Skip to main content Accessibility help

Conflict Management in Land, River, and Maritime Claims

  • Andrew P. Owsiak and Sara McLaughlin Mitchell


Why do disputants favor some conflict management strategies when managing certain territorial claim types—land, river, or maritime—but not others? We propose that state interests—defined via claim characteristics and interdependence—and transaction costs (i.e., the challenges associated with aggregating state preferences over outcomes) differ across claim types. These differences then incentivize states to cede varying levels of control over claim management, ultimately encouraging them to prioritize and institutionalize certain conflict management strategies when managing particular types of territorial claims. More specifically, we theorize and find that states pursue distinct management strategies when addressing their land (informal; bilateral negotiations and arbitration), river (more formal; third-party non-binding), and maritime claims (most formal; multilateral negotiations and legal processes).



Hide All

Andrew P. Owsiak, Associate Professor, Department of International Affairs, University of Georgia, Third Floor, Candler Hall, Athens, GA 30606 ( Sara McLaughlin Mitchell, Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Iowa, 341 Schaeffer Hall, Iowa City, IA 52242 University of Iowa ( The authors thank Mark Axelrod, Brian Phillips, Brandon Prins, and conference participants at the 2014 Annual Meeting of the Peace Science Society International for their feedback on earlier drafts of this work. To view supplementary material for this article, please visit



Hide All
Allee, Todd L., and Huth, Paul K.. 2006. ‘Legitimizing Dispute Settlement: International Legal Rulings as Domestic Political Cover’. American Political Science Review 100(2):219234.
Beardsley, Kyle. 2011. The Mediation Dilemma. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Beck, Lucas, Bernauer, Thomas, Siegfried, Tobias, and Bohmelt, Tobias. 2014. ‘Implications of Hydro-Political Dependency for International Water Cooperation and Conflict: Insights from New Data’. Political Geography 42:2333.
Bercovitch, Jacob, and Jackson, Richard. 2009. Conflict Resolution in the Twenty-First Century. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Bohmelt, Tobias. 2015. ‘The Spatial Contagion of International Mediation’. Conflict Management and Peace Science 32(1):108127.
Bouchat, Clarence J. 2013. Dangerous Ground: The Spratly Islands and U.S. Interests and Approaches. Carlisle Barracks, PA: United States Army War College Press.
Brochmann, Marit, and Hensel, Paul R.. 2009. ‘Peaceful Management of International River Claims’. International Negotiation 14(2):391416.
Crescenzi, Mark J.C., Kadera, Kelly M., Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin, and Thyne, Clayton L.. 2011. ‘A Supply Side Theory of Mediation’. International Studies Quarterly 55(4):10691094.
Dinar, Shlomi. 2009. ‘Asymmetry and Negotiations in International River Basins’. International Negotiation 14(2):329360.
Dixon, William J. 1996. ‘Third-Party Techniques for Preventing Conflict Escalation and Promoting Peaceful Settlement’. International Organization 50(4):653681.
Fearon, James D. 1994. ‘Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes’. American Political Science Review 88(3):577592.
Frazier, Derrick V., and Dixon, William. 2006. ‘Third-Party Intermediaries and Negotiated Settlements, 1946–2000’. International Interactions 32(4):385408.
Gent, Stephen E., and Shannon, Megan. 2010. ‘The Effectiveness of International Arbitration and Adjudication: Getting Into a Bind’. Journal of Politics 72(2):366380.
Gent, Stephen E., and Shannon, Megan. 2011. ‘Decision Control and the Pursuit of Binding Conflict Management: Choosing the Ties that Bind’. Journal of Conflict Resolution 55(5):710734.
Ghosn, Faten. 2010. ‘Getting to the Table and Getting to Yes: An Analysis of International Negotiations’. International Studies Quarterly 54(4):10551072.
Ghosn, Faten, Palmer, Glenn, and Bremer, Stuart A.. 2004. ‘The MID3 Dataset, 1993-2001: Procedures, Coding Rules, and Description’. Conflict Management and Peace Science 21(2):133154.
Greig, J. Michael. 2001. ‘Moments of Opportunity: Recognizing Conditions of Ripeness for International Mediation Between Enduring Rivals’. Journal of Conflict Management 45(6):691718.
Hensel, Paul R., Allison, Michael E., and Khanani, Ahmed. 2009. ‘Territorial Integrity Treaties and Armed Conflict Over Territory’. Conflict Management and Peace Science 26(2):120143.
Hensel, Paul R., and Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin. 2005. ‘Issue Indivisibility and Territorial Claims’. GeoJournal 64(4):275285.
Hensel, Paul R., Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin, Sowers, Thomas E., and Thyne, Clayton L.. 2008. ‘Bones of Contention: Comparing Territorial, Maritime, and River Issues’. Journal of Conflict Resolution 52(1):117143.
Hopmann, P. Terrence. 1996. The Negotiation Process and the Resolution of International Conflicts. Columbia, MO: University of South Carolina Press.
Huth, Paul K., Croco, Sarah E., and Appel, Benjamin J.. 2011. ‘Does International Law Promote the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes? Evidence from the Study of Territorial Conflicts Since 1945’. American Political Science Review 105(2):415436.
Huth, Paul K., and Allee, Todd L.. 2002. The Democratic Peace and Territorial Conflict in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Keohane, Robert O. 1984. After Hegemony. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Klein, Natalie. 2011. Maritime Security and the Law of the Sea. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Koremenos, Barbara, Lipson, Charles, and Snidal, Duncan. 2001. ‘The Rational Design of International Institutions’. International Organization 55(4):761799.
Kraska, James. 2011. Maritime Power and the Law of the Sea. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Marshall, Monty G., and Jaggers, Keith. 2009. Polity IV Dataset. College Park, MD: Center for International Development and Conflict Management.
Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin, and Hensel, Paul R.. 2007. ‘International Institutions and Compliance With Agreements’. American Journal of Political Science 51(4):721737.
Nemeth, Stephen C., Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin, Nyman, Elizabeth A., and Hensel, Paul R.. 2014. ‘Ruling the Sea: Managing Maritime Conflicts Through UNCLOS and Exclusive Economic Zones’. International Interactions 40(5):711736.
Owsiak, Andrew P. 2014. ‘Conflict Management Trajectories in Militarized Interstate Disputes: A Conceptual Framework and Theoretical Foundations’. International Studies Review 16(1):5078.
Prescott, Victor, and Triggs, Gillian D.. 2008. International Frontiers and Boundaries. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.
Putnam, Robert D. 1988. ‘Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games’. International Organization 42(3):427460.
Simmons, Beth A. 2002. ‘Capacity, Commitment, and Compliance: International Institutions and Territorial Disputes’. Journal of Conflict Resolution 46(6):829856.
Singer, J. David. 1988. ‘Reconstructing the Correlates of War Dataset on Material Capabilities of States, 1816-1985’. International Interactions 14(2):115132.
Tomz, Michael, King, Gary, and Zeng, Langche. 2003. ‘ReLogit: Rare Events Logistic Regression’. Journal of Statistical Software 8(2):137163.
United Nations. 1997. ‘Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses’, A/RES/51/229. New York, 21 May 1997.
Zawahri, Neda A., and Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin. 2011. ‘Fragmented Governance of International Rivers: Negotiating Bilateral Versus Multilateral Treaties’. International Studies Quarterly 55(3):835858.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Owsiak and Mitchell supplementary material
Online Appendix

 PDF (174 KB)
174 KB
Supplementary materials

Owsiak and Mitchell Dataset


Conflict Management in Land, River, and Maritime Claims

  • Andrew P. Owsiak and Sara McLaughlin Mitchell


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.