Journal article
IO Mediation of Interstate Conflicts: Moving beyond the Global versus Regional Dichotomy
The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.52(2), pp.295-325
04/2008
DOI: 10.1177/0022002707313693
Abstract
Regional and global intergovernmental organizations have grown both in number and scope, yet their role and effectiveness as conflict managers is not fully understood. Previous research efforts tent to categorize organizations solely by the scope of their membership, which obsures important sources of variation in institutional design at both the regional and global levels. International organizations will be more successful conflict managers if they are highly institutionalized, if they have members with homogeneous preferences, and if they have more established democratic members. These hypotheses are evaluated with data on territorial (1816-2001), maritime (1900-2001), and river (1900-2001) claims from the Issue Correlates of War (ICOW) project in the Western Hemisphere, Europe, and the Middle East. Empirical analysis suggests that international organizations are more likely to help disputing parties reach an anagreement if they have more democratic members, if they are highly institutionalized, and when they use binding management techniques.
Details
- Title: Subtitle
- IO Mediation of Interstate Conflicts: Moving beyond the Global versus Regional Dichotomy
- Creators
- Holley E. HansenSara McLaughlin Mitchell - University of Iowa, Political ScienceStephen C. Nemeth
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Publication Details
- The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.52(2), pp.295-325
- Publisher
- Sage Publications
- DOI
- 10.1177/0022002707313693
- ISSN
- 0022-0027
- eISSN
- 1552-8766
- Language
- English
- Date published
- 04/2008
- Academic Unit
- Political Science; Public Policy Center (Archive); Center for Social Science Innovation
- Record Identifier
- 9983766298202771
Metrics
218 Record Views