Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T01:31:10.353Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Commerce and Conflict: New Data about the Great War

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2015

Joanne Gowa  and
Raymond Hicks
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The First World War is often cited as proof par excellence of the flaws in the liberal peace argument because the adversaries it engaged had been each other’s major pre-war trading partners. Although commonly assumed to have wreaked havoc on the trade of the states it engaged, the war’s impact on commerce has rarely been rigorously examined. Using an original dataset, this study shows that the Great War triggered substitution processes that reduced its trade-related costs. Although recourse to second-best alternatives always induces efficiency losses, the costs of adjustment were small relative to the other costs that states incurred during the war. The analysis shows that the Great War is not the egregious exception to the theory that conventional wisdom has long assumed it to be. At the same time, it makes clear that the deterrent power of trade varies inversely with belligerents’ ability to access the markets of alternative trading partners.

Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 47 , Issue 3 , July 2017 , pp. 653 - 674
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Department of Politics, Princeton University (e-mail: [email protected]); Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University (e-mail: [email protected]). Data replication sets are available at https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/BJPolS, and online appendices are available at http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0007123415000289.

References

Abbatielo, John J. 2006. Anti-Submarine Warfare in World War 1: British Naval Aviation and the Defeat of the U-Boats. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Anderson, James E. 2010. The Gravity Model, Working Paper No. 16576. Cambridge, MA: NBER.Google Scholar
Anderson, James, and van Wincoop, Eric. 2004. Trade Costs. Journal of Economic Literature XLII:691–751.Google Scholar
Anderton, Charles H., and Carter, John R.. 2001. The Impact of War on Trade: An Interrupted Time-Series Study. Journal of Peace Research 38 (4):445–457.Google Scholar
Anderton, Charles H., and Carter, John R.. 2003. Does War Disrupt Trade? In Globalization and Armed Conflict, edited by Gerald Schneider, Katherine Barbieri and Nils Petter Gleditsch, 299–331. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Angell, Norman. 1909. The Great Illusion. London: W. Heinemann.Google Scholar
Arkolakis, Costas, Costinot, Arnaud, and Rodriguez-Clare, Andres. 2012. New Trade Models, Same Old Gains? American Economic Review 102 (1):94–130.Google Scholar
Baier, Scott L., and Bergstrand, Jeffrey H.. 2009. Bonus Vetus OLS: A Simple Method for Approximating International Trade-Cost Effects Using the Gravity Equation. Journal of International Economics 77 (1):77–85.Google Scholar
Baltagi, Badi H., Egger, Peter, and Pfaffermayr, Michael. 2003. A Generalized Design for Bilateral Trade Flow Models. Economics Letters 80 (3):391–397.Google Scholar
Barbieri, Katherine. 2002. The Liberal Illusion: Does Trade Promote Peace? Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbieri, Katherine, and Levy, Jack S.. 1999. Sleeping With the Enemy: The Impact of War on Trade. Journal of Peace Research 36 (4):463–479.Google Scholar
Barbieri, Katherine, and Levy, Jack S.. 2004. Trading With the Enemy During Wartime. Security Studies 13 (3):1–47.Google Scholar
Beckett, Ian F.W. 2012. The Making of the First World War. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Bernhofen, Daniel M., and Brown, John C.. 2005. An Empirical Assessment of the Comparative Advantage Gains from Trade: Evidence from Japan. The American Economic Review 95 (1):208–225.Google Scholar
Bonfatti, Roberto, and O’Rourke, Kevin H.. 2014. Growth, Import Dependence and War, Working Paper No. 20326. Cambridge, MA: NBER.Google Scholar
Boyce, Robert. 2009. The Great Interwar Crisis and the Collapse of Globalization. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Broadberry, Stephen, and Harrison, Mark. 2005. The Economics of World War I: An Overview. In The Economics of World War I, edited by Stephen Broadberry and Mark Harrsion, 3–40. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Copeland, Dale C. 1996. Economic Interdependence and War: A Theory of Trade Expectations. International Security 20 (4):5–41.Google Scholar
Davis, Lance, and Engerman, Stanley. 2006. Naval Blockades in Peace and War: Economic History Since 1750. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domke, William K. 1988. War and the Changing Global System. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dorussen, Han. 2006. Heterogeneous Trade Interests and Conflict: What You Trade Matters. Journal of Conflict Resolution 50 (1):87–107.Google Scholar
Egger, Peter, and Pfaffermayr, Michael. 2003. The Proper Panel Econometric Specification of the Gravity Equation: A Three-Way Model With Bilateral Interaction Effects. Empirical Economics 28 (3):571–580.Google Scholar
Eicher, Theo S., and Henn, Christian. 2011. In Search of WTO Trade Effects: Preferential Trade Agreements Promote Trade Strongly, But Unevenly. Journal of International Economics 83 (2):137–153.Google Scholar
Eloranta, Jari, and Harrison, Mark. 2005. War and Disintegration, 1914-1950. In The Economics of World War I, edited by Stephen Broadberry and Mark Harrison, 134–155. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Estevadeordal, Antoni, and Taylor, Alan M.. 2002. Testing Trade Theory in Ohlin’s Time. In Bertil Ohlin: A Centennial Celebration,1899–1999, edited by R. Findlay, L. Jonung and M. Lundahl. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fearon, James. 1995. Rationalist Explanations for War. International Organization 49 (3):379–414.Google Scholar
Feinstein, Charles, Temin, Peter, and Toniolo, Gianni. 2008. The World Economy Between the World Wars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fey, Mark, and Goemans, Hein. 2009. Risky But Rational: War as An Institutionally-Induced Gamble. Journal of Politics 71 (1):35–54.Google Scholar
Findlay, Ronald, and O’Rourke, Kevin. 2007. Power and Plenty: Trade, War, and the World Economy in the Second Millennium. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gartzke, Erik, and Lupu, Yonatan. 2012. Trading on Preconceptions: Why World War I Was Not a Failure of Economic Interdependence. International Security 36 (4):115–150.Google Scholar
Gasiorowski, Mark. 1986. Economic Interdependence and International Conflict: Some Cross-National Evidence. International Studies Quarterly 30 (1):23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gasiorowski, Mark, and Polachek, Solomon. 1982. Conflict and Interdependence: East-West Trade and Linkages in the Era of Détente. Journal of Conflict Resolution 26 (4):709–730.Google Scholar
Gholz, Eugene, and Press, Daryl G.. 2001. The Effects of Wars on Neutral Countries: Why It Doesn’t Pay to Preserve the Peace. Security Studies 10 (4):1–55.Google Scholar
Glick, Reuven, and Taylor, Alan. 2010. Collateral Damage: Trade Disruption and the Economic Impact of War. Review of Economic Statistics 92 (1):102–127.Google Scholar
Goenner, Cullen P. 2010. From Toys to Warships: Interdependence and the Effects of Disaggregated Trade on Militarized Disputes. Journal of Peace Research 47 (5):1–12.Google Scholar
Gowa, Joanne. 1994. Allies, Adversaries, and International Trade. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gowa, Joanne. 2015. Allies, Adversaries, and Wartime Trade. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Gowa, Joanne, and Mansfield, Edward D.. 1993. Power Politics and International Trade. American Political Science Review 87 (2):408–420.Google Scholar
Gurr, Ted R. 1990 [1989]. Polity II: Political Structures and Regime Change, 1800–1986. Boulder, CO: Center for Comparative Politics [producer], 1989; Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 1990.Google Scholar
Halpern, Paul. 2006. The Blockade. In Naval Blockades and Sea Power: Strategies and Counter-Strategies 1805–2005, edited by Bruce Elleman and Sarah M. Paine, 91–104. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hardach, Gerd. 1977. The First World War 1914–1918. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Mark, and Wolf, Nikolaus. 2012. The Frequency of Wars. The Economic History Review 65 (3):1055–1076.Google Scholar
Head, Keith, Mayer, Thierry, and Ries, John. 2010. The Erosion of Colonial Trade Linkages After Independence. Journal of International Economics 81:1–14.Google Scholar
Hirschman, Albert O. 1980 [1945] National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Irwin, Douglas A. 2005. The Welfare Cost of Autarky: Evidence from the Jeffersonian Trade Embargo, 1807-09. Review of International Economics 13 (4):631–645.Google Scholar
Jack, D.T. 1940. Studies in Economic Warfare. London: P.S. King.Google Scholar
Jacks, David, Meissner, Christopher, and Novy, Dennis. 2011. Trade Booms, Trade Busts, and Trade Costs. Journal of International Economics 83:185–201.Google Scholar
Kleinberg, Katja B., Robinson, Gregory, and French, Stewart L.. 2012. Trade Concentration and Interstate Conflict. Journal of Politics 74 (2):529–540.Google Scholar
Lambert, Nicholas A. 2012. Planning Armageddon: British Economic Warfare and the First World War. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Leeds, Ashley, Ritter, Jeffrey M., Mitchell, Sara M., and Long, Andrew G.. 2002. Alliance Treaty Obligations and Provisions, 1815–1944. International Interactions 28 (3):237–260.Google Scholar
Leeds, Ashley, and Mattes, Michaela. 2007. Alliance Politics During the Cold War: Aberration, New World Order, or Continuation of History? Conflict Management and Peace Science 24 (3):183–199.Google Scholar
Long, Andrew G. 2003. Defense Pacts and International Trade. Journal of Peace Research 40 (5):537–552.Google Scholar
Loveday, A. 1921. The League of Nations and International Trade Statistics. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 94:156–159.Google Scholar
Mansfield, Edward, and Pevehouse, Jon. 2000. Trade Blocs, Trade Flows, and International Conflict. International Organization 54 (4):775–808.Google Scholar
Mansfield, Edward, and Bronson, Rachel. 1997. Alliances, Preferential Trading Arrangements, and International Trade. American Political Science Review 91 (1):94–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Phillippe, Mayer, Thierry, and Thoenig, Mathias. 2008. Make Trade Not War? Review of Economic Studies 75 (3):865–900.Google Scholar
Mathy, Gabriel P., and Meissner, Christopher M.. 2011. Trade, Exchange Rate Regimes and Output Co-Movement: Evidence from the Great Depression, Working Paper No. 16925. Cambridge, MA: NBER.Google Scholar
McDonald, Patrick, and Sweeney, Kevin. 2007. The Achilles’ Heel of Liberal IR Theory: Globalization and Conflict in the Pre-World War I Era. World Politics 59 (3):370–403.Google Scholar
Milward, Alan S. 1979. War, Economy, and Society 1939-1945. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Brian R. 1988. British Historical Statistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Offer, Avner. 2000. The Blockade of Germany and the Strategy of Starvation, 1914-1918: An Agency Perspective. In Great War, Total War: Combat and Mobilization on the Western Front, 1914-1918, edited by Roger Chickering and Stig Föster, 169–188. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Oneal, John R., and Russett, Bruce M.. 1999. Assessing the Liberal Peace With Alternative Specifications: Trade Still Reduces Conflict. Journal of Peace Research 36 (4):423–442.Google Scholar
Oneal, John R., Oneal, Frances H., Maoz, Zeev, and Russett, Bruce. 1996. The Liberal Peace: Interdependence, Democracy, and International Conflict, 1950-85. Journal of Peace Research 33 (1):11–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oneal, John R., and Ray, James Lee. 1997. New Tests of the Democratic Peace: Controlling for Economic Interdependence, 1950-1985. Political Research Quarterly 50 (4):751–775.Google Scholar
Osborne, Eric W. 2004. Britain’s Economic Blockade of Germany 1917-1919. London: Frank Cass.Google Scholar
Ossa, Ralph. 2012. Why Trade Matters At All, Working Paper No. 18113. Cambridge, MA: NBER.Google Scholar
Polachek, Solomon W. 1980. Conflict and Trade. Journal of Conflict Resolution 24 (1):55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollins, Brian M. 1989. Does Trade Still Follow the Flag? American Political Science Review 83 (2):465–480.Google Scholar
Ripsman, Norrin M., and Blanchard, Jean-Marc F.. 1996. Commercial Liberalism Under Fire: Evidence from 1914 and 1936. Security Studies 6 (2):4–50.Google Scholar
Ritschl, Albrecht, and Straumann, Tobias. 2010. Business Cycles and Economic Policy, 1914-1945. In The Economics of World War I, edited by Stephen Broadberry and Mark Harrison, 156–180. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Royal Commission. 1905. Report of the Royal Commission on Supply of Food and Raw Material in Time of War, Vol. 1: The Report. Gt. Brit. Parliament. Papers by command Cd., 2643, vol. 39.Google Scholar
Schulze, Max-Stephan. 2005. Austria-Hungary’s Economy in World War I. In The Economics of World War I, edited by Stephen Broadberry and Mark Harrison, 77–111. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, Beth A. 2002. Capacity, Commitment, and Compliance: International Law and the Settlement of Territorial Disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution 46 (6):829–856.Google Scholar
Simmons, Beth A.. 2003. Pax Mercatoria and the Theory of the State. In Economic Interdependence and International Conflict, edited by Edward Mansfield, 31–43. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Waltz, Kenneth N. 1979. Theory of International Politics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Ward, Michael D., Siverson, Randolph M., and Cao, Xun. 2007. Disputes, Democracies, and Dependencies: A Reexamination of the Kantian Peace. American Journal of Political Science 51 (3):583–601.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization. 2014. World Trade Report 2014: Trade and Development, Recent Trends and the Role of the WTO. Geneva: World Trade Organization. Available from http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/world_trade_report14_e.pdf, accessed 7 May 2015.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Gowa and Hicks supplementary material

Appendices A-D

Download Gowa and Hicks supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 545.3 KB