IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v47y2003i1p94-115.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Opportunities to Fight

Author

Listed:
  • David H. Clark
  • Patrick M. Regan

    (Department of Political Science Binghamton University)

Abstract

Quantitative social science relies centrally on the ideal that any concept can be operationalized and measured. Although notionally tenable, practical limits dictate that some concepts might be more easily and more reliably measured than others. Some conceptual variables are not easily operationalized or measured because they are not directly observable phenomena; as a result, scholars often resort to indirect indicators of the phenomenon in question. Opportunity comprises one such concept that is important to the development of theories of international conflict. Although scholars might agree that different states have different opportunities to fight, measuring opportunity has proved to be a daunting task. This study presents a statistical method that treats unobserved concepts (such as opportunity) as latent variables. The procedure derives estimates of the latent variable and observable actions that arise from the latent process. Drawing on split population hazard models developed in the economics literature, a model of dyadic opportunity and willingness to engage in interstate conflict is produced. Results shed light on the process that leads states to fight one another.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:47:y:2003:i:1:p:94-115
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002702239513
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002702239513
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002702239513?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. Schmidt, Peter & Witte, Ann Dryden, 1989. "Predicting criminal recidivism using 'split population' survival time models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 141-159, January.
    2. Maoz, Zeev & Russett, Bruce, 1993. "Normative and Structural Causes of Democratic Peace, 1946–1986," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(3), pages 624-638, September.
    3. Siverson, Randolph M. & Starr, Harvey, 1990. "Opportunity, Willingness, and the Diffusion of War," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 84(1), pages 47-67, March.
    4. Schultz, Kenneth A., 1999. "Do Democratic Institutions Constrain or Inform? Contrasting Two Institutional Perspectives on Democracy and War," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 233-266, April.
    5. 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.
    6. de Mesquita, Bruce Bueno & Morrow, James D. & Siverson, Randolph M. & Smith, Alastair, 1999. "An Institutional Explanation of the Democratic Peace," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(4), pages 791-807, December.
    7. de Mesquita, Bruce Bueno & Morrow, James D. & Zorick, Ethan R., 1997. "Capabilities, Perception, and Escalation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(1), pages 15-27, March.
    8. Douglas Lemke & William Reed, 1996. "Regime types and status quo evaluations: Power transition theory and the democratic peace," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 143-164, May.
    9. Maoz, Zeev & Russett, Bruce, 1993. "Normative and Structural Causes of Democratic Peace, 1946–1986," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(3), pages 624-638, September.
    10. Douglas Lemke, 1995. "The tyranny of distance: Redefining relevant dyads," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 23-38.
    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. Jun Xiang, 2017. "Dyadic Effects, Relevance, and the Empirical Assessment of the Kantian Peace," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 248-271, March.

    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. Andrew P. Owsiak, 2019. "Foundations for integrating the democratic and territorial peace arguments," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(1), pages 63-87, January.
    2. Brian Lai, 2004. "The Effects of Different Types of Military Mobilization on the Outcome of International Crises," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(2), pages 211-229, April.
    3. Alexandra Guisinger & Alastair Smith, 2002. "Honest Threats," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(2), pages 175-200, April.
    4. Bruce Bueno De Mesquita & Michael T. Koch & Randolph M. Siverson, 2004. "Testing Competing Institutional Explanations of the Democratic Peace: The Case of Dispute Duration," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(4), pages 255-267, September.
    5. 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.
    6. William Reed, 2003. "Information and Economic Interdependence," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(1), pages 54-71, February.
    7. David Brulé, 2006. "Congressional Opposition, the Economy, and U.S. Dispute Initiation, 1946-2000," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(4), pages 463-483, August.
    8. Jo Jakobsen & Thomas Halvorsen, 2019. "Geographical and temporal patterns of interstate security competition: Global and regional evidence," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 22(3), pages 226-246, September.
    9. Fiona McGillivray & Alastair Smith, 2005. "The Impact of Leadership Turnover and Domestic Institutions on International Cooperation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(5), pages 639-660, October.
    10. Xinyuan Dai, 2006. "The Conditional Nature of Democratic Compliance," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(5), pages 690-713, October.
    11. Jamie Levin & Joseph MacKay & Anne Spencer Jamison & Abouzar Nasirzadeh & Anthony Sealey, 2021. "A test of the democratic peacekeeping hypothesis: Coups, democracy, and foreign military deployments," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(3), pages 355-367, May.
    12. Karim Khan & Sadia Sherbaz, 2020. "Entertaining Douglass North: Political Violence and Social Order," PIDE-Working Papers 2020:174, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.
    13. Kölle, Felix, 2020. "Governance and Group Conflict," MPRA Paper 98859, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Susan Hannah Allen, 2007. "Time Bombs," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(1), pages 112-133, February.
    15. 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.
    16. Elizabeth A. Stanley & John P. Sawyer, 2009. "The Equifinality of War Termination," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(5), pages 651-676, October.
    17. Tim Groeling & Matthew A. Baum, 2009. "Journalists’ Incentives and Media Coverage of Elite Foreign Policy Evaluations," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(5), pages 437-470, November.
    18. Robert A. Hart & William Reed, 1999. "Selection effects and dispute escalation: Democracy and status quo evaluations," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 243-263, March.
    19. Graeme A.M. Davies & Robert Johns, 2016. "The domestic consequences of international over-cooperation: An experimental study of microfoundations," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 33(4), pages 343-360, September.
    20. David Altman & Federico Rojas-de-Galarreta & Francisco Urdinez, 2021. "An interactive model of democratic peace," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(3), pages 384-398, May.

    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:47:y:2003:i:1:p:94-115. 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.