IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hit/hitjec/v62y2021i2p59-73.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Does Terrorism Occur: Game-Theoretic Analysis and Offense-Defense Balance

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Jin Yeub

Abstract

Offense-defense theory argues that wars are more likely in offense-dominant periods. I study how this claim can be challenged when it comes to making predictions about terrorism. To do so, I consider a model of continuous-time conflict between a status quo state and a terrorist, who develops offensive military technology and has private information on its aggressiveness. I characterize two measures of offense-defense balance, and show that a greater offense advantage in the balance is not associated with a higher risk of terrorism. This paper supports the critics of offense-defense theory, and provides insights into understanding when terrorism occurs.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Jin Yeub, 2021. "When Does Terrorism Occur: Game-Theoretic Analysis and Offense-Defense Balance," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 62(2), pages 59-73, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:hit:hitjec:v:62:y:2021:i:2:p:59-73
    DOI: 10.15057/hje.2021003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/hermes/ir/re/72504/HJeco0620200590.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.15057/hje.2021003?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fearon, James D., 1994. "Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(3), pages 577-592, September.
    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. Rana, Arslan Tariq & Kebewar, Mazen, 2014. "The Political Economy of FDI flows into Developing Countries: Does the depth of International Trade Agreements Matter?," EconStor Preprints 91501, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    2. Londregan, John & Vindigni, Andrea, 2006. "Voting as a Credible Threat," Papers 10-04-2006, Princeton University, Research Program in Political Economy.
    3. J. C. Sharman, 2007. "Rationalist and Constructivist Perspectives on Reputation," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55(1), pages 20-37, March.
    4. Adam, Antonis & Tsavou, Evi, 2020. "One strike and you’re out! Dictators’ fate in the aftermath of terrorism," MPRA Paper 103772, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2020.
    5. John Tyson Chatagnier, 2015. "Conflict bargaining as a signal to third parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(2), pages 237-268, April.
    6. Conconi, Paola & Sahuguet, Nicolas & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2018. "Electoral incentives, term limits, and the sustainability of peace," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 15-26.
    7. J. Joseph Hewitt, 2003. "Dyadic Processes and International Crises," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(5), pages 669-692, October.
    8. David R. Andersen-Rodgers, 2015. "No table necessary? Foreign policy crisis management techniques in non-state actor-triggered crises," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(2), pages 200-221, April.
    9. Paul K. Huth, 1998. "Major Power Intervention in International Crises, 1918-1988," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(6), pages 744-770, December.
    10. Thomas Jensen & Andreas Madum, 2014. "Partisan Optimism and Political Bargaining," Discussion Papers 14-05, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    11. Edward L. Glaeser, 2006. "The Political Economy of Warfare," NBER Working Papers 12738, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Terrence L. Chapman, 2007. "International Security Institutions, Domestic Politics, and Institutional Legitimacy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(1), pages 134-166, February.
    13. Yaohui Wang & Yanhong Ma, 2024. "Costly Signaling and China's Strategic Engagement in Arctic Regional Governance," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 12.
    14. Alastair Smith, 2009. "Political Groups, Leader Change, and the Pattern of International Cooperation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(6), pages 853-877, December.
    15. Benjamin O Fordham, 2020. "History and quantitative conflict research: A case for limiting the historical scope of our theoretical arguments," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(1), pages 3-15, January.
    16. Michael W. Simon & Erik Gartzke, 1996. "Political System Similarity And The Choice of Allies," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 40(4), pages 617-635, December.
    17. Florian Morath, 2013. "Volunteering and the strategic value of ignorance," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(1), pages 99-131, June.
    18. Barbara Dluhosch & Nikolai Ziegler, 2011. "The paradox of weakness in the politics of trade integration," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 325-354, December.
    19. David H. Clark & Patrick M. Regan, 2003. "Opportunities to Fight," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(1), pages 94-115, February.
    20. Jelnov, Artyom & Tauman, Yair & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2018. "Confronting an enemy with unknown preferences: Deterrer or provocateur?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 124-143.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    terrorism; game theory; offense-defense balance; military technology;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • F51 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Conflicts; Negotiations; Sanctions

    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:hit:hitjec:v:62:y:2021:i:2:p:59-73. 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: Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fehitjp.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.