Bilateral Trade in the Shadow of Armed Conflict
Abstract
Does the shadow of war decrease trade? I examine the influence of conflict on bilateral trade and argue that trading firms' expectations of armed conflict, both within and between nation-states, should decrease trade along with armed political violence. By assuming that firms care about future profits and assess the likelihood of a domestic or interstate conflict in the future that could disrupt trade, I argue that increasing the expectation of a domestic or interstate conflict raises the transportation, transaction, and production costs of trade. Empirically, contemporaneous trade levels should be negatively related to trading firms' beliefs about the likelihood of domestic and interstate conflicts in the future. Statistical tests, using bilateral trade data from 1984 to 1997, show that expectations of domestic or interstate conflict, in addition to violent armed conflicts, are negatively correlated with bilateral trade levels. Theoretically and empirically, this research advances our understanding of the trade-conflict relationship by demonstrating how trading firms' expectations about future conflict reduce bilateral trade levels.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Armed conflict hurts domestic as well as international trade, deters long-term investments and development assistance, and triggers capital flight.
“Armed conflict also hurts domestic as well as international trade, deters long-term investments and development assistance, and triggers capital flight (125-128).”
From Vicious Circles: Violence, Vulnerability, and Climate Change (2021) · cites this paper as [126]
Cites
What To Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data
Beck, N., & Katz, J. N. (1995) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2082979 · Cited by 6,840 · see citing works
Armed Conflict 1946-2001: A New Dataset
GLEDITSCH, N. P., WALLENSTEEN, P., ERIKSSON, M., SOLLENBERG, M., & STRAND, H. (2002) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343302039005007 · Cited by 3,846 · cited 2× · see citing works
“I recode these intensity scales so that the intermediate designations are included in the minor armed conflict category, as Strand, Wilhelmsen, and Peter Gleditsch (2004) suggest.”
BackgroundEconomic Growth, Civil Wars, and Spatial Spillovers
MURDOCH, J. C., & SANDLER, T. (2002) · Journal of Conflict Resolution · doi:10.1177/0022002702046001006 · Cited by 534 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Vicious Circles: Violence, Vulnerability, and Climate Change
Buhaug, H., & von Uexkull, N. (2021) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-014708 · Cited by 187 · see citing works
- Authors
- Long, A. G.
- Affiliations
- Kansas State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Long, Andrew G.
- Venue
- International Studies Quarterly
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-03
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 81-101
- ISSN
- 0020-8833 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2478
- OpenAlex
- W2121893561
- Cited by
- 124
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 6.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Studies Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Global trade and economics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Defense, Military, and Policy Studies
- Keywords
- armed conflict, bilateral trade, trade disruption, domestic conflict, interstate conflict, transportation costs, transaction costs, production costs, political violence, trade and conflict
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review