Most nations have experienced an internal armed conflict since 1960. Yet while civil war is central to many nations' development, it has stood at the periphery of economics research and teaching. The past decade has witnessed a long overdue explosion of research into war's causes and consequences. We summarize progress, identify weaknesses, and chart a path forward. Why war? Existing theory is provocative but incomplete, omitting advances in behavioral economics and making little progress in key areas, like why armed groups form and cohere, or how more than two armed sides compete. Empirical work finds that low per capita incomes and slow economic growth are both robustly linked to civil war. Yet there is little consensus on the most effective policies to avert conflicts or promote postwar recovery. Cross-country analysis of war will benefit from more attention to causal identification and stronger links to theory. We argue that micro-level analysis and case studies are also crucial to decipher war's causes, conduct, and consequences. We bring a growth theoretic approach to the study of conflict consequences to highlight areas for research, most of all the study of war's impact on institutions. We conclude with a plea for new and better data. (JEL D72, D74, O17)
Why do some armed groups commit massive wartime rape, whereas others never do? Using an original dataset, I describe the substantial variation in rape by armed actors during recent civil wars and test a series of competing causal explanations. I find evidence that the recruitment mechanism is associated with the occurrence of wartime rape. Specifically, the findings support an argument about wartime rape as a method of socialization, in which armed groups that recruit by force-through abduction or pressganging—use rape to create unit cohesion. State weakness and insurgent contraband funding are also associated with increased wartime rape by rebel groups. I examine observable implications of the argument in a brief case study of the Sierra Leone civil war. The results challenge common explanations for wartime rape, with important implications for scholars and policy makers.
A model of the chemo-mechanical evolution of low-pH cement is clarified in order to be used at a structural scale. The proposed phenomenological model is based on a multiphasic hydration model developed in previous studies to predict the risk of early age cracking of structures cast with blended cements. At later ages, the evolution of mechanical properties cannot be explained only by the pozzolanic reaction usually considered in hydration models (because portlandite is entirely consumed at early ages). At these ages, mineralogical analyses showed that the hydration of remaining anhydrous silicate continued to develop by consumption of calcium from hydrates with high C/S ratios (e.g. C–S–H produced by clinker hydration at early age). A model able to predict these chemical evolutions is thus proposed. It is based on the principle of chemical equilibrium between the solution and the solid phases in terms of calcium concentration. The impact of this chemical evolution on mechanical properties can then be predicted with a better accuracy than with a classical hydration model. Finally the chemo-mechanical model is applied to the prediction of cracking of a large concrete element cast with a low pH based concrete.
Coherent democracies and harshly authoritarian states have few civil wars, and intermediate regimes are the most conflict-prone. Domestic violence also seems to be associated with political change, whether toward greater democracy or greater autocracy. Is the greater violence of intermediate regimes equivalent to the finding that states in political transition experience more violence? If both level of democracy and political change are relevant, to what extent is civil violence related to each? Based on an analysis of the period 1816-1992, we conclude that intermediate regimes are most prone to civil war, even when they have had time to stabilize from a regime change. In the long run, since intermediate regimes are less stable than autocracies, which in turn are less stable than democracies, durable democracy is the most probable end-point of the democratization process. The democratic civil peace is not only more just than the autocratic peace but also more stable.
This article focuses on the role that power-sharing arrangements play in making it possible for some countries to make the transition to democracy successfully after civil war. The authors hypothesize that the adoption of multiple forms of power sharing, measures constructed to end particularly difficult civil wars, facilitate the emergence of a minimalist form of democracy following some intrastate conflicts by helping to assuage warring groups’ security concerns. The authors use a bivariate probit model to account for the possibility that the decisions by wartime rivals to engage in power sharing and whether to adopt democracy or not are interrelated. Employing panel data for all civils wars concluded between 1945 and the end of 2006, they find support for their hypothesis.
An influential conventional wisdom holds that civil wars proliferated rapidly with the end of the Cold War and that the root cause of many or most of these has been ethnic and religious antagonisms. We show that the current prevalence of internal war is mainly the result of a steady accumulation of protracted conflicts since the 1950s and 1960s rather than a sudden change associated with a new, post-Cold War international system. We also find that after controlling for per capita income, more ethnically or religiously diverse countries have been no more likely to experience significant civil violence in this period. We argue for understanding civil war in this period in terms of insurgency or rural guerrilla warfare, a particular form of military practice that can be harnessed to diverse political agendas. The factors that explain which countries have been at risk for civil war are not their ethnic or religious characteristics but rather the conditions that favor insurgency. These include poverty-which marks financially and bureaucratically weak states and also favors rebel recruitment-political instability, rough terrain, and large populations.
To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.06.028 Article Note: (footnote) Approved April 2017, Revised and approved by the ACEP Board of Directors April 2017, June 2010, and March 1997, Reaffirmed by the ACEP Board of Directors October 2001, Originally approved by the ACEP Board of Directors June 1991
We study the effect of US food aid on conflict in recipient countries. Our analysis exploits time variation in food aid shipments due to changes in US wheat production and cross-sectional variation in a country's tendency to receive any US food aid. According to our estimates, an increase in US food aid increases the incidence and duration of civil conflicts, but has no robust effect on interstate conflicts or the onset of civil conflicts. We also provide suggestive evidence that the effects are most pronounced in countries with a recent history of civil conflict.
► AAMK system has better acid, seawater attack, sodium sulfate resistance than PC. ► AAMK system has very good heat resistant up to 1200–1400 °C. ► Polypropylene and short fibers increase AAMK flexural, strength and impact energy. ► Replacing 10% MK with FA or lime or 20% with calcite gave higher strength. ► MK and blended MK with steel slag can be used as repair materials. The development of new binders, as an alternative to Portland cement (PC), by alkaline activation, is a current researchers interest. Alkali-activated metakaolin (AAMK), belongs to prospective materials in the field of Civil Engineering. This paper presents a comprehensive overview of the previous works carried out on the use of MK in alkali activation.