DOCSLIB.ORG

Information to Users

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Information to Users Dyadic power theory. Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Schampel, James Howard. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 05/10/2021 08:25:32 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/185279 INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. llMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrou.gh, substandard mar~ins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in. this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. U-M-I University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. M148106·1346 USA 313 761·4700 800'521·0600 Order Number 9111964 Dyadic power theory Schampel, James Howard, Ph.D. The University of Arizona, 1990 U·M·I 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 DYADIC POWER THEORY by James Howard Schampel A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1 990 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Final Examination Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by ~J~ame~~s~R~~Sbh~amp~~e~l~ ________________________ __ enti tIed Dyadic PCMer Theory and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirem~nt for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy ~---....." Date S-43/CZ'J DatE! ' ·S-I ;) ,0'if Date"- , Date Date Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate's submission of the final copy of the dissertation to the Graduate College. I hereby certify that I have read this dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement. Dissertation Director 'i Date 3 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under the rules of the library. Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however permission must be obtained from the author. SIGN 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ... • • . 6 LIST OF TABLES . • • • • • • • • 7 - 8 ABSTRACT .. • • 9 1. INTRODUCTION. .10 2. LITERATURE REVIEW, POWER .25 INTRODUCTION . .25 DEFINITIONS OF POWER · .28 BEGINNINGS OF HYPOTHESIS FORMATION AND TESTING .. 30 SUMMARY . .. ... .51 3. LITERATURE REVIEW, ALLIANCE BEHAVIOR · .52 INTRODUCTION . .52 ALLIANCE . · .52 PRE-SCIENTIFIC. ERA . .53 EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS .62 SUMMARY ..... · .76 4. THE THEORY OF DYADIC POWER-RATIO CHANGE DEFINED .... 78 INTRODUCTION .. ....... · . .78 APPROACH . · .78 CRISIS . .80 DYADIC POWER-RATIO CHANGE DEFINED ..... · . 83 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE THEORY OF DYADIC POWER- RATIO CHANGE . · .86 ALLIANCE . · .94 SUMMARY. .. · . 97 5. METHODOLOGY. · 102 6. NATIONAL POWER RATIOS, FINDINGS. · 129 INTRODUCTION . · 129 CHANGES IN VELOCITY AND ACCELERATION . 134 MEAN LEVEL OF CHANGE . 142 AVERAGE OF VELOCITY AND ACCELERATION AND "ACTION"/ "NON-ACTION" . 143 5 ACCELERATION . 143 VELOCITY . 144 SUMMARY ...... · . 148 7. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS ... · . 150 INTRODUCTION . ... .. · . 150 VELOCITY . .. ...... 150 CONTIGUITY . 158 THE NON-ACTION EVENT . · . 159 NON-FINDINGS . ...... 159 FUTURE DIRECTIONS .. 162 LIST OF REFERENCES. 166 6 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURE Page 1. STATISTICAL CASE .. 22 2. RISK AND UNCERTAINTY . .. ... 47 3. LIST OF MAJOR CONTRIBUTIONS FOR CAUSE OF WAR .... 88 4. CONCEPTS OF DYADIC POWER-RATIO THEORY . .. 98 7 LIST OF TABLES TABLE Page 1. POWER RATIO DATA -- WAR ... 107-114 2. POWER RATIO DATA ALLIANCE. 116-120 3. POWER RATIO DATA NON-EVENT 121-126 4. AVERAGE MONTHLY VELOCITY .... 127 5. AVERAGE MONTHLY ACCELERATION .. 127 6. CHANGE IN POWER RATIO WAR/NO WAR 131 7. CHANGE IN POWER RATIO ALLIANCE/NO WAR. 131 8 . CHANGE IN POWER RATIO BY YEAR WAR/NO WAR 132 9. CHANGE IN POWER RATIO BY YEAR ALLIANCE/NO WAR 132 10. CHANGE IN POWER RATIO BY YEAR ACTION/NO WAR 132 11. CHANGE IN VELOCITY WAR/NO WAR. .. ... 136 12. CHANGE IN VELOCITY ALLIANCE/NO WAR. 137 13. CHANGE IN VELOCITY BY YEAR WAR/NO WAR 137 14. CHANGE IN VELOCITY BY YEAR ALLIANCE/NO WAR. 137 15. CHANGE IN VELOCITY BY YEAR ACTION/NO WAR. 138 16. CHANGE IN ACCELERATION WAR/NO WAR ..... 140 17. CHANGE IN ACCELERATION ALLIANCE/NO WAR 140 18. CHANGE IN ACCELERATION BY YEAR WAR/NO WAR 141 19. CHANGE IN ACCELERATION BY YEAR ALLIANCE/NO WAR 141 20. CHANGE IN ACCELERATION BY YEAR ACTION/NO WAR 142 21. LEVEL OF ACCELERATION WAR/NO WAR. 143 22. LEVEL OF ACCELERATION ALLIANCE/NO WAR. 144 23. LEVEL OF VELOCITY -- WAR/NO WAR ..... 145 8 LIST OF TABLES (Continued) 24. LEVEL OF VELOCITY -- ALLIANCE/NO WAR .. 145 25. LEVEL OF VELOCITY, CONTIGUOUS BOUNDARIES -­ ALLIANCE/NO WAR . 146 26. LEVEL OF VELOCITY, NON-CONTIGUOUS BOUNDARIES -­ ALLIANCE/NO WAR . 147 27. LEVEL OF VELOCITY, CONTIGUOUS BOUNDARIES -- WAR/NO WAR. 147 28. LEVEL OF VELOCITY, NON-CONTIGUOUS BOUNDARIES -- WAR/NO WAR. .. 147 ABSTRACT Dyadic power theory proposes that the speed of power­ ratio change between two nations predicts to both the onset of war and alliance formation. The speed of power-ratio change is measured utilizing the concepts of velocity and acceleration. It is posited that decision-makers perceive high velocity change and/or high acceleration of change in the power-ratio between them and a potential adversary as threatening. The lack of reaction time encourages the decision-makers to act in non-traditional ways. Thus, they opt for hostilities or alliance partners rather than utilize traditional diplomatic measures such as "summits", conferences, protests, etc. The independent variables of national power were provided by Jacek Kugler in private correspondence, and the dependent variables of alliances and wars were selected from data-sets compiled by Singer and Small. Dyadic changes in power previous to these events were then correlated with the events, themselves. Moderate support for the theory was obtained. Although there was little correlation between acceleration of power­ ratio change and either event, there were moderate correlations between average velocity of change and the event, suggesting that decision-makers react precipitously to rapidly changing conditions vis-a-vis potential adversaries. The findings suggest that future studies that will isolate such factors as size of nation, century of event, contiguity, and even type of political system of the adversaries or partners are warranted. 10 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION We seem to be not a great deal closer to determining the causes of the onset of war than we were thirty years ago, for contradictions abound. It would appear that we have barely started to correlate alliance behavior, community of interest, a common enemy, and power relations with the onset of war. However, these disparate approaches have led to the consider­ ation of changes in power, measured in terms of acceleration and velocity, as a reasonable explanation for the onset of war. The thrust of this investigation is threefold: 1) investigate the relationship between power ratio changes and war; 2) investigate the relationship between power ratio changes and alliance performance (specifically, formation and entry); and 3) investigate the relationship between power ratio changes and "action" events. "Action" events are defined as the combination of initiation of hostilities and the formation of alliances, both of which are defined as pro­ ducts of "non-normal" diplomatic behavior. In all three of the aforementioned investigations, the event is correlated with a "non-action" event, a condition of "normal" diplomatic behavior, in order to determine whether the same power ratio change might also predict those events. The broad research questions addressed in this disser­ tation include "What effect do changes in power ratios among 11 and between nation-states have on the onset of war?" "Have we not exhausted the possibilities of alliance behavior predict- ing to the onset of war?" "Do changes in power ratios among and between nation-states predict equally to changes in alliance behavior and war?" If the last of these questions were answered in the affirmative, it would appear reasonable to posit that the relationship between alliance behavior and the onset of war is spurious.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • International Conflict PS 9450 114 Arts and Science R 6:00-8:30 Fall 2020 University of Missouri
    International Conflict PS 9450 114 Arts and Science R 6:00-8:30 Fall 2020 University of Missouri Syllabus Dr. Stephen L. Quackenbush Office: 305 Professional Building Phone: 882-2082 Office Hours: by appointment (zoom) Email: [email protected] Course Description and Objectives: The purpose of this graduate seminar is to analyze important theories regarding the causes of international conflict and war. This course will: (a) introduce students to a wide range of research on international conflict (focusing on quantitative and formal research) and (b) develop students’ ability to critically evaluate research, and consequently how to design and execute their own research projects. Books (available at University Bookstore): Required: Horowitz, Michael C., Allan C. Stam, and Cali M. Ellis. 2015. Why Leaders Fight. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Quackenbush, Stephen L. 2015. International Conflict: Logic and Evidence. Washington, DC: CQ Press. Sechser, Todd S., and Matthew Fuhrmann. 2017. Nuclear Weapons and Coercive Diplomacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Weeks, Jessica L. P. 2014. Dictators at War and Peace. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Zagare, Frank C. 2011. The Games of July: Explaining the Great War. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Recommended: Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin, Paul F. Diehl, and James D. Morrow, ed. 2012. Guide to the Scientific Study of International Processes. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. 1 Coursework and Grading: Participation: The quality of a graduate level seminar depends to
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Nation-State Instability and Failure1
    Assessing Nation-State Instability and Failure1 by Robert Popp, Ph.D. Executive Vice President, Aptima, Boston, MA 01801 [email protected] 781-935-3966 Stephen H. Kaisler, D.Sc. Senior Associate, SET Corporation, Arlington, VA 22203 [email protected] 571-218-4606 David Allen, Ph.D Senior Associate and Program Director, SRS Technologies, Inc., Arlington, VA 22203 [email protected] Claudio Cioffi-Revilla, Ph.D., Director, Center for Social Complexity, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA [email protected] 703-993-1402 Kathleen M. Carley, Ph.D. Professor of Computer Science, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA [email protected] Mohammed Azam PhD Candidate, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Ct [email protected] Anne Russell Director of Social Systems Analysis, SAIC, Arlington, VA 22203 [email protected] 703-469-3436 Nazli Choucri, Ph.D. Professor, Dept. of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA [email protected] Jacek Kugler, Ph.D. Professor, Dept. of Politics and Policy, Claremont Graduate School, Claremont, CA [email protected] 909-621-8690 1 Standard IEEE copyright, which for 2006 will be “0-7803-9546-8/06/$20.00© 2006 IEEE” 1 “Abstract“–DARPA initiated a six-month Pre-Conflict century strategic threat triad with “failed states” being a key Anticipation and Shaping (PCAS) initiative to demonstrate element of this triad, and the convergence of it with the utility of quantitative and computational social science terrorism and WMD proliferation representing the greatest models (Q/CSS) applied to assessing the instability and modern day strategic threat to the national security interests failure of nation-states.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Power of Nations
    TRC Working Paper Series Assessing the Power of Nations Ali Fisunoglu Kyungkook Kang Jacek Kugler Tadeusz Kugler TransReserach Consortium 506 SW Mill Street Portland OR, USA April 2021 An earlier version of this paper was presented at the ISA 2021 Annual Convention – April 6th, 2021. TRC working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. Introduction The measurement of power – that reflects the ability of a nation to influence others to pursue its goals – is a central concern of international relations. To substantiate claims, all competing power distribution theories require valid and reliable assessments of the capacity of nations to influence each other. While there is still no agreement whether a "balance of power" engenders stability or whether this condition relabeled as "power parity" sets the preconditions for global conflicts, no power distribution theory can be validated if we lack an assessment of how preponderance, asymmetry, or equality of power affects national interactions (Waltz 1979, Organski 1958, Organski and Kugler 1980, Gilpin 1981). Indeed, most macro-political analyses have been consistently concerned with the observations and measurements of power. In this paper, we review three major attempts to approximate power in hopes of determining which estimate provides a better long-term indicator to assess the past and forecast the future political trajectories of great powers. This issue is increasingly pertinent because – as we show – major changes are underway in global interactions. Russia and Britain are both exiting from the global scene, while China and India are joining the United States as the great powers this century. Power Traditional scholars provide a very rich definition of power, but their arguments are difficult to measure consistently.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Power Transitions and Their Implications for the 21St Century*
    bs_bs_banner Global Power Transitions and Their Implications for the 21st Century* Yi Feng This essay presents a theoretical approach toward war and peace, reviews basic conditions for world leadership, discusses four modes of global power transitions, illuminates the likely emergence of the future superpowers, and summarizes the differences and common interests between the United States, the incumbent world leader, and China, a potential contender for the global leadership in the 21st century. The theoretical background is power- transition theory, which predicts war when superpowers are close in power and peace when power preponderance exists. Power parity need be also considered in the context of common interests and preferences of superpow- ers. Conflict abates when the nations share fundamental rules of the game in world affairs. Four historical modes of transitions – co-dominion, deter- rence, confrontation, and cooperation – were identified. Of the four historical transitions, each time, the challenger surpassed the hegemon in economic power, and deterrence and confrontation by the hegemon against the chal- lenger did not prevent the challenger from assuming global leadership in the long term. Among the newly rising nations (BRICs), China is discussed as a potential contender for world leadership. The economic and financial inter- dependence between the United States and China is currently the driving force in their relations. It shapes their political arrangements, necessitating coordination and cooperation in policy issues. While economic collaboration and interdependence drive the relations between the two, they are not suffi- * Earlier versions of this essay were presented at The Kerala International Center, Thiruvanan- thapuram, India, The Anderson School of Management, UCLA, The US–China Institute, USC, and Tuesday Talk at Claremont Graduate University as well as the 24th Annual Conference of the Association of Chinese Political Studies, King’s College, London, 17–21 June 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    Constantine Boussalis Harvard Law School Work: (617) 495-4068 Areeda Hall 410 Mobile: (626) 731-5150 1545 Massachusetts Ave Email: [email protected] Cambridge, MA 02138 Homepage: http://www.boussalis.com/ Current Position Empirical Research Fellow, Harvard Law School, August 2011-present. Methodological support for the faculty, students, and staff of Harvard Law School. Education Ph.D. Political Science, Claremont Graduate University, 2011. Dissertation: "Political, Economic and Social Determinants of Vulnerability to Natural Disasters" Committee: Jacek Kugler (advisor and chair), Hal Nelson, Mark Abdollahian, Jean-Paul Ampuero (external reviewer, California Institute of Technology) Fields: World Politics and Comparative Politics M.A. International Studies, Claremont Graduate University, 2007. B.A. Political Science (cum laude), California State University–Los Angeles, 2005. Teaching Lecturer, Loyola Marymount University, August 2010-May 2011. Taught two introductory courses on international relations. Topics included international conflict, terrorism, international trade and finance, development, transnational organizations and responses to global environmental change. Lecturer, La Sierra University, August 2009-December 2009. Taught a joint undergraduate/MBA course on international economics. Topics included international trade, international finance, economic/political integration and emerging markets. Teaching Assistant, Claremont Graduate University, 2007-2009. Research Assistant, Claremont Graduate University, 2007-2009. Publications
    [Show full text]
  • The Power Transition: a Retrospective and Prospective Evaluation
    CHAPTER 7 The Power Transition: A Retrospective and Prospective Evaluation Jacek Kugler Vanderbib.Uniuersity A. F. K. Organski Uniuersity of Micbigan INTRODUCTION The power transition theory was introduced in 1958 (Organski 1958)' and 30 ylars seems an appropriate period for an initial evaluation of the scientific worth and staying power of a new idea. In such an evaluation, one can use the Lakatos criteria: A scientific theory T is fatsified if and only if another theory T' has been proposed with the following characteristics: (1) T'has excess empirical content over T: that is, it predicts nouel facrs, that is, facts improbable in the light of or even forbidden, by T; (2) T' explains the previous success of T, that is, all the unrefuted content of T is included (within the limits of observable error) in the content of T'; and (3) some of the excess content of T' is corroborated. [Lakatos 1978,321 ln such an evaluation rwo sets of things must be asked. Has the new construct, model, idea, or theory provided an explanation more powerful and more parsimonious than what existed previously? Has this way of looking at the problem proven more valid than the alternatives? One can add questions to the ones already posed. Has the new idea influenced the .re"tiott of other ideas and the undertaking of new work? Are such extensions successful? It should be kept in mind that the set of ideas that has Eualuation 173 1,72 HANDBooK ol'wAR sruDtES Tbe Power Transition: A Retrospectiue and Prospectiue were inferior to the net benefits; conflict survived the test of time is a very biased sample.
    [Show full text]
  • Seminar PO8048 International Politics a Michaelmas Term 2020 Monday 09:00–11:00 Room: LB08 (Lloyd Institute)
    Seminar PO8048 International Politics A Michaelmas Term 2020 Monday 09:00–11:00 Room: LB08 (Lloyd Institute) Lecturer: Dr. Jan Berz Email: [email protected] Office hours: Tuesday 14:00 – 16:00 (Zoom) Office: 1.C, 1 College Green Department of Political Science Trinity College Dublin 1 Description & Objectives This graduate seminar offers an overview of major theories and analytical ap- proaches in the field of international relations. Each week we will cover a particular theoretical lens or approach through which scholars have sought to make sense of the international environment. The readings in this module reflect research that aims to provide logically consistent and empirically supported explanations of outcomes in world politics. The overarching objective of the seminar is for students to become acquainted with scientific approaches to the study of international relations on a wide range of issue areas. 2 Covid-19 procedures We will strife for face to face teaching (F2F) but all students should be aware and prepared that teaching conditions may change on short notice if government or Trinity guidelines change. Teaching will also be dynamically adapted to the number of students who are unable to attend any F2F teaching. Students unable to participate F2F will be able to attend online and I will aim to include them as best as possible in the F2F seminar using audio/video and chat. I will set up an online session of the seminar every week in case anyone develops symptoms shortly before class. Please do not attend any F2F class if you have Covid-19 related symptoms.
    [Show full text]
  • Birol A. Yeşilada
    Birol A. Yeşilada Division of Political Science Mark O. Hatfield School of Government P.O. Box 751 Portland State University Portland, OR 97202-0751 (503) 725-3257 e-mail: [email protected] Education Ph.D., University of Michigan, 1984 (Political Science) M.A., San Francisco State University, 1979 (Political Science) B.A., University of California at Berkeley, 1977 (Neurobiology) Employment Professor of Political Science and International Studies, Portland State University (1998-present) Contemporary Turkish Studies Chair, Portland State University (1998-present) Associate Professor, University of Missouri-Columbia (1991-98) Assistant Professor, University of Missouri (1985-91) Visiting Assistant Professor, University of Missouri-Columbia (1984-85) Visiting Assistant Professor, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey (1987-88) Visiting Faculty (consultant and trainer), Foreign Service Institute, Department of State (1994- 2006) Administrative Appointments: Director, Mark O. Hatfield School of Government, Portland State University Interim Director, Mark O. Hatfield School of Government, Portland State University (2017 – 2018) Director, Center for Turkish Studies, Portland State University (1999-present) Director, Middle East Studies Center, Portland State University (9/2014-7/2017) PI-World Values Survey (for Cyprus) Director/coordinator, Public Administration and Policy Doctoral Program, Portland State University (2001-2007) Chair, Department of Political Science, University of Missouri-Columbia (1994-98) Founding Director, EU
    [Show full text]
  • Superpower Dispute Initiation: an Empirical Model of Strategic Behavior*
    Superpower Dispute Initiation: An Empirical Model of Strategic Behavior* Christopher K. Butler Assistant Professor The University of New Mexico MSC05 3070, Department of Political Science 1 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001 [email protected] ABSTRACT I present a method for empirically modeling simultaneous decisions using the estimation technique of bivariate probit. I use this technique to examine the directed dispute- initiation behavior of the superpowers during the Cold War. I argue that power-transition concepts of satisfaction and rates of capability change can be used to explain directed dispute-initiation behavior. In particular, the international influence of the rival translates into a superpower’s dissatisfaction, making dispute initiation by that superpower more likely, ceteris paribus. Additionally, a rapid strengthening of the challenger, ceteris paribus, increases the likelihood of dispute initiation in either direction. Changes in the hegemon’s capabilities, though consistent with power-transition theory, have no effect on dispute-initiation behavior. These effects hold even while controlling for various domestic conditions in each country. * Previous versions of this paper were presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association (1999) and the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association (2000). This research was partially supported by a Dissertation Completion Fellowship through the Graduate School at Michigan State University. I would like to thank Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, Erik Gartzke, Scott G. Gates, Dave Lektzian, Neil Mitchell, Charles W. Ostrom, Jr., Mark Peceny, William Reed, Mark Souva and anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions. INTRODUCTION On December 31, 1991, the Soviet Union formally ceased to exist, thus ending the greatest rivalry in the history of world politics.
    [Show full text]
  • A Test of the Power Transition Theory Garrett Alan Heckman Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected]
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2009 Power capabilities and similarity of interests: a test of the power transition theory Garrett Alan Heckman Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Heckman, Garrett Alan, "Power capabilities and similarity of interests: a test of the power transition theory" (2009). LSU Master's Theses. 712. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/712 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. POWER CAPABILITIES AND SIMILARITY OF INTERESTS: A TEST OF THE POWER TRANSITION THEORY A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts In The Department of Political Science By Garrett Heckman B.A., San Diego State University, 2007 August 2009 Acknowledgements First and foremost, this thesis would not be possible without my committee members: Dr. David Sobek, Dr. Mark Schafer, and Dr. William Clark. Without the personal and academic support of my friends, I never would have survived the writing process: Nathan Price, Lindsay Horn, Kitty Davis, Katie Gilmore, Ashley Morris, Mileah Kromer, Kim Hurd, Tabitha Cale, Kim Wenzel, Caroline Payne, Justin Ulrich, Natasha Bingham, Omar Khalid, Jeremy Wells, and Schuyler Porche.
    [Show full text]
  • Realism and World Politics
    REALISM AND WORLD POLITICS This book contributes to the rethinking of realism through multiple analyses of the keys works of Kenneth Waltz, arguing that a sophisticated appreciation of realism is needed to truly understand World Politics and International Relations. Bringing together a theoretically varied group of leading scholars from both sides of the Atlantic, this book is an outstanding appreciation of the work of realism’s most important theorist since the Second World War, and the persistent themes thrown up by his work over a half-century. The contributors do not engage with Waltz’s work as slavish disciples, but rather as positive critics, recognising its decisive significance in International Relations, while using the process of critical engage- ment to search for new or renewed understandings of unfolding global situations and new insights into long-standing problems of theory-building. The book will be of great interest to students of IR, foreign policy, security studies and politics. Ken Booth is Senior Research Associate in the Department of International Politics, Aberystwyth University, where he was formerly E.H Carr Professor and Head. He is editor of the journal International Relations and author/editor of over 20 books on International Relations and Security Studies. He is a Fellow of the British Academy and Academician of the Academy of Social Sciences. ‘In this fine volume, Ken Booth has brought together leading theorists of international politics to assess the work of Kenneth Waltz. These excellent essays clearly demonstrate how profound and enduring Waltz's influence has been on the study of international politics. I learned much from reading these essays, and I know others will also.’ Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • TRANSRESEARCH CONSORTIUM WORK PAPER #1 Power Transition Theory
    TRANSRESEARCH CONSORTIUM WORK PAPER #1 Power Transition Theory Ronald L. Tammen, Jacek Kugler, Douglas Lemke December 2011 Introduction Power Transition Theory is an active ongoing research program spanning over 50 years and four generations of scholars.1 While generally being classified as part of the realist school because of its focus on power relationships, it differs substantially from that school in terms of methodology and specific conceptual content.2 Judged by external reviewers, it is a living theory with a pattern of growth, spin offs, and refinements over time.3 Power Transition deals with the pattern of changing power relationships in world politics. It provides a probabilistic tool by which to measure these changes and it allows forecasting of likely events in future rounds of change. While based on empirically tested propositions backed by large data sets, the theory 1 See Tammen (2008), and Levy and Thompson (2010), for a discussion of the origins of Power Transition theory and the contributions of A.F.K. Organski. Also, see the introduction in Tammen et al. (2000), for details about generations of Power Transition scholars. All three authors of this article are part of the Power Transition generational research program. 2 Power Transition scholars prefer the theory to be called “rationalist” rather than “realist.” Tammen et al. (2000). 3 DiCicco and Levy (2003). 1 has an intuitive feel that maximizes its utility for interpreting current events, including the rise of China and India and the related effects on world politics. Power Transition has both a structural and dynamic form. Structurally, it envisions global politics as composed of a hierarchy of nations with varying degrees of cooperation and competition.
    [Show full text]