Recent evidence suggests that historical boundary precedents play a central role in the outbreak, character, and long-term consequences of territorial disputes. The institutional theory of borders holds promise in explaining why leaders find old borders to be attractive as new borders. However, the mechanisms that link historical precedents to territorial claims and their consequences are not fully specified in the extant literature. I argue that there are three key arguments that can explain why boundary precedents are associated with subsequent disputes: ease of justification, perpetual conflict over territories of particular value, and persistent coordination around old borders. I argue that the coordination mechanism is essential to understanding the connections between historical boundary precedents and territorial disputes.
AbramsonSFCarterDB (2016) The historical origins of territorial disputes. American Political Science Review110(4): 675–698.
2.
AlleeTLHuthPK (2006) Legitimizing dispute settlement: international legal rulings as domestic political cover. American Political Science Review100(2): 219–250.
3.
AtziliB (2012) Good Fences, Bad Neighbors: Border Fixity and International Conflict. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
4.
BabstD (1972) A force for peace. Industrial Research14: 55–58.
5.
BremerSA (1992) Dangerous dyads: conditions affecting the likelihood of interstate war, 1816–1965. Journal of Conflict Resolution36(2): 309–341.
6.
CarterDB (2010) The strategy of territorial conflict. American Journal of Political Science54(4): 969–987.
7.
CarterDBGoemansHE (2011) The making of the territorial order: new borders and the emergence of interstate conflict. International Organization65(2): 275–310.
8.
CarterDBGoemansHE (2014) The temporal dynamics of new international borders. Conflict Management and Peace Science31(3): 285–302.
9.
CarterDBGoemansHE (2018) International Trade and coordination: tracing border effects. World Politics70(1).
10.
ChiozzaGChoiA (2003) Guess who did what political leaders and the management of territorial disputes, 1950–1990. Journal of Conflict Resolution47(3): 251–278.
11.
DixonWJ (1994) Democracy and the peaceful settlement of international conflict. American Political Science Review88(1): 14–32.
12.
FearonJD (1998) Bargaining, enforcement, and international cooperation. International Organization52(2): 269–305.
13.
FeenstraRC (2002) Border effects and the gravity equation: consistent methods for estimation. Scottish Journal of Political Economy49(5): 491–5–6.
14.
GartzkeE (2007) The capitalist peace. American Journal of Political Science51(1): 166–191.
15.
GentSEShannonM (2010) The effectiveness of international arbitration and adjudication: Getting into a bind. Journal of Politics72(2): 366–380.
16.
GiblerDM (2007) Bordering on peace: democracy, territorial issues, and conflict. International Studies Quarterly51(3): 509–532.
17.
GiblerDM (2012) The Territorial Peace: Borders, State Development, and International Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
GiblerDMTirJ (2010) Settled borders and regime type: democratic transitions as consequences of peaceful territorial transfers. American Journal of Political Science54(4): 951–968.
19.
GleditschKS (2007) Transnational dimensions of civil war. Journal of Peace Research44(3): 293–309.
20.
GoemansHE (2006) Bounded communities: territoriality, territorial attachment, and conflict. In: KahlerMWalterBF (eds) Territoriality and Conflict in an Era of Globalization. New York: Cambridge University Press, Chapter 2, pp. 25–61.
21.
GoemansHESchultzKA (2017) The politics of territorial disputes: a geospatial approach applied to Africa. International Organization71(1): 31–64.
22.
GoertzGDiehlP (1992) Territorial Changes and International Conflict. London: Routledge.
23.
GowaJ (2000) Ballots and Bullets: The Elusive Democratic Peace. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24.
GowaJ (2011) The democratic peace after the cold war. Economics & Politics23(2): 153–171.
25.
HenselPR (2000) Territory: theory and evidence on geography and conflict. In: VasquezJA (ed) What Do We Know About War?Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 57–84.
26.
HenselPR (2001) Contentious issues and world politics: the management of territorial claims in the Americas, 1816–1992. International Studies Quarterly45: 81–109.
27.
HolstiKJ (1991) Peace and War: Armed Conflicts and International Order. New York: Cambridge University Press.
28.
HuthPK (1996) Standing Your Ground. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan.
29.
HuthPKAlleeTL (2002) The Democratic Peace and Territorial Conflict in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30.
HuthPKCrocoSEAppelBJ (2011) Does international law promote the peaceful settlement of international disputes? evidence from the study of territorial conflicts since 1945. American Political Science Review105(2): 415–436.
31.
HuthPKCrocoSEAppelBJ (2012) Law and the use of force in world politics: the varied effects of law on the exercise of military power in territorial disputes. International Studies Quarterly56(1): 17–31.
32.
HuthPKCrocoSEAppelBJ (2013) Bringing law to the table: legal claims, focal points, and the settlement of territorial disputes since 1945. American Journal of Political Science57(1): 90–103.
33.
JohnsonDDPToftMD (2014) Grounds for war: the evolution of territorial conflict. International Security38(3): 7–38.
34.
KocsSA (1995) Territorial disputes and interstate war, 1945–1987. Journal of Politics57(1): 159–175.
35.
LacinaBGleditschNPRussettB (2006) The declining risk of death in battle. International Studies Quarterly50(3): 673–680.
36.
LeeHMitchellSM (2012) Foreign direct investment and territorial disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution56(4): 675–703.
37.
McCallumJ (1995) National borders matter: Canada-U.S. regional trade patterns. American Economic Review85(3): 615–623.
38.
MitchellSM (2002) A Kantian system? democracy and third-party conflict resolution. American Journal of Political Science46(4): 749–759.
39.
MitchellSMHenselPR (2007) International institutions and compliance with agreements. American Journal of Political Science51(4): 721–737.
40.
MurphyAB (1990) Historical justifications for territorial claims. Annals of the Association of American Geographers80(4): 531–548.
41.
OwenD (1995) Balkan Odyssey. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
42.
PiersonP (2000) Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review94(2): 251–267.
43.
PiersonP (2004) Politics in Time: History, Institutions and Social Analysis. Princeton University Press.
44.
PinkerS (2012) The Better Angels of Our Nature: A History of Violence and Humanity. New York, NY: Penguin.
45.
ProrokAKHuthPK (2015) International law and the consolidation of peace following territorial changes. Journal of Politics77(1): 161–174.
46.
RatnerSR (1996) Drawing a better line: uti possidetis and the borders of new states. The American Journal of International Law90(4): 590–624.
47.
ReedWChibaD (2010) Decomposing the relationship between contiguity and militarized conflict. American Journal of Political Science54(1): 61–73.
48.
RussettB (1993) Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
49.
SahlinsP (1989) Boundaries: The Making of France and Spain in the Pyrenees. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
50.
SchultzKA (2001) Democracy and Coercive Diplomacy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
51.
SchultzKA (2013) Whats in a claim? de jure versus de facto borders in interstate territorial disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution58(6): 1059–1084.
52.
SchultzKA (2015) Borders, conflict, and trade. Annual Review of Political Science18: 125–145.
53.
SchultzKAGoemansHE (2017) Aims, claims and the bargaining model of war. Unpublished manuscript.
54.
SenesePD (2005) Territory, contiguity, and international conflict: assessing a new joint explanation. American Journal of Political Science49(4): 769–779.
55.
SimmonsBA (2005) Rules over real estate; trade, territorial conflict and international borders as institutions. Journal of Conflict Resolution49(6): 823–848.
56.
SiversonRMStarrH (1990) Opportunity, willingness, and the diffusion of war. American Political Science Review84(1): 47–67.
57.
SmallMSingerJD (1976) The war-proneness of democratic regimes, 1816–1965. Jerusalem Journal of International Relations1: 50–68.
58.
StarrHMostBA (1976) The substance and study of borders in international relations research. International Studies Quarterly20(4): 581–620.
59.
TirJ (2003) Averting armed in international conflicts through state-to-state territorial transfers. Journal of Politics65(4): 1235–1257.
60.
TirJ (2005a) Dividing countries to promote peace: prospects for long-term success of partitions. Journal of Peace Research42(5): 545–562.
61.
TirJ (2005b) Keeping the peace after secession: territorial conflicts between rump and secessionist states. Journal of Conflict Resolution49(5): 713–741.
62.
TreflerD (1995) The case of the missing trade and other mysteries. American Economic Review85(5): 1029–1046.
63.
VasquezJA (1993) The War Puzzle. New York: Cambridge University Press.
64.
VasquezJA (1995) Why do neighbors fight? proximity, interaction, or territoriality. Journal of Peace Research32(3): 277–293.
65.
VasquezJAHenehanMT (2001) Territorial disputes and the probability of war, 1816–1992. International Studies Quarterly38(2): 123–138.
66.
WolfN (2005) Path dependent border effects: the case of Poland’s reunification (1918–1939). Explorations in Economic History42: 414–438.
67.
WolfNSchulzeMSHeinemeyerHC (2011) On the economic consequences of the peace: trade and borders after Versailles. Journal of Economic History71(4): 915–949.
68.
ZacherMW (2001) The territorial integrity norm: international boundaries and the use of force. International Organization55(2): 215–250.
