Erratum

N/a

Journal of Peace Research, 2018, vol. 55, issue 3, NP1-NP2

Abstract: Bader, Julia & Ursula E Daxecker (2015) A Chinese resource curse: The human rights effects of oil export dependence on China versus the United States. Journal of PeaceResearch 52(6): 774–790. DOI: 10.1177/0022343315593332 . Author note Our article uses trade data from COMTRADE to compare the human rights implications of oil exports to China versus to the United States from 1992 to 2010. Unfortunately, we made a mistake when merging the oil trade data for the USA. Oil trade data for the USA were erroneously based on a more inclusive commodity code categorization than what is described in the article, including not only crude petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals (HS92 classification, commodity code 2709), but also mineral fuels, oils, and products of their distillation (HS92 classification, commodity code 27). We apologize for this mistake. To assess the implications of this error, we have retrieved the correctly categorized data for the USA and replicated our analysis. Our results remain robust (see Table I corrected below). As in the article, we find a robust, negative effect of oil exports to the USA on exporter human rights. In contrast, exports to China have no effects on human rights. There is a small difference for results in Model 3, which interacts oil export variables with oil discoveries. This model now produces a positive and significant coefficient for exports to China in the absence of discoveries, but this finding is not inconsistent with the article’s claims regarding the potentially more benign effects of oil exports to China. Table I (corrected). Ordered logit regressions of oil exports to China and the USA, 1992–2010 Variables (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Exports/capita Exports/GDP Discoveries First differences Generalized ordinal logit Exclude non-oil Repression t –1 1.115** 1.120** 0.899** –0.622** 1.089** 1.175** (0.054) (0.054) (0.064) (0.041) (0.053) (0.080) Exports to China per capita, logged t –1 0.070 0.146* 0.063 0.080 (0.048) (0.059) (0.046) (0.049) Exports to USA per capita, logged t –1 –0.094* –0.152** –0.088** –0.085* (0.040) (0.050) (0.034) (0.040) Exports to China/GDP, logged t –1 5.512 (3.771) Exports to USA/GDP, logged t –1 –6.829* (2.859) New discovery, logged t –1 0.016 (0.398) Exports to China*Discovery t –1 –0.089 (0.140) Exports to USA*Discovery t –1 0.228** (0.081) D. Exports to China per capita, logged t –1 0.121 (0.075) D. Exports to USA per capita, logged t –1 –0.029 (0.065) Democracy t –1 0.604** 0.583** 0.587** 0.705** 0.665** 0.757** (0.112) (0.110) (0.150) (0.110) (0.112) (0.151) GDP, logged t –1 0.362** (0.055) 0.344** (0.051) 0.401** (0.084) 0.286** (0.051) 0.412** (0.082) Population, logged t –1 –0.271** –0.275** –0.321** –0.276** – 0.269** (0.039) (0.039) (0.052) (0.038) (0.052) Civil war –1.431** –1.394** –1.575** –1.627** – 1.586** (0.191) (0.187) (0.232) (0.203) (0.263) Observations 2,773 2,773 1,471 2,610 2,773 1,450 Standard errors clustered by country in parentheses. Year fixed effects not reported. ** p

Date: 2018
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/55/3/NP1.abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:joupea:v:55:y:2018:i:3:p:np1-np2

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Peace Research from Peace Research Institute Oslo
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().