Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

quantitative approaches in coalition foreign policy: scope, content, process

  • Symposium
  • Published:
European Political Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article surveys the quantitative literature in coalition foreign policy. Tracing its development back to what we call the ‘first generation studies’ in Democratic Peace research, we illustrate that its theoretical and methodological foundations distinguish this literature from its predecessors. We then overview the existing studies along three dimensions: the nature of the dependent variables, the content of the key explanatory variables, and the processes that identify and systematise the institutional factors that influence coalition foreign policy. Our suggestions for future research highlight some of the puzzles motivated by the findings of this literature and the promise of multi-method designs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Auerswald, D.P. (1999) ‘Inward bound: domestic institutions and military conflicts’, International Organization 53(3): 469–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beach, D. and Pedersen, R.B. (2013) Process-Tracing Method: Foundations and Guidelines, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beasley, R.K. and Kaarbo, J. (2014) ‘Explaining extremity in the foreign policies of parliamentary democracies’, International Studies Quarterly 58(4): 729–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, P. (1982) ‘Commitment’, in P. Callahan, L.P. Brady and M.G. Hermann (eds) Describing Foreign Policy Behavior, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 177–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clare, J. (2010) ‘Ideological fractionalization and the international conflict behavior of parliamentary democracies’, International Studies Quarterly 54(4): 965–987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clare, J. (2014) ‘Hawks, doves, and international cooperation’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 58(7): 1311–1337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fearon, J.D. and Laitin, D.D. (2015) ‘Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods’, unpublished manuscript.

  • Fisher, S.D. and Hobolt, S.B. (2010) ‘Coalition government and electoral accountability’, Electoral Studies 29(3): 358–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosn, F., Palmer, G., and Bremer, S.A. (2004) ‘The MID3 data set, 1993–2001: procedures, coding rules, and description’, Conflict Management and Peace Science 21(2): 133–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, J.S. (1992) ‘A conflict–cooperation scale for WEIS events data’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 36(2): 369–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagan, J.D. (1993) Political Opposition and Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective, Boulder: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagan, J., Everts, P.P., Fukui, H. and Stempel, J.D. (2001) ‘Foreign policy by coalition. deadlock, compromise, and anarchy’, International Studies Review 3(2): 169–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermann, C.F. (1963) ‘Some consequences of crisis which limit the viability of organizations’, Administrative Science Quarterly 1: 61–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermann, M. (2001) ‘How decision units shape foreign policy: a theoretical framework’, International Studies Review 3(2): 47–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, R.K. (2013) ‘Perceptions and image theory in international relations’, in L. Huddy, D.O. Sears and J.S. Levy. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 334–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houghton, D.P. (2007) ‘Reinvigorating the study of foreign policy decision making: toward a constructivist approach’, Foreign Policy Analysis, 3(1): 24–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, J.D. (1998) ‘How does cabinet instability affect political performance? Portfolio volatility and health care cost containment in parliamentary democracies’, American Political Science Review 92(3): 577–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, V.M. (2014) Foreign Policy Analysis: Classic and Contemporary Theory, 2nd edn., Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, V.M. and Vore, C.S. (1995) ‘Foreign policy analysis yesterday, today, and tomorrow’, Mershon International Studies Review 39(2): 209–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, M.J. and Gartner, S.S. (2001) ‘Time to fight. Government type and conflict initiation in parliamentary systems’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 45(5): 547–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iversen, T. and Soskice, D. (2006) ‘Electoral institutions and the politics of coalitions: why some democracies redistribute more than others’, American Political Science Review 100(2): 165–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaarbo, J. (1996a) ‘Influencing peace. Junior partners in Israeli coalition cabinets’, Cooperation and Conflict 31(3): 243–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaarbo, J. (1996b) ‘Power and influence in foreign policy decision making: the role of junior coalition partners in German and Israeli foreign policy’, International Studies Quarterly 40(4): 501–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaarbo, J. (2012) Coalition Politics and Cabinet Decision Making: A Comparative Analysis of Foreign Policy Choices, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kaarbo, J. and Beasley, R.K. (2008) ‘Taking it to the extreme: the effect of coalition cabinets on foreign policy’, Foreign Policy Analysis 4(1): 67–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, C. (2007) ‘Belgian intervention policy in the DRC: causes and consequences of the reorientation, 1999–2006’, Les Cahiers du RMES 4(2): 59–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, G. and Lowe, W. (2003) ‘An automated information extraction tool for international conflict data with performance as good as human coders: a rare events evaluation design’, International Organization 57(3): 617–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubálková, V. (eds). (2001) Foreign Policy in a Constructed World (vol. 4), Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leblang, D. and Chan, S. (2003) ‘Explaining wars fought by established democracies: do institutional constraints matter?’ Political Research Quarterly 56(4): 385–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeds, B.A. and Davis, D.R. (1997) ‘Domestic political vulnerability and international disputes’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 41(6): 814–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeds, B.A. and Davis, D.R. (1999) ‘Beneath the surface: regime type and international interaction, 1953–78’, Journal of Peace Research 36(1): 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, L.W. (2004) ‘The government agenda in parliamentary democracies’, American Journal of Political Science 48(3): 445–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, C.A. (1978) World Event/interaction Survey (WEIS), 1966–1978, Ann Arbor: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oktay, S. (2014) ‘Constraining or enabling? The effects of government composition on international commitments’, Journal of European Public Policy 21(6): 860–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oktay-Karagul, S. (2014) ‘Unpacking coalitions: explaining international commitment in European governments’, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Political Science, Syracuse University.

  • Ozkececi-Taner, B. (2005). ‘The impact of institutionalized ideas in coalition foreign policy making: Turkey as an example, 1991–2002’, Foreign Policy Analysis 1(3), 249–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, G., London, T. and Regan, P. (2004) ‘What’s stopping you? The sources of political constraints on international conflict behavior in parliamentary democracies’, International Interactions 30(1): 1– 24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, G.B. and Whitten, G.D. (1993) ‘A cross-national analysis of economic voting: taking account of the political context’, American Journal of Political Science 37(2): 391–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prins, B.C. and Sprecher, C. (1999) ‘Institutional constraints, political opposition, and interstate dispute escalation: evidence from parliamentary systems, 1946–89’, Journal of Peace Research 36(3): 271–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R.D. (1988) ‘Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games’, International Organization 42(3): 427–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rathbun, B. (2004) Partisan Interventions: European Party Politics and Peace Enforcement in the Balkans, New York: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiter, D. and Tillman, E.R. (2002) ‘Public, legislative, and executive constraints on the democratic initiation of conflict’, Journal of Politics 64(3): 810–826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavits, M. (2007). ‘Clarity of responsibility and corruption’, American Journal of Political Science 51(1): 218–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, G. (1995) ‘Decision making in political systems: veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism and multipartyism’, British Journal of Political Science 25(3): 289–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, G. (1999) ‘Veto players and law production in parliamentary democracies: an empirical analysis’, American Political Science Review 93(3): 591–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, University of Illinois at Springfield, One University Plaza, MS PAC 350, Springfield, IL, 62703, USA

    sibel oktay

  2. School of International Relations, University of St Andrews, Arts Faculty Building, The Scores, St Andrews, KY16 9AX, Scotland, UK

    ryan beasley

Authors
  1. sibel oktay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. ryan beasley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to ryan beasley.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

oktay, s., beasley, r. quantitative approaches in coalition foreign policy: scope, content, process. Eur Polit Sci 16, 475–488 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-016-0068-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-016-0068-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation