Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Peace Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (8)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Besançon, M. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Relative Resources: Inequality in Ethnic Wars, Revolutions, and Genocides

Marie L. Besançon

Program on Intrastate Conflict, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, marie_besancon{at}harvard.edu

Political scientists and economists have exhaustively examined the nexus between economic inequality and political conflict (EI-PC nexus) in aggregated civil wars. This article revisits the nexus and its related theories, empirically and parsimoniously testing the effects of inequality on disaggregated intrastate conflicts. The results buttress the notion that traditionally deprived identity groups are more likely to engage in conflict under more economically equal conditions, while class or revolutionary wars fall under the conditions of greater economic inequality and war. Of the three types of conflicts tested - ethnic conflicts, revolutions, and genocides - economic inequality seems to have the most ambiguous bearing on genocides. Support follows for recent findings that political and social equalities are of greater importance in mitigating ethnic violence and that greed factors might exacerbate violence in all civil conflicts, including genocides. The theoretical argument proposes that the context within which intrastate violence takes place affects the requisite level of relative resources needed for the escalation of violence between groups. The results have policy implications for ethnically divided states that are in the process of equalizing their income differential, but neglect the substantial inclusion of all groups within the political process and the distribution of public goods. The social contracts between the governors and the governed then require careful crafting for a peaceful coexistence of diverse identity groups.

Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 42, No. 4, 393-415 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0022343305054086


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
J. Tir and M. Jasinski
Domestic-Level Diversionary Theory of War: Targeting Ethnic Minorities
Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 2008; 52(5): 641 - 664.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
H. Urdal
Population, Resources, and Political Violence: A Subnational Study of India, 1956-2002
Journal of Conflict Resolution, August 1, 2008; 52(4): 590 - 617.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
G. Ostby
Polarization, Horizontal Inequalities and Violent Civil Conflict
Journal of Peace Research, March 1, 2008; 45(2): 143 - 162.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
H. Brunborg and H. Urdal
The Demography of Conflict and Violence: An Introduction
Journal of Peace Research, July 1, 2005; 42(4): 371 - 374.
[Abstract] [PDF]