IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joupea/v42y2005i5p523-543.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Classical Liberals Were Half Right (or Half Wrong): New Tests of the ‘Liberal Peace’, 1960-88

Author

Listed:
  • Hyung Min Kim

    (Department of Political Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, hmkim@email.unc.edu)

  • David L. Rousseau

    (Department of Political Science, University at Albany (SUNY), rousseau@sas.upenn.edu)

Abstract

Classical liberals such as Kant argued that expanding political participation and increasing economic interdependence would promote peace among states. Recent empirical support for both propositions has led to a growing consensus on the power of the ‘liberal peace’. This article challenges one pillar of the liberal peace. Using a dataset of international disputes from 1960 to 1988, the authors find that there is no statistical evidence of the pacifying effect of economic interdependence. Findings in the existing literature appear to be due to the improper use of the classic logit (or probit) method despite the existence of the ‘simultaneity problem’ between the use of force and interdependence (i.e. reciprocal causation). In this study, the authors employ a two-stage probit least squares method to control this problem. Although Kant’s prediction with respect to regime type is supported by the analysis, the claim that economic interdependence will decrease conflict is not. The two-stage results reveal that international conflict reduces economic interdependence (rather than interdependence reducing conflict). The findings are robust using five alternative operationalizations of the economic interdependence variable. Finally, a re-analysis of the Russett & Oneal dataset using a two-stage probit model also indicates that the impact of economic interdependence evaporates after correcting for the simultaneity problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Hyung Min Kim & David L. Rousseau, 2005. "The Classical Liberals Were Half Right (or Half Wrong): New Tests of the ‘Liberal Peace’, 1960-88," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 42(5), pages 523-543, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:42:y:2005:i:5:p:523-543
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/42/5/523.abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Makovi, Michael, 2016. "The Foreign Policy of a Democratic Socialist Regime: From Intervention to Protection to Warfare," MPRA Paper 70308, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Han Dorussen & Hugh Ward, 2011. "Disaggregated Trade Flows and International Conflict," Chapters, in: Christopher J. Coyne & Rachel L. Mathers (ed.), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, chapter 25, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Aaronson Susan Ariel & Abouharb M. Rodwan & Daniel Wang K., 2015. "The Liberal Illusion Is Not a Complete Delusion: The WTO Helps Member States Keep the Peace Only When It Increases Trade," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 455-484, December.
    4. Yang-Ming Chang & Manaf Sellak, 2019. "A game-theoretic analysis of international trade and political conflict over external territories," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 209-228, June.
    5. Hadjiyiannis, Costas & Heracleous, Maria S. & Tabakis, Chrysostomos, 2016. "Regionalism and conflict: Peace creation and peace diversion," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 141-159.

    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:joupea:v:42:y:2005:i:5:p:523-543. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.prio.no/ .

    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.