IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v62y2018i9p1905-1931.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Power, Wealth, and Satisfaction

Author

Listed:
  • Susan G. Sample

Abstract

Power transition theory (PTT) has had a progressive research program for more than half a century. In spite of this, one of its key concepts, satisfaction, has remained undertheorized. A compelling theory explaining why growth would make some states dissatisfied in the context of power transitions and others satisfied has not been articulated. It is argued here that satisfaction must be theorized at two levels of analysis: the global and the dyadic. The key to distinguishing satisfied versus dissatisfied states at the global level lies in specifically differentiating between the structural effects of changing power and the satisfying effect of increasing wealth. At the dyadic level, conflict over territory creates a perfect storm of state dissatisfaction. The study develops a theoretical framework for a multilevel understanding of satisfaction and its impact and tests it across politically relevant dyads from 1950 to 2001. The evidence strongly supports the hypotheses.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan G. Sample, 2018. "Power, Wealth, and Satisfaction," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(9), pages 1905-1931, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:62:y:2018:i:9:p:1905-1931
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002717707238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002717707238
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002717707238?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. Lui Hebron & Patrick James & Michael Rudy, 2007. "Testing Dynamic Theories of Conflict: Power Cycles, Power Transitions, Foreign Policy Crises and Militarized Interstate Disputes," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 1-29, January.
    2. 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.
    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. Christopher K. Butler, 2011. "Superpower Dispute Initiation: An Empirical Model of Strategic Behavior," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 14(3), pages 61-90, September.
    2. Jonathan M. DiCicco & Jack S. Levy, 1999. "Power Shifts and Problem Shifts," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 43(6), pages 675-704, December.
    3. William Reed, 2003. "Information and Economic Interdependence," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(1), pages 54-71, February.
    4. Alex Braithwaite & Douglas Lemke, 2011. "Unpacking Escalation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(2), pages 111-123, April.
    5. Brian Efird & Gaspare M. Genna, 2002. "Structural Conditions and the Propensity for Regional Integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 3(3), pages 267-295, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Kevin J. Sweeney, 2003. "The Severity of Interstate Disputes," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(6), pages 728-750, December.
    8. Mary Caprioli & Peter F. Trumbore, 2005. "Rhetoric versus Reality," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(5), pages 770-791, October.
    9. Michelle Benson, 2007. "Extending the Bounds of Power Transition Theory," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(3), pages 211-215, July.
    10. Karim Khan & Sadia Sherbaz, 2020. "Entertaining Douglass North: Political Violence and Social Order," PIDE-Working Papers 2020:174, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.
    11. John R. Oneal & Indra De Soysa & Yong-Hee Park, 1998. "But Power and Wealth are Satisfying," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(4), pages 517-520, August.
    12. 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 1-26, April.
    13. Zhanna Terechshenko, 2020. "Hot under the collar: A latent measure of interstate hostility," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 764-776, November.
    14. Margit Bussmann & John R. Oneal, 2007. "Do Hegemons Distribute Private Goods?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(1), pages 88-111, February.
    15. Sara McLaughlin Mitchell, 2017. "Dangerous bargains with the devil? Incorporating new approaches in peace science for the study of war," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(1), pages 98-116, January.
    16. James Meernik & Kimi King, 2020. "The Security Consequences of Bearing Witness," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 64(5), pages 933-957, May.
    17. 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.
    18. Batinge, Benjamin & Musango, Josephine Kaviti & Brent, Alan C., 2019. "Sustainable energy transition framework for unmet electricity markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1090-1099.
    19. David Sobek, 2003. "Regime Type, Preferences, and War in Renaissance Italy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(2), pages 204-225, April.
    20. David Horan, 2019. "Compensation strategies to enact new governance frameworks for SDG transformations," Public Sector Economics, Institute of Public Finance, vol. 43(4), pages 375-400.

    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:62:y:2018:i:9:p:1905-1931. 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.