Kristin M. Bakke

The perils of policy by p-value: Predicting civil conflicts

Large-n studies of conflict have produced a large number of statistically significant results but little accurate guidance in terms of anticipating the onset of conflict. The authors argue that too much attention has been paid to finding statistically significant relationships, while too little attention has been paid to finding variables that improve our ability to predict civil wars. The result can be a distorted view of what matters most to the onset of conflict. Although these models may not be intended to be predictive models, prescriptions based on these models are generally based on statistical significance, and the predictive attributes of the underlying models are generally ignored. These predictions should not be ignored, but rather need to be heuristically evaluated because they may shed light on the veracity of the models. In this study, the authors conduct a side-by-side comparison of the statistical significance and predictive power of the different variables used in two of the most influential models of civil war. The results provide a clear demonstration of how potentially misleading the traditional focus on statistical significance can be. Until out-of-sample heuristics — especially including predictions — are part of the normal evaluative tools in conflict research, we are unlikely to make sufficient theoretical progress beyond broad statements that point to GDP per capita and population as the major causal factors accounting for civil war onset.

Diversity, Disparity, and Civil Conflict in Federal States

Policymakers and scholars have turned their attention to federalism as a means for managing conflicts between central governments and subnational interests. But both the theoretical literature and the empirical track record of federations make for opposing conclusions concerning federalisms ability to prevent civil conflict. This article argues that the existing literature falls short on two accounts: first, it lacks a systematic comparison of peaceful and conflict-ridden cases across federal states, and second, while some studies acknowledge that there is no one-size-fits-all federal solution, the conditional ingredients of peace-preserving federalism have not been theorized. The authors make the argument that the peace-preserving effect of specific federal traits—fiscal decentralization, fiscal transfers, and political copartisanship—are conditional on a societys income level and ethnic composition. The argument is tested across twenty-two federal states from 1978 to 2000.

A Plague of Initials: Fragmentation, Cohesion, and Infighting in Civil Wars

How do we conceptualize the fragmentation of internally divided movements? And how does variation in fragmentation affect the probability and patterns of infighting? The internal politics of non-state groups have received increasing attention, with recent research demonstrating the importance of cohesion and fragmentation for understanding conflict dynamics. Yet there is little consensusonhowtoconceptualizefragmentation,theconceptatthecenterofthisagenda,withauthorsusingdifferentdefinitionsand measures. In this paper we conceptualize fragmentation along three constitutive dimensions: the number of organizations in the movement; the degree of institutionalization across these organizations; and the distribution of power among them.We then show how variation across these dimensions can explain variation in important conflict processes, focusing on infighting. When I came to Spain, and for some time afterwards, I was not only uninterested in the political situation but unaware of it. I knew there was a war on, but I had no notion what kind of a war . . . As for the kaleidoscope of political parties and trade unions, with their tiresome names—PSUC, POUM, FAI, CNT, UGT, JCI, JSWU, AIT—they merely exasperated me. It looked at first sight as though Spain were suffering from a plague of initials . . .

Shirts Today, Skins Tomorrow

While theoretical models of conflict often treat actors as unitary, most self-determination groups are fragmented into a number of competing internal factions. This article presents a framework for understanding the “dual contests” that self-determination groups engage in—the first with their host state and the second between co-ethnic factions within groups. Using a new data set of the number of factions within a sample of self-determination groups from 1960 to 2008, the authors find that competition between co-ethnic factions is a key determinant of their conflict behavior. More competing factions are associated with higher instances of violence against the state as well as more factional fighting and attacks on co-ethnic civilians. More factions using violence increases the chances that other factions will do so, and the entry of a new faction prompts violence from existing factions in a within-group contest for political relevance. These findings have implications for both theory and policy.

Reconciliation in Conflict-Affected Societies: Multilevel Modeling of Individual and Contextual Factors in the North Caucasus of Russia

Over the past two decades, there has been a growing interest in reconciliation in societies emerging from conflict. The North Caucasus region of Russia has experienced multiple and diverse conflicts since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and violence continues, although at a lower level than a decade ago. We examine willingness to forgive members of other ethnic groups for violence that they have perpetuated as an indicator of the potential for reconciliation in the region. Using data from a large representative survey conducted in five ethnic republics of the North Caucasus in December 2005, we analyze responses to the forgiveness question in relation to social–psychological models of reconciliation, and we add a key geographic measure, distance to violent events, to the usual theories. Using the survey data (N = 2,000) and aggregate data for the eighty-two sampling points, we use a multilevel modeling approach to separate out the effects of individual and contextual factors. We find little support for the social identity theory expectations as ethnic hostility is not an important factor, except for in the case of the Ossetians, a mostly Orthodox minority disproportionately affected by multiple conflicts and the Beslan school killings. Instead, personal experiences of violence and terrorism, the impacts of military actions against communities, differences in general trust of others, and the extent to which the respondents life has been changed by violence negatively influence the willingness to forgive. Conversely, respondents in ethnic Russian communities and those relatively close to violence are more willing to engage in postconflict reconciliation.

Copying and Learning from Outsiders? Assessing Diffusion from Transnational Insurgents in the Chechen Wars

Transnational terrorism is presumed to both foster and feed on intrastate conflicts. Yet few studies have examined the ways in which transnational insurgents — be they terrorists or not — matter. This article theorizes and traces the diffusion mechanisms through which transnational insurgents affect domestic challengers to the state, drawing on the literatures on transnationalism, social movements, and intrastate conflicts. Via mediated or relational diffusion, transnational insurgents can engender learning or emulation on the part of the domestic insurgents, in turn shaping domestic processes of mobilization — shifts in framing of a movement’s goals, tactical innovation, and resource mobilization. The argument is anchored in an empirical analysis of the Chechen wars.

E pluribus unum, ex uno plures: Competition, violence, and fragmentation in ethnopolitical movements

Why are some ethnopolitical movements divided while others are relatively unified? A growing literature examines the consequences of internal divisions in ethnopolitical movements – and shows that it matters for a range of conflict outcomes – yet the mechanisms causing such divisions remain poorly understood. Our argument emphasizes competitive dynamics between states and self-determination movements and between rival factions within these movements as key determinants of fragmentation. Drawing from literatures on social movements, contentious politics, and civil war, we situate our argument vis-à-vis three alternative and complementary sets of explanations based on theories emphasizing transnational dimensions, political institutions, and structural factors within ethnopolitical groups. Using an original dataset, we test hypotheses explaining movement fragmentation over time and use a case study of Punjab in India to identify specific causal mechanisms and missing variables. Our findings show some support for three of these theories, suggesting that ethnopolitical movements divide as a result of complex and interactive processes. But our findings also underscore that central to explaining fragmentation dynamics are factors capturing competitive dynamics, including repression, accommodation of movement demands, the turn to violence, and the dynamic and changing nature of ethnopolitical demands.

State, Society and Separatism in Punjab

Why do decentralized states differ in their capacity to preserve peace within their borders? This is the question motivating this study, which maintains that an understanding of decentralizations divergent effect on intrastate conflicts calls for a consideration of how these institutions are embedded in the societies they govern. In particular, this article suggests that the impacts of policy and fiscal decentralization are conditioned by any given regions ethnic make-up and wealth. The argument is anchored in a case study of separatism in Punjab in India.