In the aftermath of World War I, sanctions were viewed as a less violent alternative to military retaliation. However, this belief was challenged when the sanctions imposed by the Allied powers on the Axis countries worsened living conditions, contributing to the outbreak of World War II. Over time, the scope of economic sanctions has expanded, extending beyond purely economic impacts to encompass significant social and political consequences. As a result, there is a rapidly growing body of multidisciplinary literature examining these broader implications. This article reviews the current state of research on economic sanctions and the themes related to it. It explores the factors that influence the effectiveness of sanctions, the relationship between domestic political and economic interests that determines the trajectory of sanctions, and the broader societal and political externalities they produce. The article offers a necessary assessment and organization of a dynamic and evolving research field that crosses multiple disciplinary boundaries.
AfrimadonaN. (2021). Party polarization in the American Congress and the duration of legislated economic sanctions, 1945-2005. Contemporary Politics, 27(4), 419-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.1902628 [Abstr. 72.424]
2.
AhmedF.GuptaH. (2021). Business diplomacy and lobbying during pandemic. In KumarV.GauravG. (Eds.), Strategic Management During a Pandemic, (pp. 31-58). Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003125648-3
3.
AltmannT.GierschJ. (2021). Sanctioned terror: Economic sanctions and more effective terrorism. International Politics, 59(2), 383-397. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-021-00318-z [Abstr. 72.5801]
4.
BeauregardP. (2021). International emotional resonance: Explaining transatlantic economic sanctions against Russia. Cooperation and Conflict, 57(1), 25-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367211027609 [Abstr. 72.3958]
5.
ChenF. R. (2021). Extended dependence: Trade, alliances, and peace. The Journal of Politics/the Journal of Politics, 83(1), 246-259. https://doi.org/10.1086/709149 [Abstr. 71.5031]
6.
ChyzhO. V. (2022). The impact of Western sanctions on Putin’s war. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 55(2), 496-501. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0008423922000336 [Abstr. 72.6559]
7.
deLisleJ. (2022). China’s Russia/Ukraine problem, and why it’s bad for almost everyone else too. Orbis, 66(3), 402-423. https://doi.org/10.1016Zj.orbis.2022.05.009 [Abstr. 72.7695]
8.
DolatabadiH. (2021). Franco-Iranian economic relations: A study of the Ebb and flow of multi-level factors. French Politics, 20(1), 53-70. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41253-021-00156-8 [Abstr. 72.3976]
9.
DomR.RogerL. (2020). Debt or alive: Burundi’s fiscal response to economic sanctions. International Studies Quarterly, 64(2), 369-379. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqaa007 [Abstr. 71.1118]
EarlyB. R.PetersonT. M. (2021). Does punishing sanctions busters work? Sanctions enforcement and US trade with sanctioned states. Political Research Quarterly, 75(3), 782-796. https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129211025620 [Abstr. 73.273]
12.
EricksonJ. L. (2019). Punishing the violators? Arms embargoes and economic sanctions as tools of norm enforcement. Review of International Studies, 46(1), 96-120. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0260210519000329 [Abstr. 70.4788]
13.
Guter-SanduA.KuznetsovaE. (2020). Theorizing resilience: Russia’s reaction to US and EU sanctions. East European Politics, 36(4), 603-621. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2020.1743690
14.
JeongJ. M. (2020). Economic sanctions and income inequality: Impacts of trade restrictions and foreign aid suspension on target countries. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 37(6), 674-693. https://doi.org/10.1177/0738894219900759 [Abstr. 72.1121]
15.
KavakliK. C.ChatagnierJ. T.HatipogluE. (2020). The power to hurt and the effectiveness of international sanctions. The Journal of Politics, 82(3), 879-894. https://doi.org/10.1086/707398 [Abstr. 71.979]
16.
KimJ. Y.LiW.LeeS. (2021). Making sense of Japan’s export restrictions against South Korea. Asian Survey, 61(4), 683-710. https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2021.6L4.683 [Abstr. 72.4001]
17.
KolstadI. (2019). Too big to fault? Effects of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize on Norwegian exports to China and foreign policy. International Political Science Review, 41(2), 207223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512118808610 [Abstr. 70.6986]
18.
KongT. Y. (2019). How China views North Korea’s readiness to reform and its influence on China’s North Korea policy in the post-Cold War era. The Pacific Review, 34(1), 85112. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2019.1651384 [Abstr. 71.5843]
19.
LaiC. (2021). More than carrots and sticks: Economic statecraft and coercion in China-Taiwan relations from 2000 to 2019. Politics, 42(3), 410-425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263395720962654 [Abstr. 72.7736]
20.
LimS.TanakaS. (2022). Why costly rivalry disputes persist: A paired conjoint experiment in Japan and South Korea. International Studies Quarterly, 66(4). https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqac063 [Abstr. 73.4012]
21.
LiouR. Y. L.MurdieA.PeksenD. (2020). Revisiting the causal links between economic sanctions and human rights violations. University of Memphis Digital Commons. https://digitalcommons.memphis.edu/facpubs/7170/
22.
McLeanE. V.WhangT. (2019). Do sanctions spell disaster? Economic sanctions, political institutions, and technological safety. European Journal of International Relations, 26(3), 767-792. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066119887422 [Abstr. 71.996]
23.
NovaesL. M.SchiumeriniL. (2021). Commodity shocks and incumbency effects. British Journal of Political Science, 52(4), 1689-1708. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123421000478 [Abstr. 73.129]
24.
ParkJ. B.BridgesB. (2021). Ecology, security and international action: Beyond sanctions on North Korea. Third World Quarterly, 42(10), 2413-2433. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2021.1951202 [Abstr. 72.7685]
25.
PeksenD.PetersonT. M. (2022). US sanctions and foreign lobbying of the US government. Political Research Quarterly, 76(1), 444-459. https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129221098109 [Abstr. 73.4039]
26.
PerryK. (2021). Better for whom? Sanction type and the gendered consequences for women. International Relations, 36(2), 151-175. https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178211018843 [Abstr. 72.6369]
27.
PortelaC.PospiesznaP.SkrzypczynskaJ.WalentekD. (2020). Consensus against all odds: explaining the persistence of EU sanctions on Russia. Revue d’integration Europeenne/Journal of European Integration, 43(6), 683-699. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2020.1803854 [Abstr. 72.2558]
28.
PospiesznaP.SkrzypczynskaJ.StepieriB. (2019). Hitting two birds with one stone: How Russian countersanctions intertwined political and economic goals. PS: Political Science & Politics, 53(2), 243-247. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096519001781 [Abstr.70.7930]
29.
RaynorB. (2022). The shadow of sanctions: Reputational risk, financial reintegration, and the political economy of sanctions relief. European Journal of International Relations, 28(3), 696-721. https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221100540 [Abstr.72.7757]
30.
RosyidinM.DirA. A. B. (2020). Why states do not impose sanctions: Regional norms and Indonesia’s diplomatic approach towards Myanmar on the Rohingya issue. International Politics, 58(5), 738-756. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-020-00264-2
31.
ShyrokykhK. (2021). Human rights sanctions and the role of black knights: Evidence from the EU’s post-Soviet neighbors. Revue d’integration Europeenne/Journal of European Integration, 44(3), 429-449. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2021.1908278 [Abstr. 73.4058]
32.
SilvaP. M.SeldenZ. (2019). Economic interdependence and economic sanctions: A case study of European Union sanctions on Russia. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 33(2), 229-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2019.1660857 [Abstr. 71.1036]
SungR.ParkJ. (2022). How do economic sanctions affect public opinion and consumer behavior in target states? Evidence from China’s economic sanctions on South Korea. International Studies Quarterly, 66(3). https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqac023 [Abstr. 72.7580]
35.
YildirimT. M.KocapinarG.EcevitY. A. (2019). Status incongruity and backlash against female legislators: How legislative speechmaking benefits men, but harms women. Political Research Quarterly, 74(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912919861443 [Abstr. 71.6834]
