Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-45ctf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-20T20:23:40.479Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Logic of Child Soldiering and Coercion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2013

Bernd Beber
Affiliation:
New York University, New York. E-mail: bernd.beber@nyu.edu
Christopher Blattman
Affiliation:
Columbia University, New York. E-mail: chrisblattman@columbia.edu

Abstract

Why do armed groups recruit large numbers of children as fighters, often coercively? The international community has tried to curb these crimes by shaming and punishing leaders who commit them—in short, making the crimes costlier. Are these policies effective and sufficient? The answer lies in more attention to the strategic interaction between rebel leaders and recruits. We adapt theories of industrial organization to rebellious groups and show how, being less able fighters, children are attractive recruits if and only if they are easier to intimidate, indoctrinate, and misinform than adults. This ease of manipulation interacts with the costliness of war crimes to influence rebel leaders' incentives to coerce children into war. We use a case study and a novel survey of former child recruits in Uganda to illustrate this argument and provide hard evidence not only that children are more easily manipulated in war, but also how—something often asserted but never demonstrated. Our theory, as well as a new “cross-rebel” data set, also support the idea that costliness matters: foreign governments, international organizations, diasporas, and local populations can discourage child recruitment by withholding resources or punishing offenders (or, conversely, encourage these crimes by failing to act). But punishing war crimes has limitations, and can only take us so far. Children's reintegration opportunities must be at least as great as adults' (something that demobilization programs sometimes fail to do). Also, indoctrination and misinformation can be directly influenced. We observe grassroots innovations in Uganda that could be models for the prevention and curbing of child soldiering and counterinsurgency generally.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2013
Figure 0

FIGURE 1. Leader's utility, by recruit type and punishment costNote: Graph assumes no indoctrination (n = 0) and no difference in reservation values (uH = uL = −0.2).

Figure 1

FIGURE 2. Leader's utility when indoctrination is effectiveNote: Graph for k = 1 and uL = uH = 0.

Figure 2

FIGURE 3. The effectiveness of indoctrination as punishment becomes cheapNote: Graph for uH = 0, uL = −0.2

Figure 3

FIGURE 4. Leader's utility when adult-child reservation values differNote: Graph for n = 0, k = 1, uH = 0.3, uL = (0.3 − value on x-axis).

Figure 4

FIGURE 5. The impact of differing reservation utilities as punishment becomes cheapNote: Graph for n = 0, k = 1, uH = 0.3, uL = (0.3− value on x-axis).

Figure 5

TABLE 1. Self-reported abduction experiences in the LRA

Figure 6

FIGURE 6. Distribution of age at the time of abduction in the LRANote: Data include absentee youth and youth who have since died or did not return from abduction. Multiple abductions are included. The proportion of the population abducted by age is calculated by dividing the number of youth abucted at each age in each year by the total number of youth in the population of that age in that year, and calculating the running-mean over all years via symmetric nearest-neighbor smoothing (bandwith = 0.5).

Figure 7

FIGURE 7. Probability of being released in the first month of abduction, by age of abductionNote: The solid line is a running-mean calculated via symmetric nearest-neighbor smoothing with a bandwidth of one. The dotted lines represent the 95% confidence interval. Data do not include absentee or nonsurviving youth. Multiple abductions enter individually.

Figure 8

FIGURE 8. How do rebel leaders employ abductees of different ages?Note: See Figure 7 for explanation of solid and dotted lines.

Figure 9

FIGURE 9. Average length of abduction by age of abductionNote: The solid line is a running-mean calculated via symmetric nearest-neighbor smoothing with a bandwidth of one. The dotted lines represent the 95% confidence interval. Data do not include absentee or nonsurviving youth. Multiple abductions enter individually.

Figure 10

FIGURE 10. Ease of misinformation and indoctrinationNote: See Figure 7 for explanation of solid and dotted lines.

Figure 11

TABLE 2. Correlates of child coercion across rebel groups

Figure 12

FIGURE 11. The distribution of child soldiering across forty rebel groups (by level of coercion employed by the group)Note: Each box represents the 25th to the 75th percentile of the distribution. Solid circles represent groups outside this range. The median is indicated by a triangle.

Supplementary material: File

Beber supplementary zip

Beber supplementary zip

Download Beber supplementary zip(File)
File 2.8 MB