Class Notes (834,026)
Canada (508,290)
POL380Y1 (15)
Lecture 7

POL380Y1 Lecture 7: Week 7
Premium

6 Pages
40 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Political Science
Course
POL380Y1
Professor
Lilach Gilady
Semester
Fall

Description
Week #7: Thursday February 16, 2017 How peacekeeping works and increases stability? -Observation -Separation of the parties ~Deterrence b/c increases costs to violating the peace agreement ~Trip wire b/c always parties to have a warning if the other side is planning an attack -Mediation ~Breaks reciprocity b/c you have to go through a mediator so increasing the time b/w when something happens and action. Ex. Sister Theresa and her teeth when 2 parties facing each other but how UN actors can prevent something from escalating into violence -Planning future operations can look at as this to see what works b/c when we know what the causal mechanism then we can make a better policy in a way that best fit the decision on the ground and lower violence. So do they work at all and what mechanism makes it more likely to succeed? Methodological Problems -Puzzle when peacekeepers are present war appears much more likely to resume. Another war b/w the same states eventually breaks out in over half of the cases where peacekeepers were keeping watch, compared w only 1/5 of the cases where no international personnel were present -Ending w/o international intervention then more peace -War resumes in more then ½ of the cases when they use peacekeepers -But peacekeepers can be sent to places w a lot of tensions and problems that are the worst possible locations. So something about selection bias b/c we don’t randomly select conflicts b/c the are started when the level of crisis is high when other efforts have failed, there is attention on it, UN has tried to intervene, prior failures to stop the conflict -So measure the independent impact of peacekeeping ex. want to measure the impact of new drug but experiment on ill people. And they die when you use it but you don’t know if the drug is effective or not b/c they are about to die anyway so its selection bias like this -Reading from last week about selection bias and removing the selection bias by trying to find evidence of removing the selection bias ~Peacekeepers aren’t sent to all conflicts so its hard to do it ~Aren’t peacekeepers after victory b/c if 1 side already won then its not necessary. So peacekeepers are sent to draw situations making it unstable and everyone has an incentive to fight for victory ~Peacekeeping happens when there is a long history of fighting ~Although in the beginning it looks like peacekeeping is not effective if you isolate the independent variable then you find peacekeeping is effective when compared w similar contexts when there is no intervention. So correcting the selection bias changes the outcome. 2nd key finding: peacekeepers can increase the Week #7: Thursday February 16, 2017 How peacekeeping works and increases stability? -Observation -Separation of the parties ~Deterrence b/c increases costs to violating the peace agreement ~Trip wire b/c always parties to have a warning if the other side is planning an attack -Mediation ~Breaks reciprocity b/c you have to go through a mediator so increasing the time b/w when something happens and action. Ex. Sister Theresa and her teeth when 2 parties facing each other but how UN actors can prevent something from escalating into violence -Planning future operations can look at as this to see what works b/c when we know what the causal mechanism then we can make a better policy in a way that best fit the decision on the ground and lower violence. So do they work at all and what mechanism makes it more likely to succeed? Methodological Problems -Puzzle when peacekeepers are present war appears much more likely to resume. Another war b/w the same states eventually breaks out in over half of the cases where peacekeepers were keeping watch, compared w only 1/5 of the cases where no international personnel were present -Ending w/o international intervention then more peace -War resumes in more then ½ of the cases when they use peacekeepers -But peacekeepers can be sent to places w a lot of tensions and problems that are the worst possible locations. So something about selection bias b/c we don’t randomly select conflicts b/c the are started when the level of crisis is high when other efforts have failed, there is attention on it, UN has tried to intervene, prior failures to stop the conflict -So measure the independent impact of peacekeeping ex. want to measure the impact of new drug but experiment on ill people. And they die when you use it but you don’t know if the drug is effective or not b/c they are about to die anyway so its selection bias like this -Reading from last week about selection bias and removing the selection bias by trying to find evidence of removing the selection bias ~Peacekeepers aren’t sent to all conflicts so its hard to do it ~Aren’t peacekeepers after victory b/c if 1 side already won then its not necessary. So peacekeepers are sent to draw situations making it unstable and everyone has an incentive to fight for victory ~Peacekeeping happens when there is a long history of fighting ~Although in the beginning it looks like peacekeeping is not effective if you isolate the independent variable then you find peacekeeping is effective when compared w similar contexts when there is no intervention. So correcting the selection bias changes the outcome. 2nd key finding: peacekeepers can increase the
More Less

Related notes for POL380Y1

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit