The Democratic Peace INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: THEORY AND PRACTICE (Course number MSFS 510-02) Russett and Oneal: Triangulating peace – From WikiSummary,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Random Dresser Wilbur has – 3 left shoes, all of different colors – 5 right shoes, all of different colors – 4 right gloves, all of different colors.
Advertisements

Government: Forms, Changes, and Economic Systems Government: Forms, Changes, and Economic Systems Mr. Stokes SJHS.
Why Do Regimes Commit to Human Rights Treaties? Badasses & Wimps Human Rights Part 2 – The United Nations Human Rights Conventions INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS.
Do Now . Monday-1. Name the Mayor of Atlanta
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: THEORY AND PRACTICE (Course number MSFS ) Classroom location: Intercultural Center (ICC) 234a Class day & time: Tuesday,
Regression Extensions W&W Chapter 14. Introduction So far we have assumed that our independent variables are measured intervally. Today we will discuss.
Introduction to Statistics: Political Science (Class 1) Answering Political Questions with Quantitative Data (political variables, review of bivariate.
Political and Economic Development in the Face of Revolutionary Threats Bruce Bueno de Mesquita Alastair Smith NYU.
Chapter 1 Political Thinking: Becoming a Responsible Citizen
CYCLES AND TRANSITIONS. READING Smith, Democracy, Introduction + chs. 1-2, 4 Modern Latin America, chs. 3, 5 (Mexico, Cuba) Magaloni, “Demise of Mexico’s.
Democratic Peace Theory
Dimensions of Governance: A Selectorate Pilot Study Bruce Bueno de Mesquita Alastair Smith New York University.
11 Why Are Developing Countries so Resistant to the Rule of Law? Barry R. Weingast Stanford University.
Lecture Three: Understanding Power
International Conventional War Research
UNDERSTANDING MASS SUPPORT FOR DEMOCRACY Conclusion to Course.
COMPARATIVE INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS: The Politics of International Finance James Raymond Vreeland School of Foreign Service Georgetown University 1.
Power Transition Theory
Fundamentals of Political Science
Democratic Peace. Empirical generalization Immanuel Kant 1795; Small and Singer 1976; Doyle 1983 Strong form: No two “democracies” have ever fought a.
Citizen Participation
Today’s Topics Domestic Politics 1. General characteristics of domestic politics approaches. 2. A detailed example: the democratic peace argument.
Estimating State Preference in International Crises: An Application.
The Identification Problem Question: Given a set of observed outcomes and covariates, can you estimate a unique set of parameters ? Answer: In general,
Repeated Interaction and Reputation Effects. Repeated Interaction Creates possibility for reputation effects –reputations for resolve –reputations for.
Lecture 2 The Distribution of Power and Systemic War.
Epistemology and Methods Data Selection, Operationalization and Measurement May
Models of Bargaining and Coercion Ken SchultzJeff Lewis Stanford UniversityUCLA.
Your Agenda First Review Political system Political culture Discuss Implications of Political Culture for Public Policy Apply Political Culture to Republicans.
AUTHORITARIANISM AND DEMOCRACY. READINGS MLA, ch. 13 (“Dynamics of Political Transformation”) MLA Website, Document 14 (Rigoberta Menchú)
Democracy and National Security or could it be golf?
Bargaining and Signaling. Basic Set-Up Two parties, A and B, bargain over the division of something of value. –Division of territory –Distribution of.
Game Theory and Empirics: What Can Go Wrong. Using Formal Theory to Identify and Characterize Biases James Fearon, “Signaling versus the Balance of Power.
War as an Enforcement Problem Interstate Conflict over Rebel Support in Civil Wars Kenneth Schultz Stanford University.
 Quantitative Approaches to International Relations  Case Study of Research Design in the International Political Economy  Case Study of Research Design.
WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO IN THIS CLASS? What three big questions (units) will we study? – Why do countries do what they do? When/how do states work together,
Plan for Today Domestic Politics 1. Introducing general characteristics of domestic politics approaches. 2. Investigating a detailed example: the democratic.
Epistemology and Methods Model Building: Concepts, Arguments, and Hypotheses April
A State-Centered Approach to the Politics of Trade
What is Democracy? Democracy in Theory vs Democracy in Practice Types of Democracy Democratization Why do States Democratize.
International Political Economy The Rational Choice Approach in IPE Ch. 5 Lecture 8.
Political Economy of the Global South Prof. Tyson Roberts.
Liberalism: Conclusion Lecture 14. The Question of the Month How Can Countries Move from Anarchy, War of All Against All, to Cooperation? Security Dilemma.
Analytical Techniques of Political Science Clip art.
Paradoxes and Puzzles of War Key Problems in Conflict Studies.
GLOBAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS Course number DEVM 566, May 14 – May 25, 2012 James Raymond Vreeland School of Foreign Service & The Department of Government.
Where do domestic political institutions come from? READING ASSIGNMENTS: Przeworski, Adam, Michael Alvarez, José Antonio Cheibub, and Fernando Limongi.
Explore the World Jack Burton Rob Mitchell Wright State University ED 648 Explore the World Jack Burton Rob Mitchell Wright State University ED 648.
TO WHAT EXTENT ARE NON- DEMOCRATIC LEADERS MORE PRONE TO WAR?
M9302 Mathematical Models in Economics Instructor: Georgi Burlakov 4.1.Dynamic Games of Incomplete Information Lecture
Why Method Matters in Political Science Prof. Kenneth Benoit PO March 2010.
Chapter Two, Section One “Why Americans Have Government”
Signaling & International Politics John Lee Department of Political Science Florida State University.
Presentation by Dr. Kevin Lasher. Government Intervention in Economy Govt. Intervention in Personal Matters FOR AGAINST AGAINST FOR LIBERALS CONSERVATIVES.
Chapter 1 The Comparative Study of Politics Comparative Politics: Structures and Choices 2e By Lowell Barrington.
Epistemology and Methods Data Selection, Operationalization, and Measurement May
Model Building Part 1: From Theories to Part 2: Following Geddes Concepts Arguments / Explanation Hypotheses.
Liberalism & “Radical” Theories John Lee Department of Political Science Florida State University.
Outline for 9/17: More Optimism about International Affairs 1.More on Free Trade: International Trade as a Harmony Game. 2. Cooperation is possible in.
Stat 31, Section 1, Last Time Big Rules of Probability –The not rule –The or rule –The and rule P{A & B} = P{A|B}P{B} = P{B|A}P{A} Bayes Rule (turn around.
THE SECOND IMAGE: WHY DO SOME SOCIETIES/ STATES/CULTURES/LEADERS FIGHT MORE THAN OTHERS? DO STATES WITH SIMILAR CHARACTERISTICS BEHAVE IN SIMILAR WAYS?
FOREIGN AID + REGIMES = ? HELEN BROSNAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND INTERNATIONAL POLITICS INAF PROBLEM HYPOTHESIS LITERATURE DATASETS CONCLUSION.
Models of Foreign Policy Decision Making PO400 Unit 7.
T HE D EMOCRATIC P EACE AND T ERRITORIAL C ONFLICT IN THE T WENTIETH C ENTURY Paul K. Huth and Todd L. Allee Merve KASARCI.
Environmental Conflict? The democratic peace The democratic peace Lecture at HEI, 19 April 2007 Course E 584 Topics in Peace Research Nils Petter Gleditsch.
WHAT IS COMPARATIVE POLITICS?
Comparative Political Theory
WHAT IS COMPARATIVE POLITICS?
CYCLES AND TRANSITIONS
WHAT IS COMPARATIVE POLITICS?
Presentation transcript:

The Democratic Peace INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: THEORY AND PRACTICE (Course number MSFS ) Russett and Oneal: Triangulating peace – From WikiSummary, the Free Social Science Summary Database. Schultz, Kenneth A Do Democratic Institutions Constrain or Inform? Contrasting Two Institutional Perspectives on Democracy and War. International Organization 53 (2): Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, James D. Morrow, Randolph M. Siverson, and Alastair Smith An Institutional Explanation of the Democratic Peace. American Political Science Review 93(4): Instructor: James Raymond Vreeland

From last time, economic models of US elections do well…

Today's plan 1.Triangulating peace 2.The BDM2S2 story 3.Schultz and backwards induction 4.Selection problems 5.Quantitative analysis 6.WEEKS!

The Democratic Peace Democracy International OrganizationsInternational Trade Peace War

Vocab Question What is the difference between “dyadic effects” & “systemic effects”? –A–Ask a randomly selected student time! –W–What would a “monadic” effect be? Using technology –G–Google: monadic dyadic systemic –G–Google-scholar it?

BDM2S2 begin with 8 empirical regularities: 1.Democracies do not fight wars against each other (dyadic) 2.Democracies do fight wars with non-democracies (dyadic) 3.Democracies win a disproportionate share of the wars they fight (monadic) 4.When disputes do emerge, democratic dyads choose more peaceful processes of dispute settlement than do other pairings of states (dyadic) 5.Democracies are more likely to initiate wars against autocracies than are autocracies against democracies (dyadic) 6.In wars they initiate, democracies pay fewer costs in terms of human life and fight shorter wars than nondemocratic states (monadic) 7.Transitional democracies appear more likely to fight than stable regimes (monadic) 8.Larger democracies seem more constrained to avoid war than smaller democracies (monadic)

BDM2S2 conception of regime Aristotelian –The key has to do with the number of rulers – or more specifically, the number of people who choose the rulers S –“selectorate” –Enfranchised people who have a say in who rules W –“winning coalition” –Those people whose support is requires to –keep the incumbent in office Survival is the key And institutions shape the effective strategies for survival

Hazard Rate over Time for Democracies (Solid Line) & Dictatorships (Dotted Line) – Time in years

Schultz The complete info game…

Working backwards… if –a<w1, game reduces to:

Working backwards… if –a>w1, game reduces to:

Summarizing S1 plays [CH, SF] if –a<w1 –highly negative audience costs (democracies) successfully challenge S1 plays [SQ, BD] if –a>w1 –weakly negative audience costs (autocracies) don’t challenge S2 plays CD if –a<w1 –both democracies and autocracies concede to challengers with highly negative audience costs (democracies) S2 plays RS if –a>w1 –both democracies and autocracies resist challengers with weakly negative audience costs (autocracies)

Complete info version Complete: w1 & w2 are “common knowledge” –Explain Solve the game through backwards induction –Last node (S1): If –a<wi, then “stand firm”, else “back down” –S2: If –a<wi (threat), “concede” (because w2<0) If –a>wi (bluff), “resist” (because 0<1) –1 st node (S1): If –a 0) If –a>wi, then “status quo” (because –a<0)

Incomplete info version Bluffing occurs S2 resists only if its expected value from war, w2, is is sufficiently high to make the gamble (that S1 is just bluffing) worthwhile The probability that a challenge is “resisted” thus depends on the value of w2

Schultz Accountability/competition story Vs Informational/transparency story Explain each What is the prediction of each of how a democracy will react when challenged by another democracy?

Accountability/competition story Costs of war are higher for democracies In the model, draw w2 from a different distribution (increase d1)

Informational/transparency story Audience costs are higher for democracies In the model, assign different values of a according to regime

Hypotheses

Tests

Probability of reciprocating: Usually written: “Excel” command is just =NORMSDIST(“B’x”)

Selection problem? BDM2S2 p802:

Thank you WE ARE GLOBAL GEORGETOWN!