Democracy, disputes, and negotiated settlements

William J Dixon, Paul D. Senese

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

67 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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 Hid 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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)547-571
Number of pages25
JournalJournal of Conflict Resolution
Volume46
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2002

Fingerprint

democracy
conditioning
dyad
compromise
mediation
rating
Dispute
Democracy
experience
literature
Compromise
Militarized interstate disputes
Mediation
Rating
Conditioning
Grievance
Dyads
Dispute settlement
Propensity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Political Science and International Relations
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Business, Management and Accounting(all)

Cite this

Democracy, disputes, and negotiated settlements. / Dixon, William J; Senese, Paul D.

In: Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 46, No. 4, 08.2002, p. 547-571.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dixon, William J ; Senese, Paul D. / Democracy, disputes, and negotiated settlements. In: Journal of Conflict Resolution. 2002 ; Vol. 46, No. 4. pp. 547-571.
@article{33e65c52543946428a4a2b449935cbb0,
title = "Democracy, disputes, and negotiated settlements",
abstract = "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 Hid 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.",
author = "Dixon, {William J} and Senese, {Paul D.}",
year = "2002",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1177/0022002702046004004",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "46",
pages = "547--571",
journal = "Journal of Conflict Resolution",
issn = "0022-0027",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Democracy, disputes, and negotiated settlements

AU - Dixon, William J

AU - Senese, Paul D.

PY - 2002/8

Y1 - 2002/8

N2 - 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 Hid 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.

AB - 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 Hid 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036334297&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036334297&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0022002702046004004

DO - 10.1177/0022002702046004004

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0036334297

VL - 46

SP - 547

EP - 571

JO - Journal of Conflict Resolution

JF - Journal of Conflict Resolution

SN - 0022-0027

IS - 4

ER -