Cited by 95Economic Sanctions and International RelationsInternational Relations and Foreign PolicyPolitical Conflict and Governance

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Designing foreign policy

McLean, Elena V, Whang, Taehee·2014·Journal of Peace Research

Abstract

The literature on economic sanctions has long studied sender countries’ policymaking as a simple choice between imposing sanctions to extract concessions from the targeted country and doing nothing. We depart from this simplifying assumption and analyze sanctions as a multifaceted foreign policy instrument. We argue that senders design sanction policies in response to policy preferences of two domestic constituencies. Voters expect a response to an international dispute in the form of some policy, such as economic sanctions; hence, the sender’s policymakers seek to demonstrate their competence in foreign affairs by imposing sanctions. Once the policymakers announce the use of sanctions, special interest groups that stand to experience economic losses when this foreign policy is implemented pressure the policymakers to choose sanction measures limiting such losses. As a result, the policymakers design sanction policies to include measures that will be less detrimental to special interest groups. We test our theoretical argument using the Threat and Imposition of Sanctions data and show that, while pressures from public opinion increase the likelihood of sanctions, special interest groups that benefit from the relationship with the target country are associated with a lower probability of the use of sanction measures that would impose substantial costs on domestic interest groups.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0022343314533811

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The EU's ban on insurance of Iranian oil transportation had a significant impact on the global oil market, as 95 percent of oil-tankers world-wide were insured by one company which also fell under European law jurisdiction, making the secure transport of Iranian oil significantly more difficult.

    “Crucially, this round also banned the insurance of Iranian oil transportation.This had a significant impact on the global oil market, as 95 percent of oil-tankers world-wide were insured by one company which also fell under European law jurisdiction, making the secure transport of Iranian oil significantly more difficult.51”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Baldwin, 1985, The Political Economy of US Import Policy
  2. Brace, 1993, Follow the Leader: Opinion Polls and the Modern Presidents
  3. Cortright, 2002, Smart Sanctions
  4. Destler, 1992, American Trade Politics
  5. Dreher, 2006, Does globalization affect growth?, Applied Economics, 38, 1091, 10.1080/00036840500392078 · DOI
  6. Drezner, 2003, The hidden hand of economic coercion, International Organization, 57, 643, 10.1017/S0020818303573052 · DOI
  7. Drury, 1998, Revisiting economic sanctions reconsidered, Journal of Peace Research, 35, 497, 10.1177/0022343398035004006 · DOI
  8. Eaton, 1992, Sanctions, Journal of Political Economy, 100, 899, 10.1086/261845 · DOI
  9. Fordham, 1998, Partisanship, macroeconomic policy, and US uses of force, 1949–1994, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42, 418, 10.1177/0022002798042004002 · DOI
  10. Fordham, 2003, Selection and influence: Interest groups and congressional voting on trade policy, International Organization, 57, 519, 10.1017/S0020818303573076 · DOI
  11. Frieden, 1991, Invested interests: The politics of national economic policies in a world of global finance, International Organization, 45, 425, 10.1017/S0020818300033178 · DOI
  12. Ginsberg, 1986, The Captive Public
  13. Grossman, 1996, Electoral competition and special interest politics, Review of Economic Studies, 63, 265, 10.2307/2297852 · DOI
  14. Grossman, 2001, Special Interest Politics
  15. Haberler, 1936, The Theory of International Trade
  16. Hainmueller, 2010, Attitudes toward highly skilled and low-skilled immigration, American Political Science Review, 104, 61, 10.1017/S0003055409990372 · DOI
  17. Harrod, 1939, An essay in dynamic theory, Economic Journal, 49, 14, 10.2307/2225181 · DOI
  18. Hiscox, 2002, Commerce, coalitions, and factor mobility: Evidence from congressional votes on trade legislation, American Political Science Review, 96, 593, 10.1017/S0003055402000357 · DOI
  19. Holsti, 1992, Public opinion and foreign policy, International Studies Quarterly, 36, 439, 10.2307/2600734 · DOI
  20. Hufbauer, 2008, Economic Sanctions Reconsidered
  21. Kaempfer, 1988, The theory of international economic sanctions, American Economic Review, 78, 786
  22. Kaempfer, 1992, International Economic Sanctions
  23. Kastner, 2007, When do conflicting political relations affect international trade?, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 51, 664, 10.1177/0022002707302804 · DOI
  24. Keohane, 2000, Introduction, 1
  25. Kiewiet, 1981, Sociotropic politics, British Journal of Political Science, 11, 129, 10.1017/S0007123400002544 · DOI
  26. Knecht, 2011, Paying Attention to Foreign Affairs: How Public Opinion Affects Presidential Decision Making
  27. Kono, 2008, Does public opinion affect trade policy?, Business and Politics, 10, 1, 10.2202/1469-3569.1224 · DOI
  28. Lacy, 2004, A theory of economic sanctions and issue linkage: The roles of preferences, information, and threats, Journal of Politics, 66, 25, 10.1046/j.1468-2508.2004.00140.x · DOI
  29. Lavergne, 1983, The Political Economy of US Tariffs
  30. Lippmann, 1922, Public Opinion
  31. MacKuen, 1983, Political drama, economic conditions, and the dynamics of presidential popularity, American Political Science Review, 27, 165, 10.2307/2111014 · DOI
  32. Mansfield, 2009, Support for free trade: Self-interest, sociotropic politics, and out-group anxiety, International Organization, 63, 425, 10.1017/S0020818309090158 · DOI
  33. Morgan, 1997, Fools suffer gladly: The use of economic sanctions in international crises, International Studies Quarterly, 41, 27, 10.1111/0020-8833.00032 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Mutz, 1992, Mass media and the depoliticization of personal experience, American Journal of Political Science, 36, 483, 10.2307/2111487 · DOI
  35. Nooruddin, 2010, Dynamics of influence in international politics: The ICC, BIAs, and economic sanctions, Journal of Peace Research, 47, 711, 10.1177/0022343310381854 · DOI
  36. Ohlin, 1933, Interregional and International Trade
  37. Ostrom, 1986, The president and the political use of force, American Political Science Review, 80, 541, 10.2307/1958273 · DOI
  38. Ostrom, 1985, Promise and performance: A dynamic model of presidential popularity, American Political Science Review, 79, 334, 10.2307/1956653 · DOI
  39. Pape, 1997, Why economic sanctions do not work, International Security, 22, 90, 10.1162/isec.22.2.90 · DOI
  40. Powlick, 1998, Defining the public opinion/foreign policy nexus, Mershon International Studies Review, 42, 29, 10.2307/254443 · DOI
  41. Shagabutdinova, 2007, Deploying sanctions while protecting human rights, Journal of Human Rights, 6, 59, 10.1080/14754830601098386 · DOI
  42. Smith, 1995, The success and use of economic sanctions, International Interactions, 21, 229, 10.1080/03050629508434867 · DOI
  43. Sobel, 2001, The Impact of Public Opinion on US Foreign Policy since Vietnam
  44. Stimson, 1991, Public Opinion in America
  45. Viner, 1937, Studies in the Theory of International Trade
  46. Whang, 2011, Playing to the home crowd? Symbolic use of economic sanctions in the United States, International Studies Quarterly, 55, 787, 10.1111/j.1468-2478.2011.00668.x · DOI
  47. Whang, 2013, Coercion, information, and the success of sanction threats, American Journal of Political Science, 57, 65, 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2012.00629.x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
McLean, E. V., & Whang, T.
Affiliations
  • Texas A&M University (US)
  • Korea University (KR)
Corresponding author
McLean, Elena V
Venue
Journal of Peace Research
Published
2014-07-01
Volume
51
Issue
5
Pages
589-602
ISSN
  • 0022-3433 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-3578
OpenAlex
W2115699020
Cited by
95
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
6.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Peace Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Research Foundation of Korea
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic Sanctions and International Relations
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
Keywords
economic sanctions, foreign policy instruments, interest groups, public opinion, international disputes

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