Constarium
← Search

Data · dataset · 2009

Replication data for: Terminating Alliances: Why do States Abrogate Agreements?

Listed in Harvard Dataverse

Are binding international agreements only valuable as matters stand (rebus sic stantibus), or are pacts respected in good faith regardless of changing circumstances (pacta sunt servanda)?

Description

In this article, we examine this question with respect to military alliance agreements, and we find that alliances are more likely to be abrogated opportunistically when one or more members experience changes that affect the value of the alliance, for instance a change in international power, a change in domestic political institutions, or the formation of a new outside alliance.

We also find, however, that controlling for such changes, factors that affect the costs of breaking commitments (for example, democracy and issue linkage) reduce the probability that leaders will abandon their alliances in violation of their terms. We evaluate our argument empirically on a sample of bilateral alliances formed between 1816 and 1989 using competing risks duration analysis and find support for our hypotheses.

Links

Where it is published

Catalogue records · 1
Provenance · 1 source records, 6 field assertions
SourceKeyLast seenRaw
Harvard Dataversedoi:10.7910/DVN/EOVMZE11 d agoJSON v1
FieldAssertionExtractorEvidence
created_datesource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0
descriptionsource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0/description
publication_datesource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0
titlesource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0/name
updated_datesource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0
version_labelsource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0