What are the drivers of diplomacy? Introducing and testing new annual dyadic data measuring diplomatic exchange

Date01 November 2021
Published date01 November 2021
DOI10.1177/0022343320929740
Subject MatterSpecial Data Features
Special Data Features
What are the drivers of diplomacy?
Introducing and testing new annual dyadic
data measuring diplomatic exchange
Jonathan D Moyer
Josef Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver
Sara D Turner
Pardee RAND Graduate School
Collin J Meisel
Josef Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver
Abstract
This article introduces a new dyadic dataset measuring formal diplomatic relations. These data were coded from the
Europa World Yearbook annually from 1960 to 2013 for 18,317 unique country dyads, and include the level of
diplomatic representation (whether the diplomatic connection is focused on a single or multiple target countries) as
well as a summary measure that captures both directed and shared dyadic level of representation. We compare the
new data with data gathered previously by the Correlates of War project and find significant specific discrepancies in
the period between 1970 and 1985. We then test the new data by replicating Neumayer (2008) generally validating
those findings: distance, power, and ideological affinity each matter when sending and receiving formal diplomatic
relations. However, using the new annual diplomatic representation data, we demonstrate a different relationship
between power, affinity, and probability of diplomatic connection: dyadic foreign policy affinity is a more important
driver of diplomatic exchange if both the sending and receiving countries have average relative material capabilities
and matters little if one or both countries in the dyad are very powerful or very weak relative to previous model
results.
Keywords
data, diplomacy, quantitative methods
Introduction
Thepotentialvalueandcostsassociatedwithformal
diplomatic relations have been widely established (Singer
& Small, 1966, 1973; Kinne, 2014a; Volgy et al., 2011).
Several studies have tied increased diplomatic connec-
tions to improvements in trade, enhanced alliance net-
works, and the expression of power; others have used
measures of in-country diplomatic missions as a proxy
for status or prestige (van Bergeijk, de Grooth & Yakop,
2011; Bagozzi & Landis, 2015; Xierali & Liu, 2006; Li,
2013; Dafoe, Renshon & Huth, 2014; Fogg, 2009;
Fordham, 2011; Kinne, 2014b; Rhamey & Early,
2013; Bezerra et al., 2015).
Despite this interest in the measurable significance of
thesedyadicdiplomaticrelationships,datagapshave
limited research. The data used in most studies
1
involv-
ing formal diplomatic exchanges are sourced from the
Corresponding author:
jmoyer@du.edu
1
With the exception of Volgy et al. (2011), Bezerra et al. (2015), van
Bergeijk, de Grooth & Yakop (2011), Rhamey & Early (2013),
Vogeler (1995), and Xierali & Liu (2006), all studies cited in this
report utilize the most recent version of the COW Diplomatic
Representation Data (Bayer, 2006).
Journal of Peace Research
2021, Vol. 58(6) 1300–1310
ªThe Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0022343320929740
journals.sagepub.com/home/jpr

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT