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.