Pub Date : 2024-10-28DOI: 10.1177/00223433241265006
Afiq bin Oslan
Why do contemporary states fortify their borders? Modern military advancements have made such fortifications obsolete for security, yet scholars have offered no satisfactory alternative theory. I propose a theory of fortifications with economic motivations using a game-theoretic model where states compete to extract wealth over a shared population around a border. Such competition generates inefficiency and states have the option to construct fortifications to disrupt competition. Fortifications contain the wealth of citizens inside the state to be taxed and enforce efficient monopolies of extraction. States hence fortify when such profits outweigh short-term expenses. The models suggest that we should expect fortifications between territories of unequal economic capacities as richer states have more to lose from inefficient competition, complementing existing empirical results.
{"title":"Economic origins of border fortifications","authors":"Afiq bin Oslan","doi":"10.1177/00223433241265006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241265006","url":null,"abstract":"Why do contemporary states fortify their borders? Modern military advancements have made such fortifications obsolete for security, yet scholars have offered no satisfactory alternative theory. I propose a theory of fortifications with economic motivations using a game-theoretic model where states compete to extract wealth over a shared population around a border. Such competition generates inefficiency and states have the option to construct fortifications to disrupt competition. Fortifications contain the wealth of citizens inside the state to be taxed and enforce efficient monopolies of extraction. States hence fortify when such profits outweigh short-term expenses. The models suggest that we should expect fortifications between territories of unequal economic capacities as richer states have more to lose from inefficient competition, complementing existing empirical results.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"118 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142519439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-25DOI: 10.1177/00223433241271872
Pearce Edwards, Daniel Arnon
New political issues and opportunities lead new actors into contentious politics. This article studies one such case: transnational migrants making claims and engaging in collective action when traversing state borders. As global migration flows and accompanying political backlash has grown since the mid-2010s, borders have increasingly become sites of contention between groups of migrants seeking entry and state agents attempting to refuse it. Media coverage and elite discourse also has focused on contentious border crossings, with implications for public attitudes toward migration. In this setting, public attitudes toward migrants should vary based on the migrants’ tactics and characteristics. We expect migrants engaging in nonviolent resistance to security forces will win more public support than those engaging in violence. Migrant characteristics – claims or motives for migration and ethnic identity – should also affect support. Survey experiments in the United States and Mexico containing fictionalized vignettes of a contentious event at the countries’ shared land border show strikingly similar results: migrant nonviolent resistance, compared to violent confrontations, reduces support for deportation and increases beliefs that migrants contribute to society. These effects are consistent across party lines and border proximity. Neither migrants’ claims nor migrants’ ethnic identity affect public support in the context of a contentious event.
{"title":"Contentious politics in the borderlands: How nonviolence and migrant characteristics affect public attitudes","authors":"Pearce Edwards, Daniel Arnon","doi":"10.1177/00223433241271872","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241271872","url":null,"abstract":"New political issues and opportunities lead new actors into contentious politics. This article studies one such case: transnational migrants making claims and engaging in collective action when traversing state borders. As global migration flows and accompanying political backlash has grown since the mid-2010s, borders have increasingly become sites of contention between groups of migrants seeking entry and state agents attempting to refuse it. Media coverage and elite discourse also has focused on contentious border crossings, with implications for public attitudes toward migration. In this setting, public attitudes toward migrants should vary based on the migrants’ tactics and characteristics. We expect migrants engaging in nonviolent resistance to security forces will win more public support than those engaging in violence. Migrant characteristics – claims or motives for migration and ethnic identity – should also affect support. Survey experiments in the United States and Mexico containing fictionalized vignettes of a contentious event at the countries’ shared land border show strikingly similar results: migrant nonviolent resistance, compared to violent confrontations, reduces support for deportation and increases beliefs that migrants contribute to society. These effects are consistent across party lines and border proximity. Neither migrants’ claims nor migrants’ ethnic identity affect public support in the context of a contentious event.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142490931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-23DOI: 10.1177/00223433241265028
Niklas Hänze
Can armed conflict amplify the societal impacts and humanitarian consequences of natural hazards? Given that these hazards affect millions of people worldwide and that climate change is expected to increase the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, it is paramount that we advance our understanding of what makes societies vulnerable to these hazards. Existing research has focused mainly on political violence as a consequence of natural hazard-related disasters but has neglected that conflict can also be an underlying factor that shapes the impact of these events. Consequently, we know little about whether and how exposure to violent armed conflict increases vulnerability to natural hazards. This study argues that the local dynamics of conflict can have a significant effect on vulnerability and empirically investigates how periods of high-intensity conflict can affect the humanitarian consequences of natural hazards in the context of tropical cyclones in the Philippines. By combining data on physical storm exposure with highly detailed subnational data on disaster fatalities and conflict events, the empirical analysis allows the identification of the independent effect of conflict on hazard impacts. Results show that local periods of high-intensity conflict significantly increase the humanitarian consequences of natural hazards. These results have important implications for research investigating the impacts of disasters on peace and conflict, as they show that the consequences of natural disasters depend fundamentally on pre-existing conflict dynamics.
{"title":"When conflict becomes calamity: Understanding the role of armed conflict dynamics in natural disasters","authors":"Niklas Hänze","doi":"10.1177/00223433241265028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241265028","url":null,"abstract":"Can armed conflict amplify the societal impacts and humanitarian consequences of natural hazards? Given that these hazards affect millions of people worldwide and that climate change is expected to increase the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, it is paramount that we advance our understanding of what makes societies vulnerable to these hazards. Existing research has focused mainly on political violence as a consequence of natural hazard-related disasters but has neglected that conflict can also be an underlying factor that shapes the impact of these events. Consequently, we know little about whether and how exposure to violent armed conflict increases vulnerability to natural hazards. This study argues that the local dynamics of conflict can have a significant effect on vulnerability and empirically investigates how periods of high-intensity conflict can affect the humanitarian consequences of natural hazards in the context of tropical cyclones in the Philippines. By combining data on physical storm exposure with highly detailed subnational data on disaster fatalities and conflict events, the empirical analysis allows the identification of the independent effect of conflict on hazard impacts. Results show that local periods of high-intensity conflict significantly increase the humanitarian consequences of natural hazards. These results have important implications for research investigating the impacts of disasters on peace and conflict, as they show that the consequences of natural disasters depend fundamentally on pre-existing conflict dynamics.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"235 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142488735","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-22DOI: 10.1177/00223433241252554
Cécile Richetta, Tim Wegenast
Conflicts involving pastoralists have been on the rise in the past two decades in West, Central and East Africa. This article argues that land alienation is a major source of this type of violence. We employ a narrow identification strategy of relevant pastoral conflicts based on the Armed Conflict Location Event Dataset and create a unique indicator of land alienation comprised of three types of land use changes (conversion of land into conservation areas, crop farms, and industrial mining projects). Relying on a disaggregated quantitative comparative design of 50 km-by-50 km cells covering the Sahelian region from 2002 to 2019, we find that land alienation is an underlying cause of pastoral conflicts. Moreover, we show that the impact of land alienation on pastoralist violence spreads over long distances and is influenced by state presence and climatic conditions. Our analysis further reveals an overlap between pastoralist violence and armed conflict. Bridging a gap between macro- and micro-level studies, we contribute to shed more light on the determinants of pastoral conflicts, a type of violence that has received scant attention in the geospatial quantitative literature.
{"title":"Access denied: Land alienation and pastoral conflicts","authors":"Cécile Richetta, Tim Wegenast","doi":"10.1177/00223433241252554","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241252554","url":null,"abstract":"Conflicts involving pastoralists have been on the rise in the past two decades in West, Central and East Africa. This article argues that land alienation is a major source of this type of violence. We employ a narrow identification strategy of relevant pastoral conflicts based on the Armed Conflict Location Event Dataset and create a unique indicator of land alienation comprised of three types of land use changes (conversion of land into conservation areas, crop farms, and industrial mining projects). Relying on a disaggregated quantitative comparative design of 50 km-by-50 km cells covering the Sahelian region from 2002 to 2019, we find that land alienation is an underlying cause of pastoral conflicts. Moreover, we show that the impact of land alienation on pastoralist violence spreads over long distances and is influenced by state presence and climatic conditions. Our analysis further reveals an overlap between pastoralist violence and armed conflict. Bridging a gap between macro- and micro-level studies, we contribute to shed more light on the determinants of pastoral conflicts, a type of violence that has received scant attention in the geospatial quantitative literature.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142487514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-22DOI: 10.1177/00223433241267811
Morgan Brigg
Relational scholarship is burgeoning across the social sciences and gaining ground in peace and conflict studies. But relationalism is prone to misunderstanding. This article demonstrates that the ‘relational’ is an ontological orientation, with foundational implications for how social scientists know the world, rather than a methodological stance oriented to relationships. It offers a threefold framework that clarifies forms of relational-ontological scholarship and the trade-offs among them without prescribing the methods of relational research. It argues that while all forms of relational-ontological scholarship have value, those that give greater emphasis to relations than to entities help to better analyse dynamism and diversity, and that the normative value of relational approaches lies in considering peace as an effect of relations and turning to relations-in-themselves.
{"title":"Furthering relational approaches to peace","authors":"Morgan Brigg","doi":"10.1177/00223433241267811","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241267811","url":null,"abstract":"Relational scholarship is burgeoning across the social sciences and gaining ground in peace and conflict studies. But relationalism is prone to misunderstanding. This article demonstrates that the ‘relational’ is an ontological orientation, with foundational implications for how social scientists know the world, rather than a methodological stance oriented to relationships. It offers a threefold framework that clarifies forms of relational-ontological scholarship and the trade-offs among them without prescribing the methods of relational research. It argues that while all forms of relational-ontological scholarship have value, those that give greater emphasis to relations than to entities help to better analyse dynamism and diversity, and that the normative value of relational approaches lies in considering peace as an effect of relations and turning to relations-in-themselves.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"91 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142487516","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-12DOI: 10.1177/00223433241261551
Kari Paasonen
It is often proposed that the young unemployed are more likely to engage in political violence, conflicts, and protests. One problem in studying the unemployed – especially in the Global South – are the blurred lines between the unemployed, the employed, and those working in the informal sector. Further, the employed are a heterogeneous group so employment quality might also play an important role. To tackle these issues, this study uses a new quantitative dataset, which covers youth in five Middle Eastern and North African countries: Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, and Tunisia. These data provide considerably more fine-grained information about the employment situations of the respondents than the datasets previously used. The study investigates separately two forms of political participation: in political violence and in demonstrations. The regression analyses show that there is no clear difference between the young unemployed and the young employed in their likelihood to participate in the studied political activities. However, some features related to employment matter. Those whose employment status is ambiguous are substantially more likely to participate in demonstrations and political violence than the employed. Among those who work, those who are dissatisfied with their work and those who work fewer hours participate more often in these activities. Income on its own does not seem to have an effect; however, those who have more assets are more likely to participate, and compared to those who feel themselves middle income, those feeling rich or poor are more likely to engage in political violence and demonstrations. The results suggest that instead of thinking in terms of a dichotomy of the employed and unemployed, more emphasis should be placed on understanding the variety of employment situations and employment quality and their impact on political instability.
{"title":"It’s not just about jobs: The significance of employment quality for participation in political violence and protests in selected Arab Mediterranean countries","authors":"Kari Paasonen","doi":"10.1177/00223433241261551","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241261551","url":null,"abstract":"It is often proposed that the young unemployed are more likely to engage in political violence, conflicts, and protests. One problem in studying the unemployed – especially in the Global South – are the blurred lines between the unemployed, the employed, and those working in the informal sector. Further, the employed are a heterogeneous group so employment quality might also play an important role. To tackle these issues, this study uses a new quantitative dataset, which covers youth in five Middle Eastern and North African countries: Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, and Tunisia. These data provide considerably more fine-grained information about the employment situations of the respondents than the datasets previously used. The study investigates separately two forms of political participation: in political violence and in demonstrations. The regression analyses show that there is no clear difference between the young unemployed and the young employed in their likelihood to participate in the studied political activities. However, some features related to employment matter. Those whose employment status is ambiguous are substantially more likely to participate in demonstrations and political violence than the employed. Among those who work, those who are dissatisfied with their work and those who work fewer hours participate more often in these activities. Income on its own does not seem to have an effect; however, those who have more assets are more likely to participate, and compared to those who feel themselves middle income, those feeling rich or poor are more likely to engage in political violence and demonstrations. The results suggest that instead of thinking in terms of a dichotomy of the employed and unemployed, more emphasis should be placed on understanding the variety of employment situations and employment quality and their impact on political instability.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142415573","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-28DOI: 10.1177/00223433241256274
Paul L Johnson, Max Z Margulies
This article tests whether social distance between the military and society leads soldiers to refrain from violence against protesters, and how that expectation affects the regime’s decision of whether to deploy the military in the first place. In contrast with previous research that primarily examined aggregated protest campaigns and often in geographically limited samples, this study is conducted at the micro-level using daily event data. It employs the Integrated Crisis Early Warning System dataset to identify more than 36,000 protest-day events in 168 countries between 1997 and 2015, coding whether and how soldiers responded. In addition, this study also demonstrates theoretically and empirically the need to differentiate conscription from the military participation rate as measures of social distance. Contrary to expectations, it does not find evidence that conscription results in a lower likelihood of violence or deters the regime from deploying soldiers to put down protests, and it finds only weak evidence that higher military participation rate results in a lower likelihood of violence. It also finds that conscription increases rather than decreases the likelihood of soldiers being deployed against protests.
{"title":"Divided loyalty: Are broadly recruited militaries less likely to repress nonviolent antigovernment protests?","authors":"Paul L Johnson, Max Z Margulies","doi":"10.1177/00223433241256274","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241256274","url":null,"abstract":"This article tests whether social distance between the military and society leads soldiers to refrain from violence against protesters, and how that expectation affects the regime’s decision of whether to deploy the military in the first place. In contrast with previous research that primarily examined aggregated protest campaigns and often in geographically limited samples, this study is conducted at the micro-level using daily event data. It employs the Integrated Crisis Early Warning System dataset to identify more than 36,000 protest-day events in 168 countries between 1997 and 2015, coding whether and how soldiers responded. In addition, this study also demonstrates theoretically and empirically the need to differentiate conscription from the military participation rate as measures of social distance. Contrary to expectations, it does not find evidence that conscription results in a lower likelihood of violence or deters the regime from deploying soldiers to put down protests, and it finds only weak evidence that higher military participation rate results in a lower likelihood of violence. It also finds that conscription increases rather than decreases the likelihood of soldiers being deployed against protests.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142329043","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-28DOI: 10.1177/00223433241265057
Gino Pauselli
Why do people support promoting human rights? Common explanations center on the characteristics of states or individuals, particularly ideology. In this study, I focus on the role of empathy for outgroups. Contact theory suggests that intergroup contact reduces prejudice and increases support for outgroup members. I argue that empathy for outgroups increases support for defending the rights of foreigners abroad. Testing this argument is challenging given selection biases and the potential confounding effects of high prejudice and alternative norms. I use geocoded public opinion data from 35 African countries to study the level of contact with outgroups and its impact on preferences for promoting rights overseas. I use the geographic distance to the nearest international border and border crossing as a novel measure of contact with outgroups and find that the closer an individual is to an international land border or an international crossing point, the higher their support for preventing human rights abuses in other countries. These results are robust to a battery of covariates, robustness checks, and model specifications. In addition, the study shows that border hardening reduces support for human rights policies, while proximity to international borders is not correlated with other potential confounders such as concerns about security and migration. Overall, this study provides evidence that border zones, despite being the edge of sovereignty, generate stakeholders for human rights.
{"title":"Mapping advocacy support: Geographic proximity to outgroups and human rights promotion","authors":"Gino Pauselli","doi":"10.1177/00223433241265057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241265057","url":null,"abstract":"Why do people support promoting human rights? Common explanations center on the characteristics of states or individuals, particularly ideology. In this study, I focus on the role of empathy for outgroups. Contact theory suggests that intergroup contact reduces prejudice and increases support for outgroup members. I argue that empathy for outgroups increases support for defending the rights of foreigners abroad. Testing this argument is challenging given selection biases and the potential confounding effects of high prejudice and alternative norms. I use geocoded public opinion data from 35 African countries to study the level of contact with outgroups and its impact on preferences for promoting rights overseas. I use the geographic distance to the nearest international border and border crossing as a novel measure of contact with outgroups and find that the closer an individual is to an international land border or an international crossing point, the higher their support for preventing human rights abuses in other countries. These results are robust to a battery of covariates, robustness checks, and model specifications. In addition, the study shows that border hardening reduces support for human rights policies, while proximity to international borders is not correlated with other potential confounders such as concerns about security and migration. Overall, this study provides evidence that border zones, despite being the edge of sovereignty, generate stakeholders for human rights.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142329041","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-27DOI: 10.1177/00223433241258368
Hans Jonas Gunzelmann
What drives the cohesion of secessionist movements? Previous research emphasized the role of internal and external factors but produced mixed results regarding their effects. This article advances scholarship on this question by examining the role of critical junctures as periods of heightened contingency that can shift movements towards fragmentation or cohesion. It focuses on independence referendums and how states respond to them as important critical junctures, and on how they shape interorganizational relations as a key dimension of movement cohesion. Empirically, it explores the effects of the 2017 referendum in Catalonia using a mixed-methods research design that combines qualitative inquiry with network analyses of protest event data. The network analyses showed that the movement was notably less cohesive in the protest arena after the referendum than during the referendum campaign. Qualitative materials were employed to inductively identify strategy framing processes as key mechanisms to explain this development. Frame alignment around the referendum as a shared goal led to more cohesion during the campaign. After the event, a frame dispute over the meaning of the referendum led to diverging strategies and fragmented the movement, as state repression limited the movement’s room for maneuver. The findings suggest that research on secessionist movement cohesion should pay more attention to critical junctures and how secessionists make sense of them.
{"title":"How critical junctures shape secessionist movement cohesion: Strategies, framing processes, and interorganizational relations before and after the 2017 referendum in Catalonia","authors":"Hans Jonas Gunzelmann","doi":"10.1177/00223433241258368","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241258368","url":null,"abstract":"What drives the cohesion of secessionist movements? Previous research emphasized the role of internal and external factors but produced mixed results regarding their effects. This article advances scholarship on this question by examining the role of critical junctures as periods of heightened contingency that can shift movements towards fragmentation or cohesion. It focuses on independence referendums and how states respond to them as important critical junctures, and on how they shape interorganizational relations as a key dimension of movement cohesion. Empirically, it explores the effects of the 2017 referendum in Catalonia using a mixed-methods research design that combines qualitative inquiry with network analyses of protest event data. The network analyses showed that the movement was notably less cohesive in the protest arena after the referendum than during the referendum campaign. Qualitative materials were employed to inductively identify strategy framing processes as key mechanisms to explain this development. Frame alignment around the referendum as a shared goal led to more cohesion during the campaign. After the event, a frame dispute over the meaning of the referendum led to diverging strategies and fragmented the movement, as state repression limited the movement’s room for maneuver. The findings suggest that research on secessionist movement cohesion should pay more attention to critical junctures and how secessionists make sense of them.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142328629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-21DOI: 10.1177/00223433241261566
Michael C Horowitz, Joshua A Schwartz
The reconnaissance strike complex is synonymous with modern military power, and prominent realist theories would have predicted rapid proliferation after its successful debut in the Gulf War. Instead, the complex has proliferated slowly. To explain this puzzle, we theorize that interstate security threats significantly impact proliferation, but not in the way traditionally presumed. Although the literature on weapons proliferation has largely assumed a monotonically increasing relationship should hold between the capabilities of a state’s adversaries and a state’s own capability, we draw from the economics literature and game theoretic insights from political science to argue that the relationship should resemble an inverted-U. When states have rivals with moderate reconnaissance strike capabilities, they have security incentives to compete with them. However, when states face highly advanced adversaries, it becomes more difficult to escape or match their competition, making symmetrical acquisition less appealing. While most prior research focuses on narrower aspects of the reconnaissance strike complex like missiles or smart bombs, we test our theory on a novel dataset tracking country-level acquisition of eight aspects of the complex from 1980 to 2017: Ballistic missiles; bombers; cruise missiles; fighter aircraft; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets; precision-guided munitions; satellites; and submarines. We find strong support for our inverted-U argument. States that have rivals with moderate reconnaissance strike capabilities have over double the reconnaissance strike capabilities themselves than states that have rivals with very low or very high capabilities. Our findings hold for broader measures of the complex that closely proxy a state’s general military capabilities, narrower measures of the complex, and alternative measures of general military sophistication, indicating our theory has broad applicability. This article explains why some states invest heavily in conventional capabilities despite an already-large lead over their adversaries, and why other states instead opt to invest in alternatives rather than balancing symmetrically.
侦察打击综合体是现代军事力量的代名词，著名的现实主义理论曾预言，在海湾战争中成功亮相后，该综合体将迅速扩散。然而，该综合体的扩散速度却十分缓慢。为了解释这一谜团，我们从理论上认为，国家间的安全威胁对武器扩散产生了重大影响，但影响方式与传统推测不同。尽管有关武器扩散的文献大多假定国家对手的能力与国家自身的能力之间存在单调递增的关系，但我们借鉴经济学文献和政治学博弈论的观点，认为这种关系应类似于倒 "U "型。当国家的对手具备中等侦察打击能力时，国家就有与之竞争的安全动机。然而，当国家面对高度先进的对手时，就更难逃脱或与之匹敌，从而降低了对称获取的吸引力。之前的研究大多集中于侦察打击综合体的狭义方面，如导弹或智能炸弹，而我们则在一个新的数据集上检验了我们的理论，该数据集追踪了从1980年到2017年国家层面对综合体八个方面的获取情况：弹道导弹；轰炸机；巡航导弹；战斗机；情报、监视和侦察资产；精确制导弹药；卫星和潜艇。我们发现，我们的倒 U 型论点得到了强有力的支持。与拥有中等侦察打击能力的对手相比，拥有极低或极高侦察打击能力的对手所拥有的侦察打击能力要高出一倍以上。我们的研究结果适用于更广义的综合衡量标准（密切代表一国的一般军事能力）、更狭义的综合衡量标准以及一般军事先进性的其他衡量标准，这表明我们的理论具有广泛的适用性。这篇文章解释了为什么有些国家在已经大幅领先对手的情况下仍大力投资于常规能力，而另一些国家则选择投资于替代能力而非对称平衡。
{"title":"To compete or strategically retreat? The global diffusion of reconnaissance strike","authors":"Michael C Horowitz, Joshua A Schwartz","doi":"10.1177/00223433241261566","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433241261566","url":null,"abstract":"The reconnaissance strike complex is synonymous with modern military power, and prominent realist theories would have predicted rapid proliferation after its successful debut in the Gulf War. Instead, the complex has proliferated slowly. To explain this puzzle, we theorize that interstate security threats significantly impact proliferation, but not in the way traditionally presumed. Although the literature on weapons proliferation has largely assumed a monotonically increasing relationship should hold between the capabilities of a state’s adversaries and a state’s own capability, we draw from the economics literature and game theoretic insights from political science to argue that the relationship should resemble an inverted-U. When states have rivals with moderate reconnaissance strike capabilities, they have security incentives to compete with them. However, when states face highly advanced adversaries, it becomes more difficult to escape or match their competition, making symmetrical acquisition less appealing. While most prior research focuses on narrower aspects of the reconnaissance strike complex like missiles or smart bombs, we test our theory on a novel dataset tracking country-level acquisition of eight aspects of the complex from 1980 to 2017: Ballistic missiles; bombers; cruise missiles; fighter aircraft; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets; precision-guided munitions; satellites; and submarines. We find strong support for our inverted-U argument. States that have rivals with moderate reconnaissance strike capabilities have over double the reconnaissance strike capabilities themselves than states that have rivals with very low or very high capabilities. Our findings hold for broader measures of the complex that closely proxy a state’s general military capabilities, narrower measures of the complex, and alternative measures of general military sophistication, indicating our theory has broad applicability. This article explains why some states invest heavily in conventional capabilities despite an already-large lead over their adversaries, and why other states instead opt to invest in alternatives rather than balancing symmetrically.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142306185","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：