Working Papers
International Influences on Nonviolent and Violent Contention
With Jori Breslawski
Abstract: How do international actors influence dissidents’ decisions whether to challenge their states using violent means, nonviolence, both or neither? We argue that the presence of important actors affects dissident decisions to engage in violent or nonviolent contention by affecting whether dissidents expect that governments will repress or concede to dissident demands in response to this contention. We examine the effect of two prominent types of actors—powerful states with close ties to the government and Highly Structured Inter-Governmental Organizations (HSIGOs) on dissident behavior in all national level elections in Africa from 2000-2012. Using integrated data drawn from four leading conflict events datasets, we find that dissidents are less likely to engage in violent contention when their government receives higher levels of military aid from the United States and in former French colonies, and more likely to engage in both violent and nonviolent contention when their state is a member of a greater number of HSIGOs.
With Jori Breslawski
Abstract: How do international actors influence dissidents’ decisions whether to challenge their states using violent means, nonviolence, both or neither? We argue that the presence of important actors affects dissident decisions to engage in violent or nonviolent contention by affecting whether dissidents expect that governments will repress or concede to dissident demands in response to this contention. We examine the effect of two prominent types of actors—powerful states with close ties to the government and Highly Structured Inter-Governmental Organizations (HSIGOs) on dissident behavior in all national level elections in Africa from 2000-2012. Using integrated data drawn from four leading conflict events datasets, we find that dissidents are less likely to engage in violent contention when their government receives higher levels of military aid from the United States and in former French colonies, and more likely to engage in both violent and nonviolent contention when their state is a member of a greater number of HSIGOs.
Explaining Civil War Severity: A formal model and empirical analysis
With Christopher K. Butler and Scott Gates
Abstract: What explains variation in civil-war severity? We argue that governments and rebel groups make strategic decisions regarding how much effort to devote to fighting based on their relative and absolute capabilities and the number of groups fighting. We develop a formal model that examines how the number of rebel groups and the resources available to governments and rebels influence conflict severity. The effect of the three parameters is highly interactive. In general, fighting is more severe in conflicts with multiple rebels groups where both sides have more resources compared to other conflicts. The model generates specific predictions about the severity of civil war that we calculate empirically by inserting the number of rebel groups and each side's troop levels directly into the equilibrium equations. We compare these theoretical predictions to actual battle-related deaths in statistical tests and find that the equilibrium-derived variable is a robust predictor of civil war severity.
With Christopher K. Butler and Scott Gates
Abstract: What explains variation in civil-war severity? We argue that governments and rebel groups make strategic decisions regarding how much effort to devote to fighting based on their relative and absolute capabilities and the number of groups fighting. We develop a formal model that examines how the number of rebel groups and the resources available to governments and rebels influence conflict severity. The effect of the three parameters is highly interactive. In general, fighting is more severe in conflicts with multiple rebels groups where both sides have more resources compared to other conflicts. The model generates specific predictions about the severity of civil war that we calculate empirically by inserting the number of rebel groups and each side's troop levels directly into the equilibrium equations. We compare these theoretical predictions to actual battle-related deaths in statistical tests and find that the equilibrium-derived variable is a robust predictor of civil war severity.
An Integrated Picture of Conflict
With Eric Dunford, David Backer, Karsten Donnay, and Erin McGrath
Abstract: Growth in event datasets is fostering research about patterns, dynamics, causes, and consequences of conflict. Studies typically rely on a single dataset. Instead, we advocate integrating multiple datasets to improve measurement and analysis. In this article, we demonstrate the benefits of integrating multiple datasets to improve measurement and analysis. We generate an integrated dataset covering Africa from 1997-2016 of four leading datasets (ACLED, UCDP-GED, SCAD, and GTD) with overlapping coverage of diverse types of conflict events. Using the integrated dataset, we document events that should be included, yet are missing in individual datasets. We also show that results of studies about the relationship between climate and conflict are sensitive given the conceptualization of conflict reflected by particular datasets. These illustrations highlight the potential for integration to advance conflict research by yielding a more complete and accurate picture of activity, which has repercussions for both descriptive and theoretical findings. Integration is likely to be increasingly worthwhile as event datasets proliferate, expand in coverage, and exhibit wider applications.
With Eric Dunford, David Backer, Karsten Donnay, and Erin McGrath
Abstract: Growth in event datasets is fostering research about patterns, dynamics, causes, and consequences of conflict. Studies typically rely on a single dataset. Instead, we advocate integrating multiple datasets to improve measurement and analysis. In this article, we demonstrate the benefits of integrating multiple datasets to improve measurement and analysis. We generate an integrated dataset covering Africa from 1997-2016 of four leading datasets (ACLED, UCDP-GED, SCAD, and GTD) with overlapping coverage of diverse types of conflict events. Using the integrated dataset, we document events that should be included, yet are missing in individual datasets. We also show that results of studies about the relationship between climate and conflict are sensitive given the conceptualization of conflict reflected by particular datasets. These illustrations highlight the potential for integration to advance conflict research by yielding a more complete and accurate picture of activity, which has repercussions for both descriptive and theoretical findings. Integration is likely to be increasingly worthwhile as event datasets proliferate, expand in coverage, and exhibit wider applications.