Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Conflict Resolution
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Dataset
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dorussen, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Heterogeneous Trade Interests and Conflict

What You Trade Matters

Han Dorussen

Department of Government, University of Essex

Empirical studies on trade and conflict generally make use of highly aggregated data. There are, however, good theoretical arguments to suspect that trade in some goods should have a bigger impact on the likelihood of conflict than trade in others. This article examines the relationship between trade and conflict at a lower level of aggregation. It discusses various theoretical arguments why the relationship between trade and conflict should vary across industry sectors, particularly strategic trade, asset specificity, and possible appropriation of gains from trade. The central hypotheses are tested using dyadic United Nations trade data disaggregated at industry level from 1970 to 1997. The main findings are that trade generally reduces the likelihood of conflict, the relationship is weaker for commodities that are more easily appropriable by force, and the relationship is generally stronger for manufactured goods with the notable exceptions of chemical and metal industries and the high-technology sector.

Key Words: trade • conflict • industrial sector • strategic goods

Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 50, No. 1, 87-107 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0022002705283013


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
M. Fuhrmann
Exporting Mass Destruction? The Determinants of Dual-Use Trade
Journal of Peace Research, September 1, 2008; 45(5): 633 - 652.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
H. Dorussen and H. Ward
Intergovernmental Organizations and the Kantian Peace: A Network Perspective
Journal of Conflict Resolution, April 1, 2008; 52(2): 189 - 212.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
H. Hegre
Polarization and Interstate Conflict
Journal of Peace Research, March 1, 2008; 45(2): 261 - 282.
[Abstract] [PDF]