Skip to main content Accesibility Help
×
×
Home

Fatality Thresholds, Causal Heterogeneity, and Civil War Research: Reconsidering the Link Between Narcotics and Conflict

  • Noel Anderson and Alec Worsnop
Abstract

Determining the appropriate fatality threshold criteria for case selection in the civil war literature has proven contentious. Yet, despite continued debate, our survey of the literature finds that scholars rarely examine their findings across multiple thresholds. Of those that did evaluate their findings in this way, nearly half found that their results changed at different thresholds. Because minor and major conflicts often exhibit different causal patterns, scholars should explore their empirical findings across a range of theoretically motivated thresholds. To illustrate the utility of this approach, we demonstrate that the relationship between narcotics and conflict intensity varies across thresholds. We then introduce a dynamic theory that emphasizes the endogeneity of rebel groups’ decisions to turn to drug cultivation during civil war.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Fatality Thresholds, Causal Heterogeneity, and Civil War Research: Reconsidering the Link Between Narcotics and Conflict
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Fatality Thresholds, Causal Heterogeneity, and Civil War Research: Reconsidering the Link Between Narcotics and Conflict
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Fatality Thresholds, Causal Heterogeneity, and Civil War Research: Reconsidering the Link Between Narcotics and Conflict
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
*

Noel Anderson, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Building E40, Room 404, 1 Amherst Street, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA (nta@mit.edu); Alec Worsnop, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Building E40, Room 404, 1 Amherst Street, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA (aworsnop@mit.edu). The authors thank Päivi Lujala for sharing her data. They also thank Mark Bell, Fotini Christia, James Conran, Cassidy D’Aloia, Kristen Eck, Brian Haggerty, Morgan Kaplan, Gary King, Nick Miller, Roger Petersen, Stathis Kalyvas, Jennifer Pan, Molly Roberts, Kirssa Cline Ryckman, Kai Thaler, Omar Wasow, Catherine Worsnop, seminar participants at MIT, Harvard, and Yale, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions on previous drafts of this paper. All errors remain the authors’ own. To view supplementary material for this article, please visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2016.22

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Angrist, Joshua D., and Kugler, Adriana D.. 2008. ‘Rural Windfall or a New Resource Curse? Coca, Income, and Civil Conflict in Colombia’. The Review of Economics and Statistics 90(2):191215.
Blattman, Christopher, and Miguel, Edward. 2010. ‘Civil War’. Journal of Economic Literature 48(1):357.
Buhaug, Halvard, Gates, Scott, and Lujala, Päivi. 2009. ‘Geography, Rebel Capability, and the Duration of Civil Conflict’. Journal of Conflict Resolution 53(4):544569.
Chaloemtiarana, Thak. 2007. Thailand: The Politics of Despotic Paternalism. Ithaca, NY: Southeast Asia Program Publications.
Chernick, Marc. 2007. ‘FARC-EP: The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-People’s Army’. In Marianne Heiberg, Brendan O’Leary and John Tirman (eds), Terror, Insurgency, and the State: Ending Protracted Conflicts, 5181. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Collier, Paul, and Hoeffler, Anke. 2004. ‘Greed and Grievance in Civil War’. Oxford Economic Papers 56(4):563595.
Cornell, Svante E. 2005. ‘The Interaction of Narcotics and Conflict’. Journal of Peace Research 42(6):751760.
Cornell, Svante E. 2007. ‘Narcotics and Armed Conflict: Interaction and Implications’. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 30(3):207227.
Cunningham, David E., and Lemke, Douglas. 2013. ‘Combining Civil and Interstate Wars’. International Organization 67(3):609627.
Dahl, Marianne, and Høyland, Bjørn. 2012. ‘Peace on Quicksand? Challenging the Conventional Wisdom About Economic Growth and Post-Conflict Risks’. Journal of Peace Research 49(3):423429.
Dube, Oeindrila, and Vargas, Juan. 2013. ‘Commodity Price Shocks and Civil Conflict: Evidence from Colombia’. The Review of Economic Studies 80(4):13841421.
Fearon, James D. 2004. ‘Why Do Some Civil Wars Last So Much Longer Than Others?’. Journal of Peace Research 41(3):275301.
Fearon, James D., and Laitin, David. 2003. ‘Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War’. American Political Science Review 97(1):7590.
Getmansky, Anna. 2013. ‘You Can’t Win If You Don’t Fight: The Role of Regime Type in Counterinsurgency Outbreaks and Outcomes’. Journal of Conflict Resolution 57(4):709734.
Gleditsch, Nils Petter, Wallensteen, Peter, Eriksson, Mikael, Sollenberg, Margareta, and Strand, Håvard. 2002. ‘Armed Conflict 1946–2001: A New Dataset’. Journal of Peace Research 39(5):615637.
Hegre, Håvard, Ellingsen, Tanja, Gates, Scott, and Gleditsch, Nils Petter. 2001. ‘Toward a Democratic Civil Peace? Democracy, Political Change, and Civil War, 1816–1992’. American Political Science Review 95(1):3348.
Ho, Daniel E., Imai, Kosuke, King, Gary, and Stuart, Elizabeth A.. 2007. ‘Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference’. Political Analysis 15(3):199236.
Hultquist, Philip. 2013. ‘Power Parity and Peace? The Role of Relative Power in Civil War Settlement’. Journal of Peace Research 50(5):623634.
Humphreys, Macartan. 2005. ‘Natural Resources, Conflict, and Conflict Resolution’. Journal of Conflict Resolution 49(4):508537.
Keen, David. 2000. ‘Incentives and Disincentives for Violence’. In Mats R. Berdal and David M. Malone (eds), Greed and Grievance: Economic Agendas in Civil Wars, 1st ed. 1942. London, England: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
King, Gary, and Zeng, Langche. 2005. ‘The Dangers of Extreme Counterfactuals’. Political Analysis 14(2):131159.
Lacina, Bethany, Gleditsch, Nils Petter, and Russett, Bruce. 2006. ‘The Declining Risk of Death in Battle’. International Studies Quarterly 50(3):673680.
Le Billon, Philippe. 2001. ‘The Political Ecology of War: Natural Resources and Armed Conflicts’. Political Geography 20(5):561584.
Lujala, Päivi. 2009. ‘Deadly Combat Over Natural Resources: Gems, Petroleum, Drugs, and the Severity of Armed Civil Conflict’. Journal of Conflict Resolution 53(1):5071.
Miroff, Nick. 2015. ‘Colombia Is Again the World’s Top Coca Producer. Here’s Why That’s a Blow to the U.S.’ The Washington Post. Available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/in-a-blow-to-us-policy-colombia-is-again-the-worlds-top-producer-of-coca/2015/11/10/316d2f66-7bf0-11e5-bfb6-65300a5ff562_story.html, accessed 6 February 2016.
Piazza, James A. 2012. ‘The Opium Trade and Patterns of Terrorism in the Provinces of Afghanistan: An Empirical Analysis’. Terrorism and Political Violence 24(2):213234.
Powell, Jonathan M., and Thyne, Clayton L.. 2011. ‘Global Instances of Coups from 1950 to 2010: A New Dataset’. Journal of Peace Research 48(2):249259.
Powell, Robert. 2004. ‘Bargaining and Learning While Fighting’. American Journal of Political Science 48(2):344361.
Regan, Patrick M. 2002. Civil Wars and Foreign Powers: Outside Intervention in Intrastate Conflict. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Rosenbaum, Paul R. 2005. ‘Heterogeneity and Causality: Unit Heterogeneity and Design Sensitivity in Observational Studies’. The American Statistician 59(2):147152.
Ross, Michael. 2004. ‘How Do Natural Resources Influence Civil War? Evidence from Thirteen Cases’. International Organization 58(1):3567.
Sambanis, Nicholas. 2000. ‘Partition as a Solution to Ethnic War: An Empirical Critique of the Theoretical Literature’. World Politics 52(4):437483.
Sambanis, Nicholas. 2001. ‘A Note on the Death Threshold in Coding Civil War Events’. Newsletter of the American Political Science Association Section on Conflict Processes, June Issue.
Sambanis, Nicholas. 2004. ‘What Is Civil War? Conceptual and Empirical Complexities of an Operational Definition’. Journal of Conflict Resolution 48(6):814858.
Sanín, Francisco Gutiérrez. 2004. ‘Criminal Rebels? A Discussion of Civil War and Criminality from the Colombian Experience’. Politics & Society 32(2):257285.
Sekhon, Jasjeet S. 2009. ‘Opiates for the Matches: Matching Methods for Causal Inference’. Annual Review of Political Science 12(1):487508.
Staniland, Paul. 2012. ‘Organizing Insurgency: Networks, Resources, and Rebellion in South Asia’. International Security 37(1):142177.
Walter, Barbara F. 1997. ‘The Critical Barrier to Civil War Settlement’. International Organization 51(3):335364.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Political Science Research and Methods
  • ISSN: 2049-8470
  • EISSN: 2049-8489
  • URL: /core/journals/political-science-research-and-methods
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Anderson and Worsnop supplementary material
Appendix

 PDF (579 KB)
579 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed