Who Fights? The Determinants of Participation in Civil War

Humphreys, Macartan; Weinstein, Jeremy M.

doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00322.x

Cited by 510 publications

(403 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

380

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Beyond sex and age, different socioeconomic attributes have been found to predict violent participation, although the results differ between studies. Humphreys and Weinstein (2008) find that political alienation, poverty, and low education were significant predictors for voluntarily taking up arms in the civil war in Sierra Leone. The authors also report that fighters 2 Important exceptions include Carpenter (2006), who discusses male over-representation in war mortality rates as gender-based violence, and Thomas and Bond (2015), who discuss the openness of violent political organisations to recruit women as key for explaining female participation in violent armed conflict.…”

Section: Previous Explanations For Participation In Political Violencementioning

confidence: 87%

Honor and political violence

Bjarnegård

Brounéus

Melander

2017

Journal of Peace Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Who participates in political violence? In this study, we investigate the issue at the micro-level, comparing individuals who have used violence in political uprisings with those who have not. We develop our argument from the observation that men are strongly overrepresented in political violence, although most men do not participate. Literature on masculinities emphasizes the role of honor and its links to different forms of violence, such as domestic abuse, criminal violence, and violent attitudes. Building on this literature, we discern two separate but related aspects of honor: honor as male societal privilege and control over female sexuality, that is, patriarchal values, and honor as ideals of masculine toughness, that is, the perceived necessity for men to be fierce and respond to affronts with violence or threats of violence in order to preserve status. We argue that patriarchal values combined with ideals of masculine toughness together constitute honor ideology, which contributes in turn to the explanation of who participates in political violence. We present new and unique individual-level survey data on these issues, collected in Thailand. We find that honor ideology strongly and robustly predicts a higher likelihood of participating in political violence among male political activists. A number of previous studies found a macro-level relationship between gender equality and peacefulness in a society. This study provides evidence for one micro-level mechanism linking gender equality and political violence at the macro level. Based on these results, we conclude that honor ideology endorsement is a driver of violence in political conflicts.

show abstract

Section: Previous Explanations For Participation In Political Violencementioning

confidence: 87%

Honor and political violence

Bjarnegård

Brounéus

Melander

2017

Journal of Peace Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[5]) as well as strategic thinking by non-governmental organizations, governments and military planners [6][7][8]. While policy-makers typically attempt to predict the decisions of leaders, the same assumption has guided the small body of research that has investigated the factors that influence whether ordinary people will support war [9][10][11]. To our knowledge, there are no published studies that directly test whether people decide to support war in an instrumentally rational manner or not.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

War as a moral imperative (not just practical politics by other means)

Ginges

Atran

2011

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present findings from one survey and five experiments carried out in the USA, Nigeria and the Middle East showing that judgements about the use of deadly intergroup violence are strikingly insensitive to quantitative indicators of success, or to perceptions of their efficacy. By demonstrating that judgements about the use of war are bounded by rules of deontological reasoning and parochial commitment, these findings may have implications for understanding the trajectory of violent political conflicts. Further, these findings are compatible with theorizing that links the evolution of within-group altruism to intergroup violence.

show abstract

“…rentier states) "tend to have weaker state apparatus than one would expect given their level of income because the rulers have less need of a socially intrusive and elaborate bureaucratic system to raise revenues," and so are less accountable to their citizens (Fearon & Laitin, 2003, p. 81). Lack of accountability can increase popular grievances and can motivate rebellion (Humphreys & Weinstein, 2008). Research findings consistently link conflict risk to a state's economic health and income composition (Collier & Hoeffler, 2004;Murshed & Tadjoeddin, 2009), including dependences on aid (Grossman, 1992) and extractive resources (Collier & Hoeffler, 2005).…”

Section: State Confllict Action and Income Sources In Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…natural resource rents or foreign aid), "state elites [will be] less responsive and accountable to citizens; and, depending on the sources of non-tax revenue, may have less incentive to build up the political and organizational capacities of the state" (Moore, 2007, p. 3;see also, Fearon & Laitin, 2003). This lack of accountability can impact popular grievances (Humphreys & Weinstein, 2008). In turn, effective tax systems are central to development as they contribute to escaping aid or single resource dependency as well as "reinforce government legitimacy through promoting accountability of the government to tax-paying citizens, effective state administration and good public financial management" (Fjeldstad, Jensen & Orre, 2012, p. 4).…”

Section: State Confllict Action and Income Sources In Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

Foreign Investment and State Conflicts in Africa

Kishi

Maggio

Raleigh

2017

Peace Economics, Peace Science and Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Rates of foreign direct investment (FDI) to Africa are increasing, yet little is known about how this will affect the political environment. One possibility, explored here, is that increasing levels of FDI within developing states will incentivize state conflict activity. Using an instrumental strategy, we show that in states with a low regard for civil liberties, or with unhealthy economies (i.e. states with a cash deficit), increased access to investment is associated with a higher number of conflict actions by the state. We argue that access to investment can push regimes into using violent strategies to secure their internal environment and to ensure their survival, specifically in their engaging in conflict against opposition and armed combatants. This underscores the need for extensive monitoring of state behavior following the receipt of investment, similar to the oversight of conditional aid.

show abstract

Who Fights? The Determinants of Participation in Civil War

Cited by 510 publications

References 30 publications

Honor and political violence

Honor and political violence

War as a moral imperative (not just practical politics by other means)

Foreign Investment and State Conflicts in Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About