Does Force or Agreement Lead to Peace?: A Collection and Analysis of Militarized Interstate Dispute (MID) Settlement, 1816 to 2001

武力还是协议会带来和平？：1816 年至 2001 年军事化州际争端 (MID) 解决的收集与分析

• 批准号: 0923406
• 负责人: Douglas Gibler
• 金额: $ 20.53万
• 依托单位: University of Alabama Tuscaloosa
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2009
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2009-08-01 至 2012-07-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0923406&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Does; Force; Agreement; Lead; Peace

This award is funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).This research analyzes the effectiveness of substantive political settlements in ending international conflict. The recent literature on peace agreements often concludes that treaty terms matter little in determining the durability of peace following interstate conflict. The authors argue that this conclusion results from the use of datasets and tests that are ill-suited for examining the role of issue settlement following conflict. Previous research has examined whether negotiation took place, not whether a substantive agreement was actually research. Previous studies have also focused on the peace agreements that follow wars and deadly conflicts, possibly ignoring the many successful agreements that have avoided conflict escalation to war.The principal investigators plan to collect and analyze data on all negotiated settlement outcomes in the Correlates of War Militarized Interstate Dispute (MID) dataset. These data include all threats, displays or uses of force between two or more countries from 1816 to 2001. The PIs will examine the issues at dispute in each conflict and will then match these issues to the agreement ending the conflict. Analysis of this data will take many forms, including qualitative case studies of the various settlements and statistical analyses of the effects of issue settlement.In addition to the immediate impact on the peace agreement literature, the analyses completed with this dataset have important implications for the scholarly literatures on studies of rivalry, territorial conflict, the bargaining literature, and research programs based on more general theories of cooperation and treaty formation. Each of these literatures has used the dichotomous imposed/negotiated settlement variable in analyses of MID data. Richer information on settlement types would allow more comprehensive tests of these theories.The implied policy prescriptions of the current peace agreement literature will also be addressed. The current literature suggests that the balance of capabilities controls the likelihood of peace, and agreements must therefore reflect that balance in order to be durable. Policymakers practicing negotiations based on the current literature are using knowledge gained from a severely selected sample of cases, which is particularly unfortunate if political settlements or enforcement mechanisms can indeed prevent disputes from escalating to war. By broadening the scope of peace agreement research, both temporally and for conflicts short of war, the researchers hope to provide a much better understanding of the necessary conditions for a durable peace.

该奖项是根据2009年美国复苏和再投资法案（公法111-5）资助的。这项研究分析了实质性政治解决方案在结束国际冲突方面的有效性。 最近关于和平协定的文献往往得出结论，条约条款在确定国家间冲突后和平的持久性方面并不重要。 作者认为，这一结论是由于使用的数据集和测试不适合研究冲突后问题解决的作用。 以前的研究审查了谈判是否发生，而不是实质性协议是否实际上是研究。 以前的研究也集中在战争和致命冲突之后的和平协议上，可能忽略了许多成功的协议，避免了冲突升级为战争。主要研究人员计划收集和分析战争军事化州际争端（MID）数据集中所有谈判解决结果的数据。 这些数据包括1816年至2001年两个或两个以上国家之间的所有威胁、展示或使用武力的情况。 PI将审查每次冲突中的争议问题，然后将这些问题与结束冲突的协议相匹配。 对这些数据的分析将采取多种形式，包括对各种定居点的定性案例研究和对问题解决效果的统计分析。除了对和平协议文献的直接影响外，用这些数据集完成的分析对研究竞争、领土冲突、讨价还价文献、以及基于合作和条约形成的更一般理论的研究方案。 这些文献中的每一个都在MID数据的分析中使用了二分的强加/谈判解决变量。 关于定居点类型的更丰富的资料将有助于对这些理论进行更全面的检验，还将探讨目前和平协定文献中隐含的政策规定。 现有文献表明，能力平衡决定着和平的可能性，因此，协定必须反映这种平衡，才能持久。 根据现有文献进行谈判的决策者正在使用从严格挑选的案例样本中获得的知识，如果政治解决或执行机制确实可以防止争端升级为战争，这就特别不幸。 通过扩大和平协议研究的范围，无论是在时间上还是在没有战争的冲突中，研究人员希望更好地了解持久和平的必要条件。