An identified systemic model of the democracy‐peace nexus

James, Patrick; Solberg, Eric J.; Wolfson, Murray

doi:10.1080/10430719908404914

Cited by 86 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Democratic states resolve their domestic conflicts by compromise and nonviolent means, providing an environment where international conflicts between democratic states are also settled peacefully. James et al (1999) suggest that two democratic states are more likely to have peaceful relations. Lebovic (2001) shows a positive association between quality of democratic institutions and the share of non-military expenditures to the military ones.…”

Section: -Review Of Theoretical and Empirical Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the military expenditures it is generally believed that as the degree of democracy increases in a country, the military expenditures will decrease. Democratic states are more likely to be at peace and less prone to become involved in international conflicts (James et al, 1999;Oneal and Russet, 1997;Lebovic, 2001). Democratic states resolve their domestic conflicts by compromise and nonviolent means, providing an environment where international conflicts between democratic states are also settled peacefully.…”

Section: -Review Of Theoretical and Empirical Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Political institutions and government spending behavior: theory and evidence from Iran

Dizaji

Farzanegan

Naghavi

2015

Int Tax Public Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: -Review Of Theoretical and Empirical Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: -Review Of Theoretical and Empirical Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Political institutions and government spending behavior: theory and evidence from Iran

Dizaji

Farzanegan

Naghavi

2015

Int Tax Public Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Several scholars make a similar reverse-causality argument, reasoning that peace provides a milieu in which democratic regimes flourish (Gates, Knutsen, & Moses 1996;James, Solberg, & Wolfson 1999;Thompson 1996;Rasler & Thompson 2004 Starting with the frequency of third party conflict management, recall that…”

Section: Previous Research On the Systemic Democratic Peacementioning

confidence: 99%

Heeding Ray's Advice: An Exegesis on Control Variables in Systemic Democratic Peace Research

Kadera

Mitchell

2005

Conflict Management and Peace Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In the holy interest of Science, we submit our recent systemic democratic peace research to the control variable doctrine of James Lee Ray, as codified in his 2003 treatise. In particular, we seek to determine whether international institutions intervene in the relationship between the democratic community's strength and the use and effectiveness of third party conflict management, whether hegemony is a competing explanation of third party settlement, and whether our extant model is robust when several control variables are specified. Two important conclusions are reached: 1) the democratic community's strength and institutional vitality promote third party mediation and its success; regardless of hegemonic might and other controls, and 2) Ray's teaching is properly understood as an exhortation for scholars to more carefully consider the theoretical role of each control variable and its proper treatment in statistical models, not as an edict banning the use of control variables.

show abstract

“…The simultaneous-equation analysis in Reuveny & Li (2003) shows that conflict reduces democracy, but also that democracy reduces conflict. 23 In all, most attempts to ascertain the direction of causality by means of appropriately designed statistical methods seem to support the core tenet of the democratic peace, although there are dissenting voices such as James, Solberg & Wolfson (1999).…”

Section: Does Democracy Cause Peace?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Democracy and armed conflict

Hegre

2014

Journal of Peace Research

161

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article reviews the literature on the relationship between democracy and armed conflict, internal as well as interstate. The review points to several similarities between how democratic institutions affect both conflict types. It summarizes the main empirical findings and discusses the most prominent explanations as well as the most important objections raised to the finding, empirically and theoretically. To a large degree, the empirical finding that pairs of democratic states have a lower risk of interstate conflict than other pairs holds up, as does the conclusion that consolidated democracies have less conflict than semi-democracies. The most critical challenge to both conclusions is the position that both democracy and peace are due to pre-existing socio-economic conditions. I conclude that this objection has considerable leverage, but it also seems clear that economic development is unlikely to bring about lasting peace alone, without the formalization embedded in democratic institutions.

show abstract

An identified systemic model of the democracy‐peace nexus

Cited by 86 publications

References 50 publications

Political institutions and government spending behavior: theory and evidence from Iran

Political institutions and government spending behavior: theory and evidence from Iran

Heeding Ray's Advice: An Exegesis on Control Variables in Systemic Democratic Peace Research

Democracy and armed conflict

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About