IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/pepspp/v26y2020i3p09n16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Guidelines for Revitalizing International Organizations for the Post-Covid-19 Era

Author

Listed:
  • Carlson Lisa J.

    (Department of Politics and Philosophy, University of Idaho, Moscow, USA)

  • Dacey Raymond

    (College of Business and Economics, University of Idaho, Moscow, USA)

Abstract

Caruso, R. 2020. “What Post COVID-19? ‹‹Avoiding a 21st Century General Crisis››.” Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy 26 (2). May 2020 provides a prescription for avoiding a general global crisis in the Post-Covid-19 era via the revitalization of Post-WWII era international organizations. Here we examine the implications of contributions from the game theory and the trade and conflict realms of the peace science literature to assess the likelihood of successful revitalization of the relevant organizations. Unfortunately, we are more pessimistic than optimistic since the contributions of peace science suggest that countries are more likely to fail to implement the guidelines needed to revitalize these organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlson Lisa J. & Dacey Raymond, 2020. "Guidelines for Revitalizing International Organizations for the Post-Covid-19 Era," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 26(3), pages 1-09, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:pepspp:v:26:y:2020:i:3:p:09:n:16
    DOI: 10.1515/peps-2020-0051
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2020-0051
    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-2020-0051?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. Solomon W. Polachek & John Robst & Yuan-Ching Chang, 1999. "Liberalism and Interdependence: Extending the Trade-Conflict Model," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 36(4), pages 405-422, July.
    2. Strange, Susan, 1987. "The Persistent myth of lost hegemony," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(4), pages 551-574, October.
    3. Solomon William Polachek, 1980. "Conflict and Trade," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 55-78, March.
    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. Jie Cai & Lian An, 2014. "Is Protectionism Rational Under the Financial Crisis? Analysis from the Perspective of International Political Relations," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 4(3), pages 278-299, March.
    2. Philippe Martin & Thierry Mayer & Mathias Thoenig, 2008. "Make Trade Not War?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(3), pages 865-900.
    3. Han Dorussen, 2006. "Heterogeneous Trade Interests and Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(1), pages 87-107, February.
    4. Jong-Wha Lee & Ju Hyun Pyun, 2016. "Does Trade Integration Contribute to Peace?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 327-344, February.
    5. Kamin, Katrin, 2022. "Bilateral trade and conflict heterogeneity: The impact of conflict on trade revisited," Kiel Working Papers 2222, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    6. Edward D. Mansfield & Brian M. Pollins, 2001. "The Study of Interdependence and Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(6), pages 834-859, December.
    7. Enrico Spolaore, 2004. "Economic Integration, International Conflict and Political Unions," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 94(5), pages 3-50, September.
    8. Michelle A. Benson, 2005. "The Relevance of Politically Relevant Dyads in the Study of Interdependence and Dyadic Disputes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(2), pages 113-133, April.
    9. John Robst & Solomon Polachek & Yuan-Ching Chang, 2007. "Geographic Proximity, Trade, and International Conflict/Cooperation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 1-24, February.
    10. Tobias Böhmelt, 2010. "The Impact of Trade on International Mediation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 54(4), pages 566-592, August.
    11. Iyigun, Murat, 2008. "Lessons from the Ottoman Harem (On Ethnicity, Religion and War)," IZA Discussion Papers 3556, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Erik Gartzke & Dominic Rohner, 2010. "Prosperous pacifists: The effects of development on initiators and targets of territorial conflict," IEW - Working Papers 500, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    13. Yang-Ming Chang & Manaf Sellak, 2019. "A game-theoretic analysis of international trade and political conflict over external territories," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 209-228, June.
    14. Solomon W. Polachek, 2002. "Trade-Based Interactions: an Interdisciplinary Perspective," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 19(2), pages 1-21, September.
    15. Polachek, Solomon, 2004. "How Outsourcing Affects Bilateral Political Relations," IZA Discussion Papers 1334, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Polachek Solomon W, 2011. "Current Research and Future Directions in Peace Economics: Trade Gone Awry," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 16(2), pages 1-14, January.
    17. Timothy M Peterson, 2011. "Third-party trade, political similarity, and dyadic conflict," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 48(2), pages 185-200, March.
    18. Lin Scott Y. & Seiglie Carlos, 2014. "Same Evidences, Different Interpretations – A Comparison of the Conflict Index between the Interstate Dyadic Events Data and Militarized Interstate Disputes Data in Peace-Conflict Models," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 347-372, April.
    19. Fletcher, Erin K. & Iyigun, Murat, 2009. "Cultures, Clashes and Peace," IZA Discussion Papers 4116, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Erik Gartzke & Dominic Rohner, 2010. "To conquer or compel: war, peace, and economic development," IEW - Working Papers 511, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.

    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:26:y:2020:i:3:p:09:n:16. 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.