Biased Sanctions? Methodological Change in Economic Sanctions Reconsidered and Its Implications

被引:12
|
作者
Van Bergeijk, Peter A. G. [1 ]
Siddiquee, Muhammad S. H. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Erasmus Univ, Inst Social Studies, The Hague, Netherlands
[2] Univ Manchester, Manchester, Lancs, England
[3] Univ Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh
关键词
Data; sanctions; HSE; bias; coding; SUCCESS; DETERMINANTS; IMPOSITION; OUTCOMES; FAILURE; THREAT; WORK;
D O I
10.1080/03050629.2016.1242584
中图分类号
D81 [国际关系];
学科分类号
030207 ;
摘要
We investigate the influence of case selection and (re)coding for two vintages of a key resource for research on economic sanctions: the Peterson Institute database reported in Hufbauer et al. (second edition in 1990 and third edition in 2007, often identified by their abbreviations HSE and HSEO). The Peterson Institute has not transparently reported about these changes. These changes make it more likely to find sanction success. A multivariate probit analysis establishes upward bias related to modest policy change, duration, and cost to target and downward bias for regime change, military impairment, companion policies, and cost to the sender.
引用
收藏
页码:879 / 893
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条