A measure—trade efficiency—that models the extent to which individual economic entities within two countries trade with each other is used to investigate the claim that symmetrical dependence on trade between two states is required for the trade bond to reduce the probability of interstate conflict. This measure is better suited to study this question than existing measures since it is by definition uncorrelated with asymmetries in country size. The relationship between the different conceptions of interdependence and militarized conflict is explored in an expected utility model of trade, distribution of resources, and conflict. For the particular pacifying mechanisms of trade studied here, the model supports the view that trade reduces the incentives for conflict but that this effect is most clearly seen in relatively symmetric dyads.
Anderton, Charles H. , and John R. Carter. 2001. The impact of war on trade: An interrupted time-series study. Journal of Peace Research38 (4): 445-457.
2.
Barbieri, Katherine . 1996. Economic interdependence: A path to peace or a source of interstate conflict?Journal of Peace Research33 (1): 29-49.
3.
Barbieri, Katherine . 2002. The liberal illusion: Does trade promote peace?Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
4.
Barbieri, Katherine , and Jack S. Levy. 1999.Sleepingwith the enemy: The impact of war on trade. Journal of Peace Research36 (4): 463-479.
5.
Beck, Nathaniel , and Matthew Baum. 2000. Trade and conflict in the cold war era: An empirical analysis using directed dyads. Paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research Joint Sessions of Workshops, April, Copenhagen.
6.
Beck, Nathaniel , Jonathan N. Katz, and Richard Tucker. 1998. Taking time seriously: Time-series-cross-section analysis with a binary dependent variable. American Journal of Political Science42 (4): 1260-1288.
7.
Bennett, D. Scott , and Allan C. Stam III. 2000. Research design and estimator choices in the analysis of interstate dyads. Journal of Conflict Resolution44 (5): 653-685.
8.
Bremer, Stuart . 1992. Dangerous dyads: Conditions affecting the likelihood of interstate war, 1816-1965. Journal of Conflict Resolution36 (2): 309-341.
9.
Burkhart, Ross E. , and Michael S. Lewis-Beck. 1994. Comparative democracy: The economic development thesis. American Political Science Review88 (4): 903-910.
10.
Collett, D.1994. Modelling survival data in medical research. London: Chapman & Hall.
11.
Cox, David R.1972. Regression models and life tables (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B74: 187-220.
12.
Deardorff, Alan V.1998. Determinants of bilateral trade: Does gravity work in a neoclassical world? In The regionalization of the world economy, edited by Jeffrey A. Frankel, 7-31. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
Dixon, William . 1994. Democracy and the peaceful settlement of international conflict. American Political Science Review88 (1): 14-32.
14.
Dorussen, Han . 1999. Balance of power revisited: A multi-country model of trade and conflict. Journal of Peace Research36 (4): 443-462.
15.
Dorussen, Han , and Håvard Hegre. 2003. Extending the multi-country model of trade and conflict. In Globalization and armed conflict, edited by Gerald Schneider, Katherine Barbieri, and Nils Petter Gleditsch, 77-102. Boulder, CO: Rowman & Littlefield.
16.
Fearon, James D.1995. Rationalist explanations for war. International Organization49 (3): 379-414.
17.
Frankel, Jeffrey A. , and David Romer. 1999. Does trade cause growth?American Economic Review89 (3): 379-399.
18.
Galtung, Johan.1971. A structural theory of imperialism. Journal of Peace Research8 (2): 81-117.
19.
Gartzke, Erik , and Quan Li. 2003. War, peace, and the invisible hand: Positive political externalities of economic globalization. International Studies Quarterly47 (4): 561-586.
20.
Gartzke, Erik , Quan Li, and Charles Boehmer. 2001. Investing in the peace: Economic interdependence and international conflict. International Organization55 (2): 391-438.
21.
Gasiorowski, Mark J.1986. Economic interdependence and international conflict: Some cross-national evidence. International Studies Quarterly30 (1): 23-38.
22.
Gleditsch, Kristian S.2002. Expanded trade and GDP data. Journal of Conflict Resolution46(5): 712-724.
23.
Reprinted 2003 in Globalization and armed conflict, edited by Gerald Schneider, Katherine Barbieri, and Nils Petter Gleditsch. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
24.
Hegre, Håvard . 2002. Trade decreases conflict more in multi-actor systems: A comment to Dorussen. Journal of Peace Research39 (1): 109-114.
25.
Hirschman, Albert O. [1945] 1980. National power and the structure of foreign trade. Reprint, Berkeley: University of California Press.
26.
Hirshleifer, Jack . 2000. The macro technology of conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution44 (6): 773-792.
27.
International Monetary Fund . 1997. Direction of trade. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund [producer]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].
28.
Jaggers, Keith , and Ted Robert Gurr. 1995.Trackingdemocracy’s third wave with the Polity III data. Journal of Peace Research32 (4): 469-482.
29.
Jones, Daniel M. , Stuart A. Bremer, and J. David Singer. 1996. Militarized interstate disputes, 1816-1992: Rationale, coding rules, and empirical patterns. Conflict Management and Peace Science15 (2): 163-213.
30.
King, Gary , and Langche Zeng. 2001. Logistic regression in rare events data. Political Analysis9 (2): 137-163.
31.
Li, Quan , and David Sacko. 2002.The (ir)relevance of Militarized Interstate Disputes for international trade. International Studies Quarterly46 (1): 11-43.
32.
Linneman, Hans.1966. An econometric study of international trade flows: Contributions to economic analysis. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
33.
Mansfield, Edward D. , and Brian M. Pollins, eds. 2003. Economic interdependence and international conflict: New perspectives on an enduring debate. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
34.
Maoz, Zeev . 1999. Dyadic Militarized Interstate Disputes (DYMID1.1) dataset—Version 1.1 codebook. Tel Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University.
35.
McLaughlin, Sara , Scott Gates, Håvard Hegre, Ranveig Gissinger, and Nils Petter Gleditsch. 1998. Timing the changes in political structures: A new polity database. Journal of Conflict Resolution42(2): 231-242.
36.
McMillan, Susan M.1997. Interdependence and conflict. Mershon International Studies Review41 (2): 33-58.
37.
Morrow, James D.1999. How could trade affect conflict?Journal of Peace Research36 (4): 481-489.
38.
Oneal, John R. , and Bruce M. Russett. 1997. The classical liberals were right: Democracy, interdependence, and conflict, 1950-85. International Studies Quarterly41 (2): 267-294.
39.
Oneal, John R. , and Bruce M. Russett. 1999. The Kantian peace: The pacific benefits of democracy, interdependence, and international organizations, 1885-1992. World Politics52 (1): 1-37.
40.
Peceny, Mark , Caroline C. Beer, and Shannon Sanchez-Terry. 2002. Dictatorial peace?American Political Science Review96 (1): 15-26.
41.
Polachek, Solomon W. , John Robst, and Yuan-Ching Chang. 1999. Liberalism and interdependence: Extending the trade-conflict model. Journal of Peace Research36 (4): 405-422.
42.
Powell, Robert . 1996. Stability and the distribution of power. World Politics48 (2): 239-267.
43.
Powell, Robert . 1999. In the shadow of power: States and strategies in international politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
44.
Raknerud, Arvid , and Håvard Hegre. 1997. The hazard of war: Reassessing the evidence for the democratic peace. Journal of Peace Research34 (4): 385-404.
45.
Rosecrance, Richard . 1986. The rise of the trading state: Commerce and conquest in the modern world. New York: Basic Books.
46.
Russett, Bruce M. , and John R. Oneal. 2001. Triangulating peace: Democracy, interdependence, and international organizations. New York: Norton.
47.
Schneider, Gerald , Katherine Barbieri, and Nils Petter Gleditsch, eds. 2003. Globalization and armed conflict. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
48.
Singer, J. David , Stuart A. Bremer, and J. Stuckey. 1972. Capability distribution, uncertainty, and major power war, 1820-1965. In Peace, war, and numbers, edited by Bruce M. Russett, 19-48. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
49.
Snidal, Duncan . 1991. Relative gains and the pattern of international cooperation. American Political Science Review85 (3): 701-726.
50.
Summers, Robert , and Alan Heston. 1991.The Penn World Table (Mark 5): An expanded set of international comparisons, 1950-1988. Quarterly Journal of Economics106: 327-368.
51.
Wagner, R. Harrison . 1998. Economic interdependence, bargaining power, and political influence. International Organization42 (3): 461-483.
52.
Wagner, R. Harrison . 2000. Bargaining and war. American Journal of Political Science44 (3): 469-484.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
