Connolly (2018:10): distinguishes between the impact of sanctions and their effectiveness.
Connolly (2018:11): “Sanctions may be focused on preventing the flow of goods, services, or capital, or they may include prohibitions on travel. But they share in common a clear objective: to induce the leaders of a target state to change their policies. In this respect, sanctions are political acts that utilize economic instruments to either effect a change in the domestic or foreign policy of the target state, or undermine and weaken the authority and effectiveness of its government.”
Connolly (2018:12-13): Countries imposing sanctions may not actually believe they will change a target country’s policies. These, therefore, often constitute the primary and officially stated objectives. Secondary objectives include signalling to domestic constituencies that a government is willing and able to act, or, more negatively, not incapable or weak. Tertiary objectives relate to shaping the international environment. Notes methodological difficulties in determining the hierarchy of these objectives in reality.
Connolly (2018:19-22): Research shows that the impact of sanctions can vary by regime type in the target country, with greater impact on democratic states compared to authoritarian ones, where the regime may be insulated from the consequences of poor macroeconomic performance. Sanctions can strengthen ruling elites, because some groups may benefit while others suffer, and nondemocratic elites may benefit from control over scarce resources. Sanctions can have a rally-round-the-flag effect. Sanctions may impact different socioeconomic forces beyond just regime type and institutions.