Assessing the effectiveness of economic sanctions

IF 2.3 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Bader Sabtan , MarcD. Kilgour , KeithW. Hipel
{"title":"Assessing the effectiveness of economic sanctions","authors":"Bader Sabtan ,&nbsp;MarcD. Kilgour ,&nbsp;KeithW. Hipel","doi":"10.1007/s40070-019-00096-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The strength of sanctions can significantly impact the outcome of a dispute. The effectiveness of economic sanctions will be explored within the context of the conflict between Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and US shale oil producers in 2014. The outcome was not what OPEC anticipated, perhaps because OPEC misperceived the opponent’s preferences. Sensitivity to sanctions is a major component of a decision maker’s preferences when a dispute, or a negotiation, is modeled within the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution (GMCR). This study uses Inverse GMCR to determine what preference rankings would be required for the conflict to end as OPEC wished. The difference between the original preference ranking and the required rankings reflects the miscalculation of the strength of the economic “squeeze” that OPEC imposed when it flooded the market with oil to reduce the price. OPEC expected this sanction to be strong enough to damage, and perhaps destroy, the shale industry, but shale producers were able to withstand it. The graph model analysis suggests why this conflict ended as it did, and provides guidelines for understanding whether sanctions can be effective in forcing a particular outcome on a dispute.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44104,"journal":{"name":"EURO Journal on Decision Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s40070-019-00096-3","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EURO Journal on Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2193943821000996","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The strength of sanctions can significantly impact the outcome of a dispute. The effectiveness of economic sanctions will be explored within the context of the conflict between Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and US shale oil producers in 2014. The outcome was not what OPEC anticipated, perhaps because OPEC misperceived the opponent’s preferences. Sensitivity to sanctions is a major component of a decision maker’s preferences when a dispute, or a negotiation, is modeled within the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution (GMCR). This study uses Inverse GMCR to determine what preference rankings would be required for the conflict to end as OPEC wished. The difference between the original preference ranking and the required rankings reflects the miscalculation of the strength of the economic “squeeze” that OPEC imposed when it flooded the market with oil to reduce the price. OPEC expected this sanction to be strong enough to damage, and perhaps destroy, the shale industry, but shale producers were able to withstand it. The graph model analysis suggests why this conflict ended as it did, and provides guidelines for understanding whether sanctions can be effective in forcing a particular outcome on a dispute.

评估经济制裁的有效性
制裁的力度可以显著影响争端的结果。经济制裁的有效性将在2014年石油输出国组织(OPEC)与美国页岩油生产商之间的冲突背景下进行探讨。结果并不是OPEC所预期的,也许是因为OPEC误解了对手的偏好。在冲突解决图模型(Graph Model for Conflict Resolution, GMCR)中对争端或谈判进行建模时,对制裁的敏感性是决策者偏好的一个主要组成部分。本研究使用逆GMCR来确定欧佩克希望冲突结束所需的偏好排名。最初的偏好排名与要求排名之间的差异,反映了欧佩克在向市场大量供应石油以降低价格时,对经济“挤压”力度的错误估计。欧佩克本以为,这一制裁力度足以损害甚至摧毁页岩油行业,但页岩油生产商却经受住了考验。图模型分析表明了这场冲突以这种方式结束的原因,并为理解制裁是否能有效地迫使争端产生特定结果提供了指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
15
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信