Abstract
This article surveys the quantitative literature in coalition foreign policy. Tracing its development back to what we call the ‘first generation studies’ in Democratic Peace research, we illustrate that its theoretical and methodological foundations distinguish this literature from its predecessors. We then overview the existing studies along three dimensions: the nature of the dependent variables, the content of the key explanatory variables, and the processes that identify and systematise the institutional factors that influence coalition foreign policy. Our suggestions for future research highlight some of the puzzles motivated by the findings of this literature and the promise of multi-method designs.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Auerswald, D.P. (1999) ‘Inward bound: domestic institutions and military conflicts’, International Organization 53(3): 469–504.
Beach, D. and Pedersen, R.B. (2013) Process-Tracing Method: Foundations and Guidelines, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Beasley, R.K. and Kaarbo, J. (2014) ‘Explaining extremity in the foreign policies of parliamentary democracies’, International Studies Quarterly 58(4): 729–740.
Callahan, P. (1982) ‘Commitment’, in P. Callahan, L.P. Brady and M.G. Hermann (eds) Describing Foreign Policy Behavior, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 177–206.
Clare, J. (2010) ‘Ideological fractionalization and the international conflict behavior of parliamentary democracies’, International Studies Quarterly 54(4): 965–987.
Clare, J. (2014) ‘Hawks, doves, and international cooperation’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 58(7): 1311–1337.
Fearon, J.D. and Laitin, D.D. (2015) ‘Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods’, unpublished manuscript.
Fisher, S.D. and Hobolt, S.B. (2010) ‘Coalition government and electoral accountability’, Electoral Studies 29(3): 358–369.
Ghosn, F., Palmer, G., and Bremer, S.A. (2004) ‘The MID3 data set, 1993–2001: procedures, coding rules, and description’, Conflict Management and Peace Science 21(2): 133–154.
Goldstein, J.S. (1992) ‘A conflict–cooperation scale for WEIS events data’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 36(2): 369–385.
Hagan, J.D. (1993) Political Opposition and Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective, Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Hagan, J., Everts, P.P., Fukui, H. and Stempel, J.D. (2001) ‘Foreign policy by coalition. deadlock, compromise, and anarchy’, International Studies Review 3(2): 169–216.
Hermann, C.F. (1963) ‘Some consequences of crisis which limit the viability of organizations’, Administrative Science Quarterly 1: 61–82.
Hermann, M. (2001) ‘How decision units shape foreign policy: a theoretical framework’, International Studies Review 3(2): 47–81.
Herrmann, R.K. (2013) ‘Perceptions and image theory in international relations’, in L. Huddy, D.O. Sears and J.S. Levy. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 334–363.
Houghton, D.P. (2007) ‘Reinvigorating the study of foreign policy decision making: toward a constructivist approach’, Foreign Policy Analysis, 3(1): 24–45.
Huber, J.D. (1998) ‘How does cabinet instability affect political performance? Portfolio volatility and health care cost containment in parliamentary democracies’, American Political Science Review 92(3): 577–591.
Hudson, V.M. (2014) Foreign Policy Analysis: Classic and Contemporary Theory, 2nd edn., Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Hudson, V.M. and Vore, C.S. (1995) ‘Foreign policy analysis yesterday, today, and tomorrow’, Mershon International Studies Review 39(2): 209–238.
Ireland, M.J. and Gartner, S.S. (2001) ‘Time to fight. Government type and conflict initiation in parliamentary systems’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 45(5): 547–568.
Iversen, T. and Soskice, D. (2006) ‘Electoral institutions and the politics of coalitions: why some democracies redistribute more than others’, American Political Science Review 100(2): 165–181.
Kaarbo, J. (1996a) ‘Influencing peace. Junior partners in Israeli coalition cabinets’, Cooperation and Conflict 31(3): 243–284.
Kaarbo, J. (1996b) ‘Power and influence in foreign policy decision making: the role of junior coalition partners in German and Israeli foreign policy’, International Studies Quarterly 40(4): 501–530.
Kaarbo, J. (2012) Coalition Politics and Cabinet Decision Making: A Comparative Analysis of Foreign Policy Choices, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Kaarbo, J. and Beasley, R.K. (2008) ‘Taking it to the extreme: the effect of coalition cabinets on foreign policy’, Foreign Policy Analysis 4(1): 67–81.
Kelly, C. (2007) ‘Belgian intervention policy in the DRC: causes and consequences of the reorientation, 1999–2006’, Les Cahiers du RMES 4(2): 59–106.
King, G. and Lowe, W. (2003) ‘An automated information extraction tool for international conflict data with performance as good as human coders: a rare events evaluation design’, International Organization 57(3): 617–642.
Kubálková, V. (eds). (2001) Foreign Policy in a Constructed World (vol. 4), Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.
Leblang, D. and Chan, S. (2003) ‘Explaining wars fought by established democracies: do institutional constraints matter?’ Political Research Quarterly 56(4): 385–400.
Leeds, B.A. and Davis, D.R. (1997) ‘Domestic political vulnerability and international disputes’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 41(6): 814–834.
Leeds, B.A. and Davis, D.R. (1999) ‘Beneath the surface: regime type and international interaction, 1953–78’, Journal of Peace Research 36(1): 5–21.
Martin, L.W. (2004) ‘The government agenda in parliamentary democracies’, American Journal of Political Science 48(3): 445–461.
McClelland, C.A. (1978) World Event/interaction Survey (WEIS), 1966–1978, Ann Arbor: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.
Oktay, S. (2014) ‘Constraining or enabling? The effects of government composition on international commitments’, Journal of European Public Policy 21(6): 860–884.
Oktay-Karagul, S. (2014) ‘Unpacking coalitions: explaining international commitment in European governments’, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Political Science, Syracuse University.
Ozkececi-Taner, B. (2005). ‘The impact of institutionalized ideas in coalition foreign policy making: Turkey as an example, 1991–2002’, Foreign Policy Analysis 1(3), 249–278.
Palmer, G., London, T. and Regan, P. (2004) ‘What’s stopping you? The sources of political constraints on international conflict behavior in parliamentary democracies’, International Interactions 30(1): 1– 24.
Powell, G.B. and Whitten, G.D. (1993) ‘A cross-national analysis of economic voting: taking account of the political context’, American Journal of Political Science 37(2): 391–414.
Prins, B.C. and Sprecher, C. (1999) ‘Institutional constraints, political opposition, and interstate dispute escalation: evidence from parliamentary systems, 1946–89’, Journal of Peace Research 36(3): 271–287.
Putnam, R.D. (1988) ‘Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games’, International Organization 42(3): 427–460.
Rathbun, B. (2004) Partisan Interventions: European Party Politics and Peace Enforcement in the Balkans, New York: Cornell University Press.
Reiter, D. and Tillman, E.R. (2002) ‘Public, legislative, and executive constraints on the democratic initiation of conflict’, Journal of Politics 64(3): 810–826.
Tavits, M. (2007). ‘Clarity of responsibility and corruption’, American Journal of Political Science 51(1): 218–229.
Tsebelis, G. (1995) ‘Decision making in political systems: veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism and multipartyism’, British Journal of Political Science 25(3): 289–325.
Tsebelis, G. (1999) ‘Veto players and law production in parliamentary democracies: an empirical analysis’, American Political Science Review 93(3): 591–608.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
oktay, s., beasley, r. quantitative approaches in coalition foreign policy: scope, content, process. Eur Polit Sci 16, 475–488 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-016-0068-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-016-0068-5