Search Climate Insights Directory

The authors argue that traditional dyadic analysis of international conflict often ignores spatial dependence, where the risk of conflict in one pair of states is influenced by the status of other linked pairs. They introduce new measures for 'third-party' and 'fourth-party' alliance ties, as well as a theory of geographic 'inbetweenness,' to demonstrate that dyads linked to ongoing disputes through these pathways are significantly more likely to experience conflict onset. Using data from 1950-1992, the study finds that these extra-dyadic factors provide a substantially better fit for predicting conflict than purely dyadic models.