IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v50y2006i1p87-107.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Heterogeneous Trade Interests and Conflict

Author

Listed:
  • Han Dorussen

    (Department of Government, University of Essex)

Abstract

Empirical studies on trade and conflict generally make use of highly aggregated data. There are, however, good theoretical arguments to suspect that trade in some goods should have a bigger impact on the likelihood of conflict than trade in others. This article examines the relationship between trade and conflict at a lower level of aggregation. It discusses various theoretical arguments why the relationship between trade and conflict should vary across industry sectors, particularly strategic trade, asset specificity, and possible appropriation of gains from trade. The central hypotheses are tested using dyadic United Nations trade data disaggregated at industry level from 1970 to 1997. The main findings are that trade generally reduces the likelihood of conflict, the relationship is weaker for commodities that are more easily appropriable by force, and the relationship is generally stronger for manufactured goods with the notable exceptions of chemical and metal industries and the high-technology sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Han Dorussen, 2006. "Heterogeneous Trade Interests and Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(1), pages 87-107, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:50:y:2006:i:1:p:87-107
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002705283013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002705283013
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002705283013?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baldwin, David A., 1980. "Interdependence and power: a conceptual analysis," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(4), pages 471-506, October.
    2. Solomon William Polachek, 1980. "Conflict and Trade," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 55-78, March.
    3. Tomz, Michael & Wittenberg, Jason & King, Gary, 2003. "Clarify: Software for Interpreting and Presenting Statistical Results," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 8(i01).
    4. Laura D'Andrea Tyson, 1992. "Who's Bashing Whom? Trade Conflict in High-Technology Industries," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 86, April.
    5. Marquez, Jaime, 1990. "Bilateral Trade Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 72(1), pages 70-77, February.
    6. Garfinkel,Michelle R. & Skaperdas,Stergios (ed.), 1996. "The Political Economy of Conflict and Appropriation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521560634, November.
    7. Rafael Reuveny & Heejoon Kang, 1998. "Bilateral Trade and Political Conflict/Cooperation: Do Goods Matter?," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 35(5), pages 581-602, September.
    8. Solomon W. Polachek & John Robst & Yuan-Ching Chang, 1999. "Liberalism and Interdependence: Extending the Trade-Conflict Model," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 36(4), pages 405-422, July.
    9. Mark Gasiorowski & Solomon W. Polachek, 1982. "Conflict and Interdependence," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(4), pages 709-729, December.
    10. Wagner, R. Harrison, 1988. "Economic interdependence, bargaining power, and political influence," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 461-483, July.
    11. Gartzke, Erik & Li, Quan & Boehmer, Charles, 2001. "Investing in the Peace: Economic Interdependence and International Conflict," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 391-438, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tesfaye A. Gebremedhin & Astghik Mavisakalyan, 2013. "Immigration and Political Instability," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 317-341, August.
    2. Erich Weede, 2011. "The Capitalist Peace," Chapters, in: Christopher J. Coyne & Rachel L. Mathers (ed.), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, chapter 14, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Christopher J. Coyne & Anne R. Bradley, 2019. "Ludwig von Mises on war and the economy," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 32(3), pages 215-228, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Edward D. Mansfield & Brian M. Pollins, 2001. "The Study of Interdependence and Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(6), pages 834-859, December.
    2. Reuveny Rafael, 2000. "The Trade and Conflict Debate: A Survey of Theory, Evidence and Future Research," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 23-49, January.
    3. Chang, Yuan-Ching & Polachek, Solomon W. & Robst, John, 2004. "Conflict and trade: the relationship between geographic distance and international interactions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 491-509, September.
    4. Zeev Maoz, 2009. "The Effects of Strategic and Economic Interdependence on International Conflict Across Levels of Analysis," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 223-240, January.
    5. Erik Gartzke & Dominic Rohner, 2010. "To conquer or compel: war, peace, and economic development," IEW - Working Papers 511, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    6. Håvard Hegre, 2005. "Development and the Liberal Peace," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 31, pages 17-46.
    7. Solomon W. Polachek, 2002. "Trade-Based Interactions: an Interdisciplinary Perspective," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 19(2), pages 1-21, September.
    8. Timothy M Peterson, 2011. "Third-party trade, political similarity, and dyadic conflict," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 48(2), pages 185-200, March.
    9. Han Dorussen & Hugh Ward, 2011. "Disaggregated Trade Flows and International Conflict," Chapters, in: Christopher J. Coyne & Rachel L. Mathers (ed.), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, chapter 25, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Jie Cai & Lian An, 2014. "Is Protectionism Rational Under the Financial Crisis? Analysis from the Perspective of International Political Relations," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 4(3), pages 278-299, March.
    11. Yuleng Zeng, 2020. "Bluff to peace: How economic dependence promotes peace despite increasing deception and uncertainty," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(6), pages 633-654, November.
    12. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Alexander H. Montgomery, 2012. "War, Trade, and Distrust: Why Trade Agreements Don’t Always Keep the Peace," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(3), pages 257-278, July.
    13. Lingyu Lu & Cameron G. Thies, 2010. "Trade Interdependence and the Issues at Stake in the Onset of Militarized Conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 27(4), pages 347-368, September.
    14. Lin Scott Y. & Seiglie Carlos, 2014. "Same Evidences, Different Interpretations – A Comparison of the Conflict Index between the Interstate Dyadic Events Data and Militarized Interstate Disputes Data in Peace-Conflict Models," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 347-372, April.
    15. John Robst & Solomon Polachek & Yuan-Ching Chang, 2007. "Geographic Proximity, Trade, and International Conflict/Cooperation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 1-24, February.
    16. Lee, Yusin, 2017. "Interdependence, issue importance, and the 2009 Russia-Ukraine gas conflict," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 199-209.
    17. Bora Jeong & Hoon Lee, 2021. "US–China commercial rivalry, great war and middle powers," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 24(2), pages 135-148, June.
    18. Enrico Spolaore, 2004. "Economic Integration, International Conflict and Political Unions," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 94(5), pages 3-50, September.
    19. Patrick J. McDonald, 2004. "Peace through Trade or Free Trade?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(4), pages 547-572, August.
    20. Michelle A. Benson, 2005. "The Relevance of Politically Relevant Dyads in the Study of Interdependence and Dyadic Disputes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(2), pages 113-133, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:50:y:2006:i:1:p:87-107. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.