Trade openness, inequality, and internal conflict: global evidence from a dynamic panel analysis

MakaleYalnız künyeScopus SJRQ1
  • SDG 8 · İnsana Yakışır İş ve Ekonomik Büyüme
  • SDG 10 · Eşitsizliklerin Azaltılması
  • SDG 16 · Barış, Adalet ve Güçlü Kurumlar

Özet

PurposeThis study investigates how trade openness influences internal conflict, emphasizing the moderating role of income inequality. It aims to clarify whether the benefits of globalization translate into domestic peace or exacerbate internal unrest when income distribution is unequal.Design/methodology/approachUsing an unbalanced panel of 126 countries from 1999 to 2022, the study applies a dynamic panel data framework based on two-step System Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) estimators. This approach accounts for potential endogeneity, autocorrelation, and heterogeneity across countries. Robustness tests include alternative lag structures and difference GMM estimations.FindingsEmpirical results reveal that trade openness and GDP per capita significantly reduce the risk of internal conflict, supporting the liberal peace hypothesis. In contrast, higher income inequality, inflation, democracy index, market concentration, and external conflict increase conflict risk. The findings confirm the embedded liberalism thesis, indicating that trade promotes peace only when accompanied by redistributive domestic policies that mitigate inequality.Research limitations/implicationsThis study is subject to several limitations. While it offers robust empirical findings, the use of panel data limits the ability to capture country-specific dynamics and institutional nuances. Moreover, internal conflict is a multifaceted phenomenon influenced by non-economic factors not fully addressed in the model. Despite these limitations, the results provide valuable insights for policymakers, suggesting that trade openness alone may not ensure peace without addressing domestic inequality. Future research may benefit from disaggregated analyses or mixed-method approaches to better understand the country-level mechanisms linking globalization and internal conflict.Practical implicationsThe results suggest that policymakers should complement liberalization policies with inclusive welfare measures and skill-based interventions to ensure that trade benefits are broadly shared, preventing distributional grievances that may lead to instability.Social implicationsThis study highlights the social risks of uneven globalization. While trade can promote economic growth, its benefits must be distributed fairly to prevent societal fragmentation. High income inequality can erode trust, deepen social divisions, and increase the likelihood of unrest. Furthermore, democratization without strong institutions may fail to foster cohesion, especially in developing societies. These findings stress the importance of inclusive development policies that promote both economic opportunity and social equity to ensure long-term internal stability and reduce the risk of conflict.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the literature by integrating trade theory and conflict analysis within a dynamic panel framework, offering one of the few cross-country empirical examinations of how trade openness, inequality, and internal conflict interact over time.

Anahtar Kelimeler

RDL Kalıcı Bağlantı (PID)
https://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/munzur/4841Resmi atıflarda kullanılan kalıcı adres
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/jes-08-2025-0578Yayıncı resmi DOI adresi
İndeks kayıtları
Kaydın indeks veri tabanlarındaki sayfası (aktarımda alınan kayıt numarasıyla). Erişim, indeksin kendi koşullarına bağlıdır.
Atıflar
WoS
2
OpenAlex
3
Her kaynağın kendi saydığı toplam atıf; aktarım ve zenginleştirme sırasında alındı.
Tam Kayıt
AlanDeğerDil
dc.contributor.authorAtes, Erdem
dc.date.accessioned2026-10-28T15:03:49.096979497Z
dc.date.available2026-10-28T15:03:49.096979497Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.description.abstractPurposeThis study investigates how trade openness influences internal conflict, emphasizing the moderating role of income inequality. It aims to clarify whether the benefits of globalization translate into domestic peace or exacerbate internal unrest when income distribution is unequal.Design/methodology/approachUsing an unbalanced panel of 126 countries from 1999 to 2022, the study applies a dynamic panel data framework based on two-step System Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) estimators. This approach accounts for potential endogeneity, autocorrelation, and heterogeneity across countries. Robustness tests include alternative lag structures and difference GMM estimations.FindingsEmpirical results reveal that trade openness and GDP per capita significantly reduce the risk of internal conflict, supporting the liberal peace hypothesis. In contrast, higher income inequality, inflation, democracy index, market concentration, and external conflict increase conflict risk. The findings confirm the embedded liberalism thesis, indicating that trade promotes peace only when accompanied by redistributive domestic policies that mitigate inequality.Research limitations/implicationsThis study is subject to several limitations. While it offers robust empirical findings, the use of panel data limits the ability to capture country-specific dynamics and institutional nuances. Moreover, internal conflict is a multifaceted phenomenon influenced by non-economic factors not fully addressed in the model. Despite these limitations, the results provide valuable insights for policymakers, suggesting that trade openness alone may not ensure peace without addressing domestic inequality. Future research may benefit from disaggregated analyses or mixed-method approaches to better understand the country-level mechanisms linking globalization and internal conflict.Practical implicationsThe results suggest that policymakers should complement liberalization policies with inclusive welfare measures and skill-based interventions to ensure that trade benefits are broadly shared, preventing distributional grievances that may lead to instability.Social implicationsThis study highlights the social risks of uneven globalization. While trade can promote economic growth, its benefits must be distributed fairly to prevent societal fragmentation. High income inequality can erode trust, deepen social divisions, and increase the likelihood of unrest. Furthermore, democratization without strong institutions may fail to foster cohesion, especially in developing societies. These findings stress the importance of inclusive development policies that promote both economic opportunity and social equity to ensure long-term internal stability and reduce the risk of conflict.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the literature by integrating trade theory and conflict analysis within a dynamic panel framework, offering one of the few cross-country empirical examinations of how trade openness, inequality, and internal conflict interact over time.
dc.identifier.doi10.1108/jes-08-2025-0578
dc.identifier.eissn1758-7387
dc.identifier.issn0144-3585
dc.identifier.urihttps://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/munzur/4841
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001626164100001
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherEMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
dc.relation.ispartofJOURNAL OF ECONOMIC STUDIES
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subjectInternational economics
dc.subjectInternational trade
dc.subjectIncome distribution
dc.subjectInternal conflict
dc.subjectGMM
dc.subjectF10
dc.subjectF12
dc.subjectF14
dc.subject.classificationEconomics
dc.subject.classificationBusiness & Economics
dc.subject.otherEMBEDDED LIBERALISM
dc.subject.otherCIVIL PEACE
dc.subject.otherWAR
dc.subject.otherGLOBALIZATION
dc.subject.otherDEMOCRACY
dc.subject.otherGMM
dc.titleTrade openness, inequality, and internal conflict: global evidence from a dynamic panel analysis
dc.typeArticle
rdl.citation.openalex3
rdl.citation.wos2
rdl.oa.statusclosed
rdl.publication.statusearlyAccess
rdl.scopus.quartileQ1
rdl.sdgSDG16
rdl.sdgSDG10
rdl.sdgSDG08
rdl.source.indexWOS
rdl.wos.indexEmerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)