IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v40y1996i3p460-485.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic Behavior in Refugee Repatriation

Author

Listed:
  • Lester A. Zeager

    (Department of Economics, East Carolina University)

  • Johnathan B. Bascom

    (Department of Geography, East Carolina University)

Abstract

The authors present a game-theoretic analysis of negotiations involving two players: the government of a country of origin and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), in which the latter represents refugees, countries of asylum, and donor countries at the negotiating table. Ordinal preference orderings of outcomes allow the authors to represent the attitudes of governments in countries of origin toward their refugees as well as the urgency of repatriation for countries of asylum and donor countries. For alternative configurations of preference orderings, the authors analyze repatriation negotiations using classical game theory and the theory of moves, which assume different rules of play. They find the theory of moves is better suited for understanding efforts to achieve repatriation agreements in actual refugee crises and conclude with reflections on the difficulties of reaching repatriation agreements in recent years.

Suggested Citation

  • Lester A. Zeager & Johnathan B. Bascom, 1996. "Strategic Behavior in Refugee Repatriation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 40(3), pages 460-485, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:40:y:1996:i:3:p:460-485
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002796040003004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002796040003004
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002796040003004?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. Steven J. Brams & Walter Mattli, 1993. "Theory of Moves: Overview and Examples," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 12(2), pages 1-39, February.
    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. Lester A. Zeager, "undated". "A Model of Strategic Behavior in Three Cuban Refugee Crises," Working Papers 0202, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
    2. Kiryluk-Dryjska, Ewa, 2016. "Negotiation analysis using the theory of moves—Theoretical background and a case study," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 44-53.
    3. Paolo VERME, 2016. "The Economics Of Forced Displacement: An Introduction," Region et Developpement, Region et Developpement, LEAD, Universite du Sud - Toulon Var, vol. 44, pages 141-163.
    4. Arroyo, Santiago & Alegría, Alexander, 2009. "El conflicto colombo-venezolano y la construcción de escenarios desde la Teoría de Juegos [The Colombo-Venezuelan conflict and the construction of scenes from Theory of Games]," MPRA Paper 24396, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 24 Aug 2009.
    5. Brams Steven J., 2000. "Game Theory: Pitfalls and Opportunities in Applying It to International Relations," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-11, April.
    6. Arroyo, Santiago & Bolaños, Juan, 2010. "Tensión diplomática entre Colombia y Ecuador durante 2006-2009: una mirada desde la teoría de juegos [Diplomatic tension between Colombia and Ecuador during 2006-2009: a look from the theory of gam," MPRA Paper 28751, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Nov 2010.
    7. Brams, S.J., 1998. "To Mobilize of Not to Mobilize: Catch 22s in International Crises," Working Papers 98-11, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    8. Kiryluk-Dryjska, Ewa & Baer-Nawrocka, Agnieszka, 2019. "Reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU: Expected results and their social acceptance," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 607-622.

    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. Marek Hudik, 0. "Equilibrium as compatibility of plans," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    2. Steven J. Brams, 1997. "Game Theory And Emotions," Rationality and Society, , vol. 9(1), pages 91-124, February.
    3. Ben D. Mor & Zeev Maoz, 1999. "Learning and the Evolution of Enduring International Rivalries: a Strategic Approach," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 17(1), pages 1-48, February.
    4. Marek Hudik, 2020. "Equilibrium as compatibility of plans," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 349-368, October.
    5. Manfred J. Holler & Bengt-Arne Wickström, 1998. "The Scandal Matrix: The Use of Scandals in the Progress of Society," CESifo Working Paper Series 159, CESifo.
    6. Ben D. Mor, 1995. "Crisis Initiation and Misperception," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(3), pages 351-367, July.
    7. Lester A. Zeager, "undated". "Negotiations for Refugee Repatriation or Local Settlement: A Game-Theoretic Analysis," Working Papers 9730, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
    8. Lester A. Zeager, "undated". "A Model of Strategic Behavior in Three Cuban Refugee Crises," Working Papers 0202, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
    9. John H.P. Williams & Lester A. Zeager, 2004. "Macedonian Border Closings in the Kosovo Refugee Crisis: A Game-Theoretic Perspective," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(4), pages 233-254, September.
    10. Haiyan Xu & D. Marc Kilgour & Keith W. Hipel, 2011. "Matrix Representation of Conflict Resolution in Multiple-Decision-Maker Graph Models with Preference Uncertainty," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 755-779, November.

    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:sae:jocore:v:40:y:1996:i:3:p:460-485. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.