Replication Data for: Conflict Management as an Insular Strategy? Comparing Dyadic Learning of Dispute Resolution Strategies across Geopolitical Issues

This study considers whether and how familiarity with (i.e., past usage) and the usefulness (i.e., success) of past conflict management strategies influence the way that pairs of countries address diplomatic conflicts over land, river, or maritime areas. The theory proposes that while dyadic learning is possible within issues, it may be less likely across issues due to epistemic conflict management communities that arise in issue areas. Empirical analyses utilize data from the Issue Correlates of War (ICOW) project and focus on the context of issue rivalry, where states have two or more ongoing diplomatic conflicts involving multiple issues (e.g., rivers and territory). Empirical results show that dyadic learning occurs mostly within issues; for example, how river claims were managed in the past influences how rivers might be managed in the future. States learn more from past conflict management strategies that are less costly (e.g., negotiations or non-binding third party techniques) and learn less (within issue) from past uses of (more costly) binding settlement techniques (arbitration, adjudication). Success with past conflict management techniques does not improve their usage in the future.

本研究旨在探究过往冲突管理策略的熟悉程度（即过往使用经验）与实用价值（即实施成效），如何影响两国间针对陆地、河流或海域外交争端的解决路径。该理论提出，尽管在单一议题内部开展双边学习具备可行性，但由于各议题领域内形成的认知型冲突管理共同体，跨议题的双边学习可能性会大幅降低。实证分析采用战争议题关联（Issue Correlates of War, ICOW）项目的数据集，聚焦于议题对抗场景：即两国间存在两项及以上涉及多议题的持续外交争端时（例如同时存在河流与领土争端）。实证结果表明，双边学习大多仅发生在单一议题内部：例如过往对河流主权主张的争端处理方式，会影响未来同类河流争端的解决逻辑。各国更易从低成本的过往冲突管理策略中汲取经验（例如谈判或非约束性第三方调解手段），而在同一议题范围内，从高成本约束性争端解决手段（仲裁、司法裁决）的过往实践中学习的效果则相对有限。过往冲突管理手段的实施成效，并不会提升其在未来被采用的概率。