All Conflict is Local

Previous civil war analyses have approached conflict as a single category with limited exceptions, and this project assesses whether differentiating conflicts by their type and intensity using a local-level geo-referenced analytical approach produces differing results for sub-groups of conflicts. The conflicts are divided into 1) governmental hostilities, where the aim of the armed non-state group is to capture the state, and 2) territorial hostilities, where the aim of the armed non-state group is to capture increased autonomy or secession for a territorial claim. The conflicts are also differentiated by intensity into 1) low-intensity conflicts, with fewer than 1000 battle-related deaths per year, and 2) civil wars, with 1000 or more battle-related deaths per year. The results demonstrate that conflicts with differing insurgent goals and intensities of battle are correlated with markedly different factors. For policymakers and practitioners, this research suggests that there is not a one-size-fits-all approach for conflict prevention but that strategies need to be targeted to specific types of conflict.

Autorentext

Whitney Haring-Smith studied civil conflict from the halls of the academy and the back roads of failed states. While completing a simultaneous BA and MA from Yale and a DPhil from Oxford, Whitney worked in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Sudan.