Forecasting Methods for Conflict Situations
AbstractIn 1975, a consortium sponsored by the Argentine government tried to purchase the stock of the Britishowned Falkland Islands Company, a monopoly that owned 43 percent of the land in the Falklands, employed 51 per cent of the labor force, had a monopoly on all wool exports, and operated the steamship run to South America. The stockholders were willing to sell especially because the Argentine consortium was reportedly willing to pay “almost any price.” But the British government stepped in to prevent the sale, (Murray N. Rothbard, as quoted in The Wall Street Journal, 8 April 1982). In my opinion, the actual solution in the Falklands War left both sides worse off than before. In contrast, a sale of the Falklands would have benefited both sides in the short run, and, as companies seldom wage shooting wars, this would probably have been a good long-range solution. Apparently, Britain did not predict how the Argentine generals would act when it blocked the sale, and the Argentine generals did not predict how Britain would respond when they occupied the islands. Accurate forecasting by each side in this situation might have led to a superior solution. This study examines the evidence on alternative procedures that can be used to forecast outcomes in conflict situations. I first define what is meant here by conflict situations. Next, I describe alternative forecasting methods. This is followed by a presentation of hypotheses on which method is more appropriate. The evidence is reviewed in two stages: first the prior research, then research that we have done.
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 EconWPA in its series General Economics and Teaching with number 0412025.
Length: 15 pages
Date of creation: 10 Dec 2004
Date of revision:
Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 15
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://126.96.36.199
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- A - General Economics and Teaching
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2004-12-20 (All new papers)
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.:
- JS Armstrong, 2004.
"Social Irresponsibility in Management,"
General Economics and Teaching
- JS Armstrong & Philip D. Hutcherson, 2005. "Predicting The Outcome of Marketing Negotiations: Role-Playing versus Unaided Opinions," General Economics and Teaching 0502040, EconWPA.
- J. S. Armstrong, 2005.
"Forecasting for Environmental Decision Making,"
General Economics and Teaching
- Gunther Tichy, 2002. "Over-optimism Among Experts in Assessment and Foresight," ITA manu:scripts 02_05, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
- J. S. Armstrong & R. Brodie & S. McIntyre, 2005. "Forecasting Methods for Marketing:* Review of Empirical Research," General Economics and Teaching 0502023, EconWPA.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (EconWPA).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.