IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v50y2006i5p664-689.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structural Equivalence and International Conflict

Author

Listed:
  • Zeev Maoz

    (Department of Political Science, University of California, Davis)

  • Ranan D. Kuperman

    (Department of Industrial Relations, University of Haifa, Israel)

  • Lesley Terris

    (Department of Political Science, Tel-Aviv University, Israel)

  • Ilan Talmud

    (Department of Sociology, University of Haifa, Israel)

Abstract

The concept of international affinity—albeit under different names—captures a central place in international relations research. This study examines how different types of affinity affect the likelihood of conflict between states. The authors discuss different types of affinities as these appear in the realist and liberal paradigms. They offer a social networks conception of structural affinity—the concept of structural equivalence —which reflects the similarity of international ties across a set of different networks. They test the hypotheses derived from these paradigms, using both existing measures of affinity and their own structural equivalence measures. Their findings suggest that (1) strategic affinity has a consistent dampening effect on the probability of dyadic conflict, (2) trade-related affinity does consistently affect the probability of dyadic conflict, and (3) intergovernmental organization-related affinity has a negative impact on conflict, mostly in the twentieth century.

Suggested Citation

  • Zeev Maoz & Ranan D. Kuperman & Lesley Terris & Ilan Talmud, 2006. "Structural Equivalence and International Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(5), pages 664-689, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:50:y:2006:i:5:p:664-689
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002706291053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002706291053
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002706291053?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. D. Scott Bennett & Allan C. Stam, 2000. "Eugene : A conceptual manual," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 179-204, March.
    2. Bowles, Samuel & Gintis, Herbert, 2004. "Persistent parochialism: trust and exclusion in ethnic networks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 1-23, September.
    3. Henderson, Errol A., 2004. "Mistaken Identity: Testing the Clash of Civilizations Thesis in Light of Democratic Peace Claims," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(3), pages 539-554, July.
    4. Kelly Kadera & Gerald Sorokin, 2004. "Measuring National Power," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 211-230, July.
    5. Christensen, Thomas J. & Snyder, Jack, 1990. "Chain gangs and passed bucks: predicting alliance patterns in multipolarity," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(2), pages 137-168, April.
    6. Brams, Steven J., 1966. "Transaction Flows in the International System," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(4), pages 880-898, December.
    7. Leeds, Brett Ashley, 2003. "Alliance Reliability in Times of War: Explaining State Decisions to Violate Treaties," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(4), pages 801-827, October.
    8. Hoff, Peter D. & Ward, Michael D., 2004. "Modeling Dependencies in International Relations Networks," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 160-175, 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. Murshed, Mansoob & Mamoon, Dawood, 2008. "The consequences of Not Loving thy neigbor as Thyself: Trade, democracy and military explainations behind India Pakistan rivalry," MPRA Paper 10429, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Yi Yi Mon & Seunghoo Lim & Makoto Kakinaka, 2019. "Multiplex Relations between States: Coevolution of Trade Agreements and Political Alliances," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-24, July.

    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. 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.
    2. Muhammet A. Bas & Robert J. Schub, 2016. "How Uncertainty about War Outcomes Affects War Onset," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 60(6), pages 1099-1128, September.
    3. Zeev Maoz, 2012. "Preferential Attachment, Homophily, and the Structure of International Networks, 1816–2003," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(3), pages 341-369, July.
    4. Benjamin Fordham & Paul Poast, 2016. "All Alliances Are Multilateral," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 60(5), pages 840-865, August.
    5. Paul Poast, 2013. "Issue linkage and international cooperation: An empirical investigation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(3), pages 286-303, July.
    6. Jesse C. Johnson & Brett Ashley Leeds & Ahra Wu, 2015. "Capability, Credibility, and Extended General Deterrence," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 309-336, March.
    7. Brett V. Benson & Joshua D. Clinton, 2016. "Assessing the Variation of Formal Military Alliances," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 60(5), pages 866-898, August.
    8. Strüver, Georg, 2016. "International Alignment between Interests and Ideology: The Case of China's Partnership Diplomacy," GIGA Working Papers 283, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    9. Cali Mortenson Ellis & Michael C. Horowitz & Allan C. Stam, 2015. "Introducing the LEAD Data Set," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 718-741, August.
    10. 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.
    11. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Alexander H. Montgomery, 2006. "Power Positions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(1), pages 3-27, February.
    12. Rémi Suchon & Marie Claire Villeval, 2017. "Does upward mobility harm trust?," Post-Print halshs-01659021, HAL.
    13. Ahelegbey, Daniel Felix & Giudici, Paolo & Hashem, Shatha Qamhieh, 2021. "Network VAR models to measure financial contagion," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    14. Samrachana Adhikari & Tracy Sweet & Brian Junker, 2021. "Analysis of longitudinal advice‐seeking networks following implementation of high stakes testing," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(4), pages 1475-1500, October.
    15. Kingdon, Geeta Gandhi & Knight, John, 2007. "Community, comparisons and subjective well-being in a divided society," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 69-90, September.
    16. 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.
    17. Matthew Fuhrmann & Jaroslav Tir, 2009. "Territorial Dimensions of Enduring Internal Rivalries," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(4), pages 307-329, September.
    18. Bartoš, Vojtěch & Levely, Ian, 2021. "Sanctioning and trustworthiness across ethnic groups: Experimental evidence from Afghanistan," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    19. Michael Horowitz & Rose McDermott & Allan C. Stam, 2005. "Leader Age, Regime Type, and Violent International Relations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(5), pages 661-685, October.
    20. Kyle Haynes, 2017. "Diversionary conflict: Demonizing enemies or demonstrating competence?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(4), pages 337-358, July.

    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:5:p:664-689. 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.