Annexation or Conquest? The Economics of Empire Building
AbstractThis paper develops an economic theory of empire building. This theory addresses the choice among three strategies that empire builders historically have used. We call these strategies Uncoerced Annexation, Coerced Annexation, and Attempted Conquest. The theory shows how the choice among these strategies depends on such factors as the economic gains from imperial expansion, the relative effectiveness of imperial armies, the costs of projecting imperial military power, and liquidity constraints on financing imperial armies. This theory also addresses the scope of imperial ambitions. The paper uses examples from the history of the Roman, Mongol, Ottoman, and Nazi German empires to illustrate the applicability of the theory.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Brown University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 2002-15.
Date of creation: 2002
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Department of Economics, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912
Other versions of this item:
- Herschel I. Grossman & Juan Mendoza, 2001. "Annexation or Conquest? The Economics of Empire Building," NBER Working Papers 8109, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances
- F02 - International Economics - - General - - - International Economic Order; Noneconomic International Organizations;; Economic Integration and Globalization: General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2003-04-21 (All new papers)
- NEP-HPE-2003-04-21 (History & Philosophy of Economics)
- NEP-LAM-2003-04-21 (Central & South America)
- NEP-POL-2003-04-21 (Positive Political Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Gershenson, Dmitriy, 2002. "Sanctions and Civil Conflict," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 69(274), pages 185-206, May.
- Grossman, Herschel I & Kim, Minseong, 1995. "Swords or Plowshares? A Theory of the Security of Claims to Property," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(6), pages 1275-88, December.
- Cem Karayalcin, 2005. ""Romes without Empires": Primate Cities, Political Competition, and Economic Growth," Working Papers 0510, Florida International University, Department of Economics.
- Herschel I. Grossman, 2003.
"Choosing Between Peace and War,"
NBER Working Papers
10180, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Cem Karayalcin, 2005. "Divided We Stand, United We Fall: The Hume-Weber-Jones Mechanism for the Rise of Europe," Working Papers 0509, Florida International University, Department of Economics.
- Martin Mcguire, 2002. "Property distribution and configurations of sovereign states: A rational economic model," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 251-270.
- Libman, Alexander Mikhailovich, 2009.
"Эндогенные Границы И Распределение Власти В Федерациях И Международных Сообществах
[ENDOGENOUS BOUNDARIES AND DISTRIBUTION O," MPRA Paper 16473, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Martin C. McGuire, 2010. "Economic Analysis and International Security," Public Policy Review, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance Japan, vol. 6(2), pages 313-346, March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Brown Economics Webmaster).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.