Abstract
Existing studies of the trade-conflict relationship focus primarily on dyadic trade and its implications for the opportunity cost of conflict. Most states maintain economic relations with numerous partners, yet few studies have examined the effects of extradyadic trade on dyadic conflict. In an influential discussion of economic interdependence, Albert Hirschman ([1945] 1980) draws attention to the importance of both direct trade ties and the extent to which a states total trade is monopolized by any one trading partner. Building on this notion, we present and test a theoretical argument about the conflict-reducing implications of third-party trade. The findings provide support for our prediction that greater concentration of trade outside the dyad is associated with a reduced risk of interstate hostility and violent disputes.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 529-540 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Journal of Politics |
| Volume | 74 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Apr 2012 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Trade concentration and interstate conflict'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver