Citation

Barbieri K, Keshk OMG, Pollins BM. Confl. Manage. Peace Sci. 2009; 26(5): 471-491.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0738894209343887

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Some scholars have rushed to judgment about the nature of the relationship between trade and conflict, making strong assumptions about the data upon which their conclusions rest. In this paper, we test these assumptions, showing that they are often not warranted and, thus, pose threats to many of our conclusions about trade’s impact on conflict. We discuss official trade statistics; the treatment of missing trade data; and problems with some decision rules being adopted within our research community. We introduce the new Correlates of War (COW) Trade Data Set; discuss the rationale behind our coding decisions; and compare this data set with other sets. The end result is a series of findings that should help our field advance its understanding of the often difficult issue of trade’s relationship with international conflict.