Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The emphasis on constitutional political economy has been that new rules and institutions can be devised that improve the welfare of a society. Given the number of societies that are infected with political conflict and, as a result, lower levels of welfare, this paper attempts to analyze why we do not see more constitutional conventions aimed at eliminating conflict. The key idea is that expressively motivated group members may create incentives for instrumentally motivated group leaders such that it leads them to choose conflict rather than compromise. Nonetheless, it is not argued that such a peace is impossible to obtain. This leads to a further question, that if such a constitutional agreement could be found, would the expressive perspective alter the conventional instrumental perspective on the sort of constitutional reform that should be undertaken?

Agreement --- Agreements --- Compromise --- Conflict --- Conflict and Development --- Conflict Resolution --- Constitutional Reform --- Contract --- Convention --- Conventions --- Economy --- Education --- Education and Society --- Fighting --- Frontier --- Meeting --- Negotiation --- Organized Crime --- Peace --- Peace and Peacekeeping --- Post Conflict Reconstruction --- Post Conflict Reintegration --- Trust --- University --- Violent Conflict --- War

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Democracies rarely if ever fight one another, but they participate in wars as frequently as autocracies. They tend to win the wars in which they participate. Democracies frequently build large alliances in wartime, but not only with other democracies. From time to time democracies intervene militarily in ongoing conflicts. The democratic peace may contribute to a normative justification for such interventions, for the purpose of promoting democracy and eventually for the promotion of peace. This is reinforced by an emerging norm of humanitarian intervention. Democracies may have a motivation to intervene in non-democracies, even in the absence of ongoing conflict, for the purpose of regime change. The recent Iraq War may be interpreted in this perspective. A strong version of this type of foreign policy may be interpreted as a democratic crusade. The paper examines the normative and theoretical foundations of democratic interventionism. An empirical investigation of interventions in the period 1960-96 indicates that democracies intervene quite frequently, but rarely against other democracies. In the short term, democratic intervention appears to be successfully promoting democratization, but the target states tend to end up among the unstable semi-democracies. The most widely publicized recent interventions are targeted on poor or resource-dependent countries in non-democratic neighborhoods. Previous research has found these characteristics to reduce the prospects for stable democracy. Thus, forced democratization is unpredictable with regard to achieving long-term democracy and potentially harmful with regard to securing peace. But short-term military successes may stimulate more interventions until the negative consequences become more visible.

Civil War --- Conflict and Development --- Democracy --- Foreign policy --- Governance --- Health, Nutrition and Population --- Parliamentary Government --- Peace --- Peace and Peacekeeping --- Policy Research --- Policy Research Working Paper --- Political instability --- Politics and Government --- Population Policies --- Post Conflict Reconstruction --- Progress --- Wars --- Woman

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The most influential recent work on the determinants of civil wars found the factors associated with the grievance motivation to be largely irrelevant. Our paper subjects the results of this empirical work to further scrutiny by embedding the study of civil war in a more general analysis of varieties of violent contestation of political power within the borders of the state. Such an approach, we argue, will have important implications for how we think theoretically about the occurrence of domestic war as well as how we specify our empirical tests. In the empirical model, the manifestation of domestic conflict range from low intensity violence and coups to civil war. Our multinomial specification of domestic conflict supports the hypothesis that diversity accentuates distributional conflict and thus increases the risk of civil war. We also find that democracies may be more efficient than autocracies in reducing the risk of civil war.

Civil War --- Civil Wars --- Conflict --- Conflict and Development --- Dependence --- Hazard Risk Management --- Health, Nutrition and Population --- International Bank --- Peace --- Peace and Peacekeeping --- Peace Research --- Population Policies --- Post Conflict Reconstruction --- Rebel --- Reconstruction --- Social Conflict and Violence --- Social Development --- Urban Development --- Violence

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Democracies rarely if ever fight one another, but they participate in wars as frequently as autocracies. They tend to win the wars in which they participate. Democracies frequently build large alliances in wartime, but not only with other democracies. From time to time democracies intervene militarily in ongoing conflicts. The democratic peace may contribute to a normative justification for such interventions, for the purpose of promoting democracy and eventually for the promotion of peace. This is reinforced by an emerging norm of humanitarian intervention. Democracies may have a motivation to intervene in non-democracies, even in the absence of ongoing conflict, for the purpose of regime change. The recent Iraq War may be interpreted in this perspective. A strong version of this type of foreign policy may be interpreted as a democratic crusade. The paper examines the normative and theoretical foundations of democratic interventionism. An empirical investigation of interventions in the period 1960-96 indicates that democracies intervene quite frequently, but rarely against other democracies. In the short term, democratic intervention appears to be successfully promoting democratization, but the target states tend to end up among the unstable semi-democracies. The most widely publicized recent interventions are targeted on poor or resource-dependent countries in non-democratic neighborhoods. Previous research has found these characteristics to reduce the prospects for stable democracy. Thus, forced democratization is unpredictable with regard to achieving long-term democracy and potentially harmful with regard to securing peace. But short-term military successes may stimulate more interventions until the negative consequences become more visible.

Civil War --- Conflict and Development --- Democracy --- Foreign policy --- Governance --- Health, Nutrition and Population --- Parliamentary Government --- Peace --- Peace and Peacekeeping --- Policy Research --- Policy Research Working Paper --- Political instability --- Politics and Government --- Population Policies --- Post Conflict Reconstruction --- Progress --- Wars --- Woman

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This study questions the extent to which domestic conflict is influenced by national, regional, and international relationships. It is designed to answer specific questions relating to the effects of neighboring characteristics on a state's risk of conflict and instability: What is the interaction between neighboring conflict and political disorder? Do democratic neighborhoods have different conflict trajectories than non-democratic neighborhoods and if so, where and why? Given that most poor countries are located in poor and conflictual neighborhoods, to what extent is there a relationship between poverty and political disorder in different regime neighborhoods? Using spatial lag terms to specify neighboring regime characteristics and multilevel models to differentiate between explanatory levels, this study reiterates the importance of domestic and neighboring factors in promoting or diminishing the risk of instability and conflict. However, the pronounced negative effects of autocratic and anocratic neighborhoods are mitigated by a growing domestic GDP. This study also finds that democratic neighborhoods are more stable, regardless of income level. Research presented here is unique in its contribution on how regime type is a significant development indicator, which in turn is salient in determining the risks of civil war across states.

Civil War --- Civil wars --- Conflict --- Conflict and Development --- Conflict prevention --- Dependence --- Hazard Risk Management --- Health, Nutrition and Population --- Interdependences --- Member states --- Peace --- Peace and Peacekeeping --- Population Policies --- Post Conflict Reconstruction --- Poverty Reduction --- Rebel --- Refugee --- Services and Transfers to Poor --- Urban Development