IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v95y2001i01p15-31_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Back to Kant: Reinterpreting the Democratic Peace as a Macrohistorical Learning Process

Author

Listed:
  • Cederman, Lars-Erik

Abstract

The contemporary international relations literature links the democratic peace hypothesis to Kant’s famous peace plan. Yet, whether attempting to prove or disprove the hypothesis, most quantitative studies have lost sight of important dimensions of the Kantian vision. I reinterpret the democratic peace as a dynamic and dialectical learning process. In order to assess the dynamic dimension of this process (while controlling for exogenous dialectical reversals), I rely on quantitative evidence drawn from popular data sets. In conformance with the Kantian perspective, the conflict propensities among democracies exhibit a steadily falling trend since the nineteenth century. Yet, in partial opposition to Kant’s expectations, other dyads also experience a significant, although weaker, pacifying trend. A series of tests shows that these findings are robust to epochal effects, various control variables, and “maturity effects†measuring the age of democratic dyads.

Suggested Citation

  • Cederman, Lars-Erik, 2001. "Back to Kant: Reinterpreting the Democratic Peace as a Macrohistorical Learning Process," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(1), pages 15-31, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:95:y:2001:i:01:p:15-31_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055401000028/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Paul K. Huth & Todd L. Allee, 2002. "Domestic Political Accountability and the Escalation and Settlement of International Disputes," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(6), pages 754-790, December.
    2. Torsten Selck & Mark Rhinard & Frank Häge, 2007. "The evolution of European legal integration," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 187-200, December.
    3. William J. Dixon & Paul D. Senese, 2002. "Democracy, Disputes, and Negotiated Settlements," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(4), pages 547-571, August.
    4. Christos Kollias & Suzanna-Maria Paleologou, 2017. "The Globalization and Peace Nexus: Findings Using Two Composite Indices," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 131(3), pages 871-885, April.
    5. Carl Hamilton, 2004. "Globalization and Democracy," NBER Chapters, in: Challenges to Globalization: Analyzing the Economics, pages 63-88, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Lars-Erik Cederman & Mohan Penubarti Rao, 2001. "Exploring the Dynamics of the Democratic Peace," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(6), pages 818-833, December.
    7. Dina A. Zinnes, 2004. "Constructing Political Logic," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(3), pages 430-454, June.
    8. James Lee Ray, 2001. "Integrating Levels of Analysis in World Politics," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 13(4), pages 355-388, October.
    9. Lars-Erik Cederman, 2001. "Modeling the Democratic Peace as a Kantian Selection Process," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(4), pages 470-502, August.
    10. Buscema, Massimo & Ferilli, Guido & Sacco, Pier Luigi, 2017. "What kind of ‘world order’? An artificial neural networks approach to intensive data mining," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 46-56.
    11. Johann Park, 2013. "Forward to the future? The democratic peace after the Cold War," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(2), pages 178-194, April.

    More about this item

    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:cup:apsrev:v:95:y:2001:i:01:p:15-31_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    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.