Margit Bussmann

Foreign direct investment and militarized international conflict

Liberals claim that countries avoid conflict in order not to disrupt economically beneficial exchange. The statement that economic integration reduces the likelihood of conflict is largely based on the effects of trade. A similar rationale can be applied to economic interdependence in the form of international capital exchange. A state is expected to avoid political risk, especially severe forms such as militarized disputes, in order not to deter investors. This study tests, on the dyadic and monadic levels of analyses, whether the liberal peace proposition holds when economic integration is operationalized as foreign direct investment (FDI) stocks, inflows, and outflows. The results for the years 1980—2000 indicate that inflows and stock of foreign investment reduce the risk of an outbreak of a fatal dispute, regardless of whether they are tested in a single equation or a simultaneous equation model. Thus, reverse causality does not bias the pacifying effect of foreign investment inflows and stock. The results also support the underlying notion of the commercial peace that militarized conflicts inhibit foreign investment. The onset of a fatal conflict reduces FDI inflows, and, if tested in a two-stage instrumental variable approach, FDI stock, the most complete measure of economic integration through foreign investment. Accounting for endogeneity seems particularly important when analyzing the link between the onset of fatal disputes and the outflow of FDI.

Foreign Economic Liberalization and Peace : the Case of Sub-Saharan Africa

A typical adage of the globalization literature is that foreign economic liberalization undermines the social fabric of developing countries. This article examines this claim for the sub-Saharan African countries and thus the continent that experienced both low economic growth and a high incidence of armed conflict during the 1990s. Our results yield support for the assertion that economic openness durably pacifies countries once the restructuring of the economy is over. We can, however, not reject the possibility that the distributional consequences of foreign economic liberalization increase the risk of civil war during the implementation of the reform measures. We contrast this ‘distributional’ model with alternative explanations such as the role of the International Monetary Fund and the level of democracy. A comparative case study on Guinea and Guinea-Bissau lends some illustrative evidence to the claim that compensating the losers of globalization can pacify intrastate relations.

The Dynamics of Mass Killings: Testing Time-Series Models of One-Sided Violence in the Bosnian Civil War

Many observers contend that wartime civilian victimization is an instrument of political leaders to achieve a particular goal. This article examines whether retaliation for similar acts by the other side, the developments on the battlefield, or the behavior of international actors accounts for the ups and downs of this so-called one-sided violence. Using information from the Konstanz One-Sided Violence Event Dataset and other sources, we evaluate the empirical relevance of these complementary models statistically. Time series analyses of the weekly number of killed and harmed Muslims (Bosniacs) and Serbs during the Bosnian civil war support the military and the massacre logic. We show that the Serbian side decreased one-sided violence following a territorial conquest, but that its one-sided violence was not a reciprocal response to the Bosniac targeting of civilians. Conversely, the Bosniac side resorted to violence during times of increasing Serbian atrocities and when the fighting was particularly intense. The analysis reveals that most international interventions did not reduce the carnage, but that the Serbs responded to Russian moves.

The Effect of Globalization on National Income Inequality

We assess the effect of globalization on income inequality within countries, focusing on the influence of accumulated foreign direct investment stocks. We analyze data on inequality and foreign investment for 72 countries, 1970-90, incorporating in our tests the Kuznets (1955) curve, the character of political institutions, and various other aspects of the economy and society emphasized in previous research. Our results indicate that globalization does not increase national income inequality. The ratio of foreign direct investment to gross domestic product is unrelated to the distribution of incomes in both developing and developed countries. The share of income received by the poorest 20% of society also is unaffected by foreign investment. Nor are alternative measures of economic openness – the trade-to-GDP ratio and Sachs and Warners (1995) measure of free trading policies – associated with greater income inequality. If foreign investment increases average incomes in developing countries, as recent research indicates, and does not increase inequality, it must benefit all strata of these societies, including the poor.

Accounting for the dynamics of one-sided violence : Introducing KOSVED

This article presents the Konstanz One-Sided Violence Event Dataset (KOSVED) which allows researchers to study the dynamics of civilian abuse in 17 civil wars. The dataset provides, based on a multitude of sources, detailed information on the number of civilians killed or harmed by government or rebel troops. Where information is available, KOSVED also documents the dates of these events as well as the identities of the perpetrators and the means used in terrorizing the civilian population. The authors argue that the content analysis of news reports offers relatively accurate figures on those events that the perpetrators cannot hide from the public and that receive prominent media attention. Presumably, such information motivates potential short-term retaliatory acts by the group that has been the target of one-sided violence. The analysis suggests that, over the course of a conflict, almost all actors attack unarmed citizens, although to radically different degrees and relying on different means.

Do Hegemons Distribute Private Goods?: A Test of Power-Transition Theory

According to power-transition theory, war is most likely when the leading state is challenged by a rapidly growing, dissatisfied rival. Challengers are said to be dissatisfied because the hegemon manages the status quo for its own benefit, rewarding its allies and penalizing rivals. We assess the leading state’s ability to distribute the private goods of peace, victory in war, and economic prosperity. States with alliance portfolios similar to the hegemon’s are not protected from aggression; nor do they grow more rapidly than countries with which the leading state is not closely allied. The dominant power’s allies are more apt to win defensive wars, although the means by which this is accomplished are unclear. On balance, our results call into question the ability of the leading state to engineer satisfaction by distributing private goods. Like hegemonic-stability theory, power-transition theory exaggerates the influence of the leading state over the international system.

Trade Liberalization and Political Instability in Developing Countries

When in spring 2002 thousands of Argentineans protested against their government’s economic policy, their anger was directed against, amongst other issues, the economic liberalization of the 1990s. After decades of protectionism, the Latin-American state followed the recommendation of the IMF, as did its neighbors, and systematically opened its markets of goods and capital. Critics of globalization considered the Argentinean crisis as an affirmation of their skepticism towards the “Washington consensus”, namely the recipes of liberalization and deregulation. According to their interpretation, economic integration instigates socio-political conflicts because of the redistributive effects of liberalization. While capital owners and multinational firms profit from the renunciation of import substitution and other protectionist measures, the working population and the local industry are, in this perspective, the losers of the new policy. This view suggests that increasing social and political instability will accompany the “Rush to Free Trade” (Rodrik, 1994) onto which many developing countries have embarked within the past two decades. Although this thesis plays a central role in the debate on globalization, it was not systematically tested until now. The majority of the economic literature deals with the causes but not with the consequences of economic interdependence. The increasingly professional research on the causes of civil war refers only partially to economic conditions as potential explanations of intrastate conflicts.

Dynamics of One-sided Violence in the Civil War in Northern Uganda

The analysis aims at detecting patterns in the use of violence against the civilian population in the Civil War that was fought in the North of Uganda by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), an armed group that is known for its atrocities. One-sided violence increased with a decline in popular support and was related to the support of an external patron who influenced the relative military strength. The results of the quantitative analysis indicate that the LRA’s use of violence varied systematically with battle-related activities and was higher after the LRA had to suffer losses in combat.

Against All Odds: 2013 Richardson Award to Mats Hammarström and Peter Wallensteen

Abstract The institutionalization of peace research has been a tortuous process and it has proven particularly difficult to establish separate departments for peace research in the universities. The Department of Peace and Conflict Research at Uppsala University is a spectacular exception. This article honors two outstanding scholars who made it happen against all odds and who received the 2013 Lewis Fry Richardson Lifetime Achievement Award for their contribution to the scientific study of armed conflict. Peter Wallensteen and Mats Hammarström were awarded the prize for their individual scholarly output but above all for their joint achievement in establishing peace and conflict research at Uppsala University with its two pillars, the Uppsala Conflict Data Program and the training program for young scholars. They have made a lasting contribution to an institution of world-wide renown that pursues research in the scientific tradition of Richardson.

Globalisierung und Frauen

Die positiven Effekte der Globalisierung auf die makrookonomische Entwicklung eines Landes werden aus wirtschafts- und sozialwissenschaftlicher Perspektive kaum mehr angezweifelt. Genauso unumstritten ist aber auch die distributive Wirkung der Integration in den Weltmarkt, die sowohl Gewinner als auch Verlierer unter den okonomischen Akteuren hervorbringt. Gewohnlich stehen Arbeitnehmer und Arbeitgeber oder Konsumenten und Produzenten im Fokus der Forschung. Die feministische Okonomie thematisiert dagegen den Geschlechterunterschied.