Measure for Mis-measure: A Response to Gartzke & Li*

Abstract

Barbieri & Peters (B&P) question Gartzke & Li’s (G&L’s) conclusion that the contradictory findings between Barbieri andOneal & Russett on the trade–conflict question can be explained by their use of alternative measures. There are problems with G&L’s analysis. First, G&L’s findings are based on analyses with measures incompatible with Barbieri’s. Second, G&L adopt measures that are not truly dyadic. Third, G&L draw erroneous conclusions from their mathematics. B&P explain these problems and present empirical analyses that show that even when controlling for economic openness, as G&L propose, dyadic interdependence is still positively associated with conflict.B&P find support for G&L’s conclusion that openness promotes peace.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barbieri, Katherine, 1995. Economic Interdependence and Militarized Interstate Conflict, 1870–1985,PhD dissertation, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY.

Barbieri, Katherine, 1996a. ‘Economic Interdependence: A Path to Peace or a Source of Interstate Conflict?’ , Journal of Peace Research 33(1): 29–49 .

Barbieri, Katherine, 1996b. ‘Risky Business: The Impact of Trade Linkages on Interstate Conflict, 1870–1985’, in Gerald Schneider & Patricia A. Weitsman, eds, Enforcing Cooperation: ‘Risky’ States and Intergovernmental Management of Conflict. London: Macmillan (202–231).

Barbieri, Katherine, 2002. The Liberal Illusion: Does Trade Promote Peace? Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press .

Barbieri, Katherine, 2003. ‘Models and Measures in Trade–Conflict Research’, in Edward D. Mansfield & Brian M. Pollins, eds, Economic Interdependence and International Conflict: New Perspectives onan Enduring Debate. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press (207–221).

Barbieri, Katherine & Gerald Schneider, 1999. ‘Globalization and Peace: Assessing New Directions in the Study of Trade and Conflict’ , Journal of Peace Research 36(4): 387–404 .

Dixon, William J., 1993. ‘Democracy and the Management of International Conflict’ , Journal of Conflict Resolution 37(1): 42–68 .

Dixon, William J., 1994. ‘Democracy and thePeaceful Settlement of International Conflict’ , American Political Science Review 88(1): 14–32 .

Dixon, William J. & Gary Goertz, 2003.‘Weakest Link Hypothesesand Measurement Validity: A Note on the Liberal Peace’, typescript, University of Arizona.

10.

Gartzke, Erik & Quan Li, 2003. ‘Measure for Measure: Concept Operationalization and the Trade Interdependence–Conflict Debate’ , Journal of Peace Research 40(5): 553–571 .

11.

Mansfield, Edward D. & Brian Pollins, 2001. ‘The Study of Interdependence and Conflict. Recent Advances, Open Questions, and Directions for Future Research’ , Journal of Conflict Resolution 45(6): 834–859 .

12.

Oneal, John R. & Bruce M. Russett, 1997. ‘The Classical Liberals Were Right: Democracy, Interdependence, and Conflict, 1950–85’ , International Studies Quarterly 41(2): 267–294 .

13.

Oneal, John R. & Bruce M. Russett, 1999a. ‘Assessing the Liberal Peace with Alternative Specifications: Trade Still Reduces Conflict’ , Journal of Peace Research 36(4): 423–442 .

14.

Oneal, John R. & Bruce M. Russett, 1999b. ‘The Kantian Peace: The Pacific Benefits of Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations, 1885–1992’ , World Politics 52(1): 1–37 .

15.

Oneal, John R.; Frances Oneal, Zeev Maoz & Bruce Russett, 1996. ‘The Liberal Peace: Interdependence, Democracy and International Conflict, 1950–1986’ , Journal of Peace Research 33(1): 11–28 .

16.

Polachek, Solomon W., 1980. ‘Conflict and Trade’ , Journalof Conflict Resolution 24(1): 55–78 .

17.

Russett, Bruce & John R. Oneal, 2001.Triangulating Peace: Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations. New York: Norton .

18.

Schneider, Gerald; Katherine Barbieri & Nils Petter Gleditsch, 2003.‘Does Globalization Contribute to Peace? A Critical Survey of the Theoretical and Formal Literature’, in Gerald Schneider, Katherine Barbieri & Nils Petter Gleditsch, eds, Globalization and Armed Conflict. Boulder, CO: Rowman & Littlefield (3–29).

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.

0.00 MB