IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ginixx/v43y2017i2p248-271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dyadic Effects, Relevance, and the Empirical Assessment of the Kantian Peace

Author

Listed:
  • Jun Xiang

Abstract

Dyadic effects to a large extent account for the difficulty of explaining and predicting international conflict. In this study, I derive a statistical model to estimate unobserved dyadic effects in the dyadic analysis of conflict. The proposed model employs a hierarchical modeling approach to estimate dyadic effects, thereby avoiding the problems caused by the use of fixed effects models. Furthermore, it simultaneously addresses the important sample selection issue of identifying relevant dyads. I show that the estimation of dyadic effects significantly improves the model fit and generates several interesting findings. Substantively, this study makes an important contribution to the empirical evaluation of the Kantian peace. It argues that international organizations increase the likelihood of conflict of interest between member states but reduce the probability of militarized conflict. I demonstrate that the positive coefficient of international organizations in Oneal and Russett (1999) is biased in the positive direction. When the proposed statistical model is used, international organizations, together with trade and democracy, reduce the probability of conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Jun Xiang, 2017. "Dyadic Effects, Relevance, and the Empirical Assessment of the Kantian Peace," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 248-271, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ginixx:v:43:y:2017:i:2:p:248-271
    DOI: 10.1080/03050629.2016.1156542
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03050629.2016.1156542
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/03050629.2016.1156542?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Russett, Bruce & Oneal, John R. & Davis, David R., 1998. "The Third Leg of the Kantian Tripod for Peace: International Organizations and Militarized Disputes, 1950–85," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(3), pages 441-467, July.
    2. repec:cup:apsrev:v:98:y:2004:i:02:p:379-389_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Michael D. Ward & Randolph M. Siverson & Xun Cao, 2007. "Disputes, Democracies, and Dependencies: A Reexamination of the Kantian Peace," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(3), pages 583-601, July.
    4. Shor, Boris & Bafumi, Joseph & Keele, Luke & Park, David, 2007. "A Bayesian Multilevel Modeling Approach to Time-Series Cross-Sectional Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 165-181, April.
    5. Braumoeller, Bear F., 2003. "Causal Complexity and the Study of Politics," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 209-233, July.
    6. Chiba, Daina & Metternich, Nils W. & Ward, Michael D., 2015. "Every Story Has a Beginning, Middle, and an End (But Not Always in That Order): Predicting Duration Dynamics in a Unified Framework," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 515-541, September.
    7. Oneal, John R. & Russett, Bruce, 2001. "Clear and Clean: The Fixed Effects of the Liberal Peace," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 469-485, April.
    8. Poirier, Dale J., 1980. "Partial observability in bivariate probit models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 209-217, February.
    9. Beger, Andreas & Dorff, Cassy L. & Ward, Michael D., 2016. "Irregular leadership changes in 2014: Forecasts using ensemble, split-population duration models," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 98-111.
    10. David H. Clark & Patrick M. Regan, 2003. "Opportunities to Fight," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(1), pages 94-115, February.
    11. Beck, Nathaniel & Katz, Jonathan N., 2001. "Throwing Out the Baby with the Bath Water: A Comment on Green, Kim, and Yoon," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 487-495, April.
    12. Bear F. Braumoeller & Austin Carson, 2011. "Political Irrelevance, Democracy, and the Limits of Militarized Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 55(2), pages 292-320, April.
    13. Carter, David B. & Signorino, Curtis S., 2010. "Back to the Future: Modeling Time Dependence in Binary Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(3), pages 271-292, July.
    14. Beck, Nathaniel & King, Gary & Zeng, Langche, 2000. "Improving Quantitative Studies of International Conflict: A Conjecture," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(1), pages 21-35, March.
    15. King, Gary, 2001. "Proper Nouns and Methodological Propriety: Pooling Dyads in International Relations Data," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 497-507, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Fabrizio Gilardi, 2010. "Who Learns from What in Policy Diffusion Processes?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 650-666, July.
    2. Charles R. Boehmer & Bernadette M.E. Jungblut & Richard J. Stoll, 2011. "Tradeoffs in Trade Data," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(2), pages 145-167, April.
    3. Samuel Bazzi & Robert A. Blair & Christopher Blattman & Oeindrila Dube & Matthew Gudgeon & Richard Peck, 2022. "The Promise and Pitfalls of Conflict Prediction: Evidence from Colombia and Indonesia," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(4), pages 764-779, October.
    4. Raouf Boucekkine & Rodolphe Desbordes & Paolo Melindi-Ghidi, 2020. "Education, neopatrimonialism, and revolutions," Working Papers halshs-02613158, HAL.
    5. Xiang Jun & Primiano Christopher B. & Huang Wei-hao, 2015. "Aggressive or Peaceful Rise? An Empirical Assessment of China’s Militarized Conflict, 1979–2010," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 21(3), pages 301-325, August.
    6. Schulz, Nicolai, 2020. "The politics of export restrictions: A panel data analysis of African commodity processing industries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    7. Christopher Gelpi & Nazli Avdan, 2018. "Democracies at risk? A forecasting analysis of regime type and the risk of terrorist attack," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(1), pages 18-42, January.
    8. Chang, Eric C.C. & Wu, Wen-Chin, 2022. "Autocracy and human capital," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    9. George W Williford & Douglas B Atkinson, 2020. "A Bayesian forecasting model of international conflict," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 17(3), pages 235-242, July.
    10. Susan Ariel Aaronson & M. Rodwan Abouharb & K. Daniel Wang, 2015. "The Liberal Illusion Is Not a Complete Delusion: The WTO Helps Member States Keep the Peace Only When It Increases Trade," Global Economy Journal (GEJ), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(4), pages 455-484, December.
    11. Schulz, Nicolai, 2020. "The politics of export restrictions: a panel data analysis of African commodity processing industries," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103779, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. James Lee Ray, 2003. "Explaining Interstate Conflict and War: What Should Be Controlled for?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 20(2), pages 1-31, September.
    13. Brian Lai, 2007. "“Draining the Swamp†: An Empirical Examination of the Production of International Terrorism, 1968—1998," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(4), pages 297-310, September.
    14. 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.
    15. Kristian Skrede Gleditsch & Idean Salehyan & Kenneth Schultz, 2008. "Fighting at Home, Fighting Abroad," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(4), pages 479-506, August.
    16. 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.
    17. Faruk Balli & Hatice Ozer Balli & Mudassar Hasan & Russell Gregory-Allen, 2022. "Geopolitical risk spillovers and its determinants," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 68(2), pages 463-500, April.
    18. Jacob Ausderan, 2018. "Reassessing the democratic advantage in interstate wars using k-adic datasets," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(5), pages 451-473, September.
    19. 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.
    20. Robert A. Blair & Nicholas Sambanis, 2021. "Is Theory Useful for Conflict Prediction? A Response to Beger, Morgan, and Ward," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 65(7-8), pages 1427-1453, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:ginixx:v:43:y:2017:i:2:p:248-271. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GINI20 .

    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.