IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/pepspp/v25y2019i4p4n13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Could the literature on the economic determinants of sanctions be biased?

Author

Listed:
  • Bergeijk Peter A.G. van

    (International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University, The Hague, The Netherlands)

  • Demena Binyam A.

    (International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University, The Hague, The Netherlands)

  • Reta Alemayehu

    (International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University, The Hague, The Netherlands)

  • Jativa Gabriela Benalcazar

    (International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University, The Hague, The Netherlands)

  • Kimararungu Patrick

    (International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University, The Hague, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The economic theory on economic sanctions gives strong indications that success depends positively on pre-sanction trade linkage and prior relations and negatively on sanction duration. However, the empirical literature has not arrived at consensus regarding these factors. Our research puzzle is the observation that despite more than three decades of empirical research on economic sanctions no consensus has yet emerged on the sign and significance of the impact of the key variables that theoretically determine the success of economic sanctions. In our research we explore reasons for the heterogeneity of the findings in the literature and the persistence nature of the debate.

Suggested Citation

  • Bergeijk Peter A.G. van & Demena Binyam A. & Reta Alemayehu & Jativa Gabriela Benalcazar & Kimararungu Patrick, 2019. "Could the literature on the economic determinants of sanctions be biased?," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 25(4), pages 1-4, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:pepspp:v:25:y:2019:i:4:p:4:n:13
    DOI: 10.1515/peps-2019-0048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2019-0048
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/peps-2019-0048?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Garret Christensen & Edward Miguel, 2018. "Transparency, Reproducibility, and the Credibility of Economics Research," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(3), pages 920-980, September.
    2. Robert Goldfarb, 1995. "The economist-as-audience needs a methodology of plausible inference," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 201-222.
    3. Alptekin, Aynur & Levine, Paul, 2012. "Military expenditure and economic growth: A meta-analysis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 636-650.
    4. Sajjad Faraji Dizaji & Peter A G van Bergeijk, 2013. "Potential early phase success and ultimate failure of economic sanctions," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 50(6), pages 721-736, November.
    5. Peter A. G. Van Bergeijk & Muhammad S. H. Siddiquee, 2017. "Biased Sanctions? Methodological Change in Economic Sanctions Reconsidered and Its Implications," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(5), pages 879-893, September.
    6. Chris (hristos) Doucouliagos & Patrice Laroche & T.D. Stanley, 2005. "Publication Bias in Union-Productivity Research? [¿ Publicación tendenciosa en la investigación sobre la productividad sindical ?]," Post-Print hal-02138187, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Raul Caruso, 2021. "Economic Statecraft: from Negative Sanctions to Positive Sanctions," Working Papers 1010, European Centre of Peace Science, Integration and Cooperation (CESPIC), Catholic University 'Our Lady of Good Counsel'.
    2. Demena, B.A., 2021. "Effectiveness of export promotion programmes," ISS Working Papers - General Series 688, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    3. Demena, B.A. & Benalcazar Jativa, G. & Reta, A.S. & Kimararungu, P.B. & van Bergeijk, P.A.G., 2021. "Does research on economic sanctions suffer from publication bias?," ISS Working Papers - General Series 674, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    4. Floridi, Andrea & Demena, Binyam Afewerk & Wagner, Natascha, 2020. "Shedding light on the shadows of informality: A meta-analysis of formalization interventions targeted at informal firms," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).

    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. Demena, B.A. & Benalcazar Jativa, G. & Reta, A.S. & Kimararungu, P.B. & van Bergeijk, P.A.G., 2021. "Does research on economic sanctions suffer from publication bias?," ISS Working Papers - General Series 674, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    2. Peter A. G. van Bergeijk, 2020. "Can the Sanction Debate Be Resolved?," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 20(04), pages 3-8, January.
    3. Stanley, T.D. & Doucouliagos, Chris & Jarrell, Stephen B., 2008. "Meta-regression analysis as the socio-economics of economics research," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 276-292, February.
    4. Mirkina, Irina, 2018. "FDI and sanctions: An empirical analysis of short- and long-run effects," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 198-225.
    5. Sajjad. F. Dizaji & Mohammad Reza Farzanegan, 2018. "Do sanctions reduce the military spending in Iran?," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201831, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    6. Neves, Pedro Cunha & Afonso, Óscar & Silva, Sandra Tavares, 2016. "A Meta-Analytic Reassessment of the Effects of Inequality on Growth," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 386-400.
    7. Afonso, Oscar & Neves, Pedro Cunha & Pinto, Tiago, 2020. "The non-observed economy and economic growth: A meta-analysis," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 44(1).
    8. Dizaji, S.F. & Lis, P. & Murshed, S.M. & Zweiri, M., 2020. "What the political economy literature tells us about blockades and sanctions," ISS Working Papers - General Series 130655, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    9. Bruno Ferman & Cristine Pinto & Vitor Possebom, 2020. "Cherry Picking with Synthetic Controls," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 510-532, March.
    10. repec:osf:osfxxx:sw6kd_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Hans Pitlik & Michael Klien & Stefan Schiman-Vukan, 2017. "Stabilitätskonforme Berücksichtigung nachhaltiger öffentlicher Investitionen," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 60595, August.
    12. Bensch, Gunther & Gotz, Gunnar & Peters, Jörg, 2020. "Effects of rural electrification on employment: A comment on Dinkelman (2011)," Ruhr Economic Papers 840, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    13. Sabrina Auci & Laura Castellucci & Manuela Coromaldi, 2021. "How does public spending affect technical efficiency? Some evidence from 15 European countries," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 108-130, January.
    14. Stefano DellaVigna & Elizabeth Linos, 2022. "RCTs to Scale: Comprehensive Evidence From Two Nudge Units," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(1), pages 81-116, January.
    15. Alessandra Cepparulo & Gilles Mourre, 2020. "How and How Much? The Growth-Friendliness of Public Spending through the Lens," European Economy - Discussion Papers 132, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    16. Matthieu Crozet & Julian Hinz, 2020. "Friendly fire: the trade impact of the Russia sanctions and counter-sanctions," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 35(101), pages 97-146.
    17. Uk Heo & Min Ye, 2016. "Defense Spending and Economic Growth around the Globe: The Direct and Indirect Link," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(5), pages 774-796, October.
    18. Lastauskas, Povilas & Proškutė, Aurelija & Žaldokas, Alminas, 2023. "How do firms adjust when trade stops?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 287-307.
    19. Eibich, Peter & Goldzahl, Léontine, 2021. "Does retirement affect secondary preventive care use? Evidence from breast cancer screening," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    20. Mohammad Reza Farzanegan & Sajjad Faraji Dizaji, 2014. "Political Institutions and Government Spending Behavior in Iran," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201403, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    21. Shakoor Ahmed & Khorshed Alam & Afzalur Rashid & Jeff Gow, 2020. "Militarisation, Energy Consumption, CO2 Emissions and Economic Growth in Myanmar," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(6), pages 615-641, August.

    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:bpj:pepspp:v:25:y:2019:i:4:p:4:n: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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.