Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Conflict Management and Peace Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lemke, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Toward A General Understanding of Parity and War

Douglas Lemke

Florida State University

Questions about the relationship between power distribution and war have been a major focus of empirical research in international relations for decades. Thus far no consistent relationship has been uncovered at the systemic level. At the dyadic level of analysis, however, many independent studies suggest a relationship between power parity and war. One conceptual framework, power transition theory, is consistent with this evidence. However, power transition theory is unduly limited by an exclusive focus on the power and conflict relations of the very strongest of states. The present effort attempts to generalize power transition theory so that the power and conflict relations of minor powers can be included within its empirical domain. The extension involves the introduction of a Multiple Hierarchy Model. This multiple hierarchy model is discussed conceptually, empirical evaluations are reviewed, and its implications for a general understanding of power and conflict relations are assessed.

Conflict Management and Peace Science, Vol. 14, No. 2, 143-162 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/073889429501400202


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
European Journal of International RelationsHome page
B. E. Goldsmith
A Universal Proposition? Region, Conflict, War and the Robustness of the Kantian Peace
European Journal of International Relations, December 1, 2006; 12(4): 533 - 563.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
G. S. Sanjian
Arms Transfers, Military Balances, and Interstate Relations: Modeling Power Balance Versus Power Transition Linkages
Journal of Conflict Resolution, December 1, 2003; 47(6): 711 - 727.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
J. M. DiCicco and J. S. Levy
Power Shifts and Problem Shifts: The Evolution of the Power Transition Research Program
Journal of Conflict Resolution, December 1, 1999; 43(6): 675 - 704.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Conflict Management and Peace ScienceHome page
J. Kugler
The Policy Implications of Power Parity
Conflict Management and Peace Science, January 1, 1998; 16(2): 99 - 124.
[Abstract] [PDF]