IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/blg/msudev/v11y2019i2p5-13.html

The Utility Of Economic Sanctions In View Of Coercive Characteristics Towards Prosperity And Security

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Raymond ULMER

    (Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, International Economics and Marketing, Kyiv, Ukraine)

Abstract

Research involving the utility of economic sanctions introduces misrepresentations and if categorized would include: ignoring comparisons of economic sanctions with coercive alternatives, analyzing economic sanctions as a substitute to hard force exclusively, and redefining the uses of economic sanctions for political purposes. We present a definition of economic sanctions and show the sequence of power as it may be imposed across a spectrum at various intensities relative to characteristics. We analyze how characteristics between power groups are diffuse and that conclusions involving utility are insignificant without analyzing variance within power strata. We’ve categorized characteristics into two groups that are inversely positioned and regressed on a power interval: characteristics of prosperity (target size, intervention, predictability, attractiveness, efficiency, and communication) and characteristics of security (clarity, rate, return, control, risk, costs, and violence). We illustrate that as prosperity increase or decrease the security characteristics decrease or increase respectively as inverse substitutes.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Raymond ULMER, 2019. "The Utility Of Economic Sanctions In View Of Coercive Characteristics Towards Prosperity And Security," Management of Sustainable Development, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 11(2), pages 1-9, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:blg:msudev:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:5-13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://msdjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/vol11issue2-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jeffrey J. Schott & Kimberly Ann Elliott, 2009. "Economic Sanctions Reconsidered, 3rd Edition (paper)," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 4129, October.
    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. Michael Horowitz & Dan Reiter, 2001. "When Does Aerial Bombing Work?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(2), pages 147-173, April.
    2. Jo Thori Lind & Daniel Chen, 2016. "The Political Economy Of Beliefs: Why Fiscal And Social Conservatives/Liberals Come Hand-In-Hand," 2016 Meeting Papers 606, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    3. Görg, Holger & Jacobs, Anna & Meuchelböck, Saskia, 2024. "Who is to suffer? Quantifying the impact of sanctions on German firms," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    4. Gerschewski, Johannes, 2021. "Explanations of Institutional Change: Reflecting on a “Missing Diagonal”," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 115(1), pages 218-233.
    5. Busse, Matthias, 2003. "Democracy and FDI," HWWA Discussion Papers 220, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    6. Hendrix, Cullen & Noland, Marcus, 2021. "Economic diplomacy and genocide in Xinjiang," MPRA Paper 110869, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Kimberly Ann Elliott, 2003. "Economic Leverage and the North Korean Nuclear Crisis," Policy Briefs PB03-03, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    8. Mark J.C. Crescenzi, 2003. "Interdependence and Conflict: When Does Symmetry Matter?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 20(1), pages 73-92, February.
    9. Daniel Berger & William Easterly & Nathan Nunn & Shanker Satyanath, 2013. "Commercial Imperialism? Political Influence and Trade during the Cold War," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 863-896, April.
    10. Bob Carbaugh & Koushik Ghosh, 2019. "Economic Sanctions and North Korea," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 64(1), pages 131-141, March.
    11. Barseghyan, Gayane, 2019. "Sanctions and counter-sanctions : What did they do?," BOFIT Discussion Papers 24/2019, Bank of Finland, Institute for Economies in Transition.
    12. Kevin O'Rourke, 2005. "The worldwide economic impact of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars," Trinity Economics Papers 200059, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    13. Lauren Ralph, 2019. "In Consideration of Economic Sanctions," Studies in Applied Economics 131, The Johns Hopkins Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise.
    14. Siebert, Horst, 2007. "How global rules are established and stabilized," Kiel Working Papers 1388, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    15. Timothy M. Peterson, 2014. "Taking the cue: The response to US human rights sanctions against third parties," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(2), pages 145-167, April.
    16. Mitchell Radtke & Hyeran Jo, 2018. "Fighting the Hydra," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 55(6), pages 759-773, November.
    17. Makoto Fukumoto, 2025. "Who Traded Away Democracy? Business-Backed Legislators during the Democratic Backsliding in Japan 1936-1942," Working Papers 2504, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    18. Andreas Fuchs, 2018. "China’s economic diplomacy and the politics-trade nexus," Chapters, in: Research Handbook on Economic Diplomacy, chapter 18, pages 297-314, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Jerg Gutmann & Matthias Neuenkirch & Florian Neumeier, 2021. "Sanctioned to Death? The Impact of Economic Sanctions on Life Expectancy and its Gender Gap," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(1), pages 139-162, January.
    20. Kim, Jihee & Kim, Kyoochul & Park, Sangyoon & Sun, Chang, 2023. "The economic costs of trade sanctions: Evidence from North Korea," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • F51 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Conflicts; Negotiations; Sanctions
    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government

    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:blg:msudev:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:5-13. 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: Camelia Oprean-Stan (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feulbro.html .

    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.