The DOI matches its Crossref record; 87 of the 87 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Trade Blocs, Trade Flows, and International Conflict
Abstract
The relationship between foreign trade and political conflict has been a persistent source of controversy among scholars of international relations. Existing empirical studies of this topic have focused on the effects of trade flows on conflict, but they have largely ignored the institutional context in which trade is conducted. In this article we present some initial quantitative results pertaining to the influence on military disputes of preferential trading arrangements (PTAs), a broad class of commercial institutions that includes free trade areas, common markets, and customs unions. We argue that parties to the same PTA are less prone to disputes than other states and that hostilities between PTA members are less likely to occur as trade flows rise between them. Moreover, we maintain that heightened commerce is more likely to inhibit conflict between states that belong to the same preferential grouping than between states that do not. Our results accord with this argument. Based on an analysis of the period since World War II, we find that trade flows have relatively little effect on the likelihood of disputes between states that do not participate in the same PTA. Within PTAs, however, there is a strong, inverse relationship between commerce and conflict. Parties to such an arrangement are less likely to engage in hostilities than other states, and the likelihood of a military dispute dips markedly as trade increases between them.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables.
MTW, & Long, J. S. (1997) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2965458 · Cited by 6,898
Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables
Calvin, J. A. (1998) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1998.10485496 · Cited by 5,201
War and Change in World Politics
Gilpin, R. (1981) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511664267 · Cited by 4,020
The Penn World Table (Mark 5): An Expanded Set of International Comparisons, 1950-1988
Summers, R., & Heston, A. (1991) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2937941 · Cited by 3,429
Power and Interdependence: World Politics In Transition
(2017) · The SHAFR Guide Online · doi:10.1163/2468-1733_shafr_sim280020670 · Cited by 3,073
Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics
Moravcsik, A. (1997) · International Organization · doi:10.1162/002081897550447 · Cited by 2,814
The False Promise of International Institutions
Mearsheimer, J. J. (1994) · International Security · doi:10.2307/2539078 · Cited by 2,680
The Political Economy of International Relations
Gilpin, R. (1987) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781400882779 · Cited by 2,583
Taking Time Seriously: Time-Series-Cross-Section Analysis with a Binary Dependent Variable
Beck, N., Katz, J. N., & Tucker, R. (1998) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2991857 · Cited by 2,471
Monitoring the world economy, 1820-1992
(1996) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-2851 · Cited by 2,413
Cited by
Conflict, security, and political risk: International business in challenging times
Henisz, W. J., Mansfield, E. D., & Von Glinow, M. A. (2010) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.11 · Cited by 113
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Mansfield, E. D., & Pevehouse, J. C.
- Venue
- International Organization
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2000
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 775-808
- ISSN
- 0020-8183 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-5088
- OpenAlex
- W2111222172
- Cited by
- 384
- References
- 87
- FWCI
- 25.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Trade Blocs, Trade Flows, and International Conflict. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/002081800551361
- The paper
- Mansfield, E. D., & Pevehouse, J. C. (2000). Trade Blocs, Trade Flows, and International Conflict. International Organization. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081800551361
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.