New Directions in Rebel Governance Research

Abstract

Day to day governance of civilians is not solely the purview of states. Rulemaking, rule-enforcing, and goods and services provision are central components of governance, yet in many instances it is non-state actors who assume these functions. We advance the study of governance by rebel groups engaged in armed confrontation against state governments. We identify five key areas of research where the field of rebel governance is best poised to go: the study of multi-level governance, rebel use of self-constraining or hand-tying behaviors, synergy between institutional form and domestic legitimacy, the nuanced role of territorial control in governance, and short- and longer-term impacts of rebel governance on post-conflict outcomes. In each area, we draw attention to the lessons already learned, interrogate key assumptions in existing work, raise arguments that remain under- or uninvestigated, and focus on the next frontier in the exploration of rebel governance. Learning more about the ways that rebel groups govern informs our understanding of armed conflict and its resolution, as well as provides broader lessons about the study of governance.

Did Covid‐19 Change Armed Group Governance? Evidence from a Survey of Local Security Authorities in Colombia

“…In addition to insights into how groups adapt to shocks such as pandemics, this article also contributes to a growing body of research challenging the assumption that territorial control is a prerequisite for governance (e.g. Florea, 2018;Loyle et al, 2023;Waterman, 2023;Newman, Saikia, and Waterman 2023). We show that in areas of Colombia contested by multiple armed groups, both criminal and political groups are engaging in a wide variety of governance activities -including establishing rules to regulate civilian behaviour, demanding the payment of taxes, and providing services including economic benefits and dispute resolution to civilians in their territories.…”

“…This article also contributes to broader debates about the conditions under which armed groups govern (Arjona, 2016;Arias and Barnes, 2017;Barnes, 2017;Florea, 2018;Stewart, 2018;Lessing, 2021;Loyle et al, 2023;Waterman, 2023). Research on armed group governance has tended to focus on areas of monopolistic control (e.g.…”

The political consequences of corporate donations for public service provision

“…Nelson-Nuñez (2019), for instance, uses evidence from Peru to demonstrate that NGOs can either strengthen or weaken relationships between individuals and the government, based on whether the NGOs appear to be replacing the need for government interaction or not, and how much information the NGO provides. Work on rebel groups by Loyle et al (2022) and Loyle et al (2023) questions whether our focus on the state as the default provider may be misguided. In the context of firms specifically, Dawkins (2021) finds that government contracting-companies delivering a service that is funded by governments-can reduce citizen buy-in, creating a situation where people blame governments for failures and do not believe the government to be accountable.…”

Rebel Governance and Development: The Persistent Effects of Guerrillas in El Salvador

“…In addition, we contribute to a growing literature on rebel governance by considering the effects on development in areas that have experienced control by insurgents. Scholars have recently shown that non-state actors can govern the political, economic, and social lives of residents in an orderly fashion and establish institutions that regulate civilian behaviors (Arjona, 2016;Breslawski, 2021;Loyle et al, 2021;Stewart, 2018;Sánchez De La Sierra, 2020;Grasse, Sexton and Wright, 2021).…”