Territory, River, and Maritime Claims in the Western Hemisphere: Regime Type, Rivalry, and MIDs from 1901 to 2000

Issues remain at the core of armed conflict. Territory, in particular, appears to increase substantially the probability of inter-state violence and is concluded by many to be one of the most critical correlates of war onset. While scholars have called for an issue-based approach to the study of int...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInternational studies quarterly Vol. 54; no. 4; pp. 1073 - 1098
Main Authors Lektzian, David, Prins, Brandon C., Souva, Mark
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.12.2010
Wiley Periodicals, Inc
Subjects
Armed conflict
Colonies & territories
Conflict
Data collection
Democracy
Dyadic relations
Dyads
Hazards
Intellectuals
International conflicts
International disputes
International Relations
Interstate conflict
Land claims
Management
Ownership
Political institutions
Political violence
Prone
Rivalry
Rivers
Social conflict
Territorial disputes
Territorial issues
Territorial waters
Time
Violence
War
War conflict
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Issues remain at the core of armed conflict. Territory, in particular, appears to increase substantially the probability of inter-state violence and is concluded by many to be one of the most critical correlates of war onset. While scholars have called for an issue-based approach to the study of international relations for some time, recent data collection efforts allow the emergence and management of contentious issues over time to be studied more directly. Our argument and evidence suggest that territory is not necessarily contentious by itself, but is contentious in dyadic contexts characterized by rivalry. Using data from the Issue Correlates of War project, which codes specific government assertions of ownership to territory, river, and maritime locations, we find strategic rivalry, coupled with territorial claims, produces some of the most conflict-prone dyads. Further, jointly democratic domestic institutions do not appear to reduce the hazard of violent conflict over territorial issues within the context of rivalry, although they substantially reduce the hazard of violent conflict among states outside the context of rivalry.
Bibliography:istex:6E9A1EE23618C2C46116BF864FE3D3C49DAB190D
ark:/67375/WNG-S10VLXGJ-V
ArticleID:ISQU627
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ISSN:0020-8833
1468-2478
DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2478.2010.00627.x