter's [1999] and Bueno de Mesquita's [1985] alliance similarity measures, from EUGene). Additionally, these concerns for spurious correlation due to an antecedent variable resemble those regarding endogeneity in trade and conflict studies (for example, Keshk, Pollins, and Reveny 2004;Keshk, Reuveny, and Pollins 2010). In robustness checks (not presented but available from the authors), we find that our results hold in simultaneous equations models for reciprocal causation between trade and conflict.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…In results not presented (due to space concerns, but available from the authors), we find that our results hold when replacing the dyadic rivalry dummy variable with continuous indicators of stability (Specifically, Signorino and Ritter's [1999] and Bueno de Mesquita's [1985] alliance similarity measures, from EUGene). Additionally, these concerns for spurious correlation due to an antecedent variable resemble those regarding endogeneity in trade and conflict studies (for example, Keshk, Pollins, and Reveny 2004;Keshk, Reuveny, and Pollins 2010). In robustness checks (not presented but available from the authors), we find that our results hold in simultaneous equations models for reciprocal causation between trade and conflict.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…Keshk's (2003) two-stage probit least squares model offers some advantages over standard simultaneous equations models because its endogenous variables may also be dichotomous and continuous measures. Keshk, Reuveny, and Pollins (2010) and Hegre, Oneal, and Russett (2010) rely on Keshk's simultaneous equations model. Unfortunately, because the endogenous variables in this study are a count measure (i.e., terrorism) and a dichotomous measure (i.e., economic sanctions), use of those simultaneous equations models will yield biased estimates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although some suggest that controlling for distance is not important in models of trade and conflict (Keshk et al, 2010), I argue that including both distance and contiguity is necessary because capital cities might be quite far from each other, although two states share a border (e.g. Russia and China).…”
Section: Controlsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…But even with better methods, the debate continues over whether trade is associated with war, or peace, or whether there is no relationship (e.g. Hegre et al, 2010;Keshk et al, 2010;Li and Reuveny 2011). In this article, I suggest a theoretical rethinking by considering the process of international conflict onset and escalation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%