Territory, Contentious Issues, and International Relations
In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics
"Territory, Contentious Issues, and International Relations" published on by Oxford University Press.
In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics
"Territory, Contentious Issues, and International Relations" published on by Oxford University Press.
In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies
"Review of Available Data Sets" published on by Oxford University Press.
In: Conflict management and peace science: the official journal of the Peace Science Society (International), Band 19, Heft 1, S. 27-52
ISSN: 1549-9219
It is becoming increasingly fashionable to argue that conflict patterns today are fundamentally different from patterns in past eras. If correct, this argument could call into question the future value of decades of seientific research on the sources and consequences of interstate conflict. This paper reviews several Prominent differences that have been proposed and examines major conflict-related data sets for evidence related to these explanations. It appears that intrastate conflict is currelltly more frequent and bloodier than interstate conflict, as many analysts have argued, but that this has been the case for most of the past two centuries. Similarly, while analysts claim that future conflict will revolve around ethnic or cultural issues rather than territoral or ideological questions, the available evidence is mixed. I conclude with seieral suggestions for future research on militarized conflict, focusing on three themes: non-state actors, sub-war intrastate conflict, and (both interstate and intrastate) contentious issues and issue management.
In: International studies quarterly: the journal of the International Studies Association, Band 45, Heft 1, S. 81-109
ISSN: 1468-2478
In: Conflict management and peace science: the official journal of the Peace Science Society (International), Band 17, Heft 2, S. 175-206
ISSN: 1549-9219
Recent research on interstate conflict and rivalry has shown that most conflict occurs between long-time rival countries, and has used enduring rivalries to test propositions on arms races, deterrence, and power transitions. Yet most of this research has focused on the dynamics of already-established rivalry; little is known about how adversaries become long-term rivals. The present effort attempts to account for the origins of rivalry with an evolutionary model of interstate rivalry that treats rivalry as a dynamic process, evolving out of interactions between two adversaries. Empirical analyses reveal that the context of recent relations between two adversaries has a great influence on their conflict behavior, particularly on their probability of engaging in further conflict along the path toward or away from enduring rivalry. As two adversaries accumulate a longer history of conflict, their rivalry relationship tends to become "locked in" or entrenched, with future conflict becoming increasingly difficult to avoid; specific characteristics of their past confrontations can hasten or reverse this movement toward rivalry. This paper concludes by discussing the implications of this evolutionary model for the understanding of rivalry, conflict, and world politics more generally.
In: Conflict management and peace science: the official journal of the Peace Science Society (International), Band 15, Heft 1, S. 43-73
ISSN: 1549-9219
Contentious issues have frequently been overlooked in the study of international relations and interstate conflict. This paper explores the influence of territory and territorial issues on processes of interstate conflict. I begin by reviewing existing approaches to the study of territory, and existing theoretical efforts to understand the role of territory. I then offer an empirical investigation of the effects of territory on conflict, using the Correlates of War Project's data on militarized interstate disputes. Conflict processes are found to differ noticeably when territorial issues are at stake between the adversaries. Disputes in which territorial issues are at stake tend to be much more escalatory than disputes over less salient issues, using several different indicators of dispute severity and escalation. Disputes over territorial issues are less likely to end in stalemated outcomes than disputes over other issues, and more likely to end in decisive outcomes. Furthermore, the same adversaries are more likely to become involved in recurrent conflict in the aftermath of disputes over territorial issues, and this future conflict is likely to recur sooner than after disputes over other issues. Territorial issues thus seem to be especially salient to state leaders, producing more escalatory confrontations and being difficult to resolve through militarized means without triggering recurrent conflict in the future. I conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for future research on conflict and on contentious issues, and by offering some implications for policy-makers.
In: Journal of peace research, Band 31, Heft 3, S. 281-297
ISSN: 1460-3578
Most systematic research on interstate conflict has overlooked the effects of one confrontation on subsequent conflict between the same adversaries. This article explores three aspects of recurrent militarized interstate disputes: the likelihood of a subsequent dispute between the same states, the interval between disputes involving the same adversaries, and characteristics of the initiators of recurrent disputes. These three queries are addressed through empirical examination of recurrent militarized conflict in Latin America from 1816-1986. Subsequent conflict between the same two adversaries is found to be more likely when territorial issues are under contention, and less likely when the first confrontation ends in a negotiated compromise outcome. The next confrontation tends to occur sooner after disputes that ended in stalemate, rather than in compromise or in a decisive outcome, and when territorial issues are at stake. The level of escalation reached in the dispute had little effect by itself on the timing of later conflict, but stronger results were produced in interaction with the type of issue at stake. Similar results were obtained both for recurrent conflict overall, and for recurrent conflict over the same contentious issues as before, but the combination of dispute outcomes, contentious issues, and escalation produced much stronger results with respect to the likelihood and timing of future conflict over the same issue(s). Additionally, the results did not provide overwhelming support for any single ideal type of characteristics of recurrent dispute initiators, with different initiation patterns following different types of dispute outcomes.
In: International studies quarterly: the journal of the International Studies Association, Band 55, Heft 3
ISSN: 1468-2478
Rising demand for water in water-scarce areas has led to frequent predictions of looming "water wars," although evidence suggests that water is also an important source of cooperation. This paper follows up on recent research suggesting that river disagreements are more likely to lead to both militarized conflict and peaceful negotiations when water demands and water scarcity are greatest, but that river treaties have generally prevented militarization while increasing negotiations. Here, we examine the effectiveness of these negotiations, in order to determine whether factors that promote negotiation onset have different effects on negotiation outcomes. Empirical analysis suggests that negotiations are most likely to succeed when they concern rivers with high value for the negotiating states (with many uses offering the possibility of negotiating tradeoffs), when they concern a current rather than future problem, and when the adversaries share closer overall relations, but less likely when water scarcity is more acute and when they involve a cross-border river with a stronger upstream state. Adapted from the source document.
In: International Studies Quarterly, Band 55, Heft 3, S. 859-882
In: International negotiation: a journal of theory and practice, Band 14, Heft 2, S. 393-418
ISSN: 1571-8069
As global water scarcity increases, both scholars and leaders have suggested that water will be a leading cause of future armed conflict. Yet other scholars argue that states typically cooperate rather than fight to manage their shared water resources. We address these arguments by examining the management of internationally shared rivers in the Americas, Western Europe, and the Middle East from 1900-2001. We propose hypotheses on the factors that lead states to become involved in disagreements over shared rivers as well as the factors that lead them to negotiate over these disagreements. Heckman probit analysis suggests that water scarcity - found by past work to be an important influence on armed conflict over rivers - is also an important influence on peaceful efforts to settle river problems; river claims are more likely where water supply is lower and demand is greater, but negotiations are also generally more likely in these same situations. Furthermore, while the existence of river treaties does not prevent the emergence of river claims, the presence of at least one treaty over the specific subject of the claim provides an important starting point that greatly increases the likelihood of negotiations over such claims. We conclude that the more pessimistic views of water management are missing an important part of the story. States are much more likely to negotiate in the most dangerous situations, and institutionalization of river resources can make an important contribution to negotiations over any disagreements that do emerge. Adapted from the source document.
In: Conflict management and peace science: the official journal of the Peace Science Society (International), Band 34, Heft 2, S. 126-140
ISSN: 1549-9219
The Issue Correlates of War (ICOW) research project began nearly 20 years ago by collecting data on territorial claims in South America. Since then, the ICOW territorial claims dataset has expanded to cover the entire world, while ICOW has collected new data on river claims and maritime claims and is beginning a new project on identity claims. This article discusses the development and expansion of ICOW data, illustrating how the additional datasets offer important new information and open up new avenues for scholarship.
In: Journal of peace research, Band 52, Heft 1
ISSN: 1460-3578
We present lessons and best practices for conflict data collection from the experiences of the ICOW project. Lessons include the development of a search strategy for potential events, the consultation of a broad range of sources, and recognition of the limitations of these sources. More general best practices address the development of detailed instructions for coders, detailed descriptions for data users, and strategies for managing research assistants and preserving project documentation. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]
In: Journal of peace research, Band 52, Heft 1, S. 116-119
ISSN: 1460-3578
We present lessons and best practices for conflict data collection from the experiences of the ICOW project. Lessons include the development of a search strategy for potential events, the consultation of a broad range of sources, and recognition of the limitations of these sources. More general best practices address the development of detailed instructions for coders, detailed descriptions for data users, and strategies for managing research assistants and preserving project documentation.
In: American journal of political science, Band 51, Heft 4, S. 721-737
ISSN: 1540-5907
The ultimate litmus test of compliance theories occurs in situations where states' interests are directly opposed, such as competing interstate claims over territory, maritime areas, and cross-border rivers. This article considers the extent to which the involvement of international institutions in the settlement of contentious issues between states bolsters compliance with agreements that are struck. Institutions may influence the prospects for compliance actively and passively. Active institutional involvement in the conflict management process increases the chances for compliance with agreements, particularly for binding institutional activities, relative to the active involvement of noninstitutional third parties. More passively, joint membership in peace-promoting institutions enhances the likelihood that states will comply with peaceful agreements to resolve contentious issues. Empirical analyses demonstrate the relevance of international institutions for resolving contentious interstate issues both actively and passively, although the results suggest that institutions are more effective conflict managers when they choose binding settlement techniques. Adapted from the source document.
In: Political geography: an interdisciplinary journal for all students of political studies with an interest in the geographical and spatial aspects, Band 13, Heft 1, S. 33-51
ISSN: 0962-6298