This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by DIXON, W. J. Articles by SENESE, P. D. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Democracy, Disputes, and Negotiated Settlements

Department of Political Science University of Arizona, Tucson

PAUL D. SENESE

Department of Political Science University at Buffalo, SUNY

The argument that democracies are less belligerent toward one another because of their experience with mediation, negotiation, and compromise at the domestic level suggests that negotiated dispute settlements are more likely between relatively democratic states than other conflicting pairs. Militarized Interstate Dispute data and Polity IIId and Freedom House ratings of democracy are used to examine the propensities of disputants to resolve their grievances through negotiated means. Findings suggest a strong positive influence for mutual democracy. Specifically, the more democratic the less democratic member of a conflictual dyad, the more likely it is their dispute will be resolved through a negotiated settlement. This finding also holds across varying degrees of dyadic relative power and supports existing literature that chronicles the pacific conditioning power of democratic norms for several areas of interstate relations.

Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 46, No. 4, 547-571 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/0022002702046004004


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. L. Quackenbush and J. F. Venteicher Settlements, Outcomes, and the Recurrence of Conflict Journal of Peace Research, November 1, 2008; 45(6): 723 - 742. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. E. Hansen, S. McLaughlin Mitchell, and S. C. Nemeth IO Mediation of Interstate Conflicts: Moving Beyond the Global versus Regional Dichotomy Journal of Conflict Resolution, April 1, 2008; 52(2): 295 - 325. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. V. Frazier Third Party Characteristics, Territory and the Mediation of Militarized Interstate Disputes Conflict Management and Peace Science, September 1, 2006; 23(4): 267 - 284. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. G. Conway III, S. M. Sexton, and R. G. Tweed Collectivism and Governmentally Initiated Restrictions: A Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analysis Across Nations and Within a Nation Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, January 1, 2006; 37(1): 20 - 41. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. Goertz, B. Jones, and P. F. Diehl Maintenance Processes in International Rivalries Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 2005; 49(5): 742 - 769. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. G. Terris and Z. Maoz Rational Mediation: A Theory and a Test Journal of Peace Research, September 1, 2005; 42(5): 563 - 583. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Dacey The Status of Likelihood Claims in International Relations and Peace Science Conflict Management and Peace Science, July 1, 2005; 22(3): 189 - 200. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Sweeney and O. M.G. Keshk the Similarity of States: Using S to Compute Dyadic Interest Similarity Conflict Management and Peace Science, April 1, 2005; 22(2): 165 - 187. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Mattes and T. C. Morgan When Do They Stop? Modeling the Termination of War Conflict Management and Peace Science, July 1, 2004; 21(3): 179 - 193. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Regan and R. J. Leng Culture and Negotiation in Militarized Interstate Disputes Conflict Management and Peace Science, January 1, 2003; 20(2): 111 - 132. [Abstract] [PDF]