IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/compsc/v35y2018i5p523-543.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Win, lose, or draw in the fog of civil war

Author

Listed:
  • J Michael Greig

    (Castleberry Peace Institute, University of North Texas, USA)

  • T David Mason

    (Castleberry Peace Institute, University of North Texas, USA)

  • Jesse Hamner

    (Castleberry Peace Institute, University of North Texas, USA)

Abstract

Civil war outcome studies have used expected utility logic to identify factors that affect actors’ estimates of the probability of victory, the payoffs from victory vs defeat, and the accumulated costs of fighting until victory is achieved. Tests have used static measures of national attributes and war characteristics, measured prior to the war or at its end. We use UCDP Georeferenced Event Data from 73 civil conflicts in Africa to estimate how changes in government and rebel tactical choices on where and when to fight battles affect expected utility estimates and, therefore, civil war outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • J Michael Greig & T David Mason & Jesse Hamner, 2018. "Win, lose, or draw in the fog of civil war," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(5), pages 523-543, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:35:y:2018:i:5:p:523-543
    DOI: 10.1177/0738894216649343
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0738894216649343
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0738894216649343?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrick Brandt & T. David Mason & Mehmet Gurses & Nicolai Petrovsky & Dagmar Radin, 2008. "When And How The Fighting Stops: Explaining The Duration And Outcome Of Civil Wars," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(6), pages 415-434.
    2. Fearon, James D., 1995. "Rationalist explanations for war," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 379-414, July.
    3. Wood, Reed M., 2014. "From Loss to Looting? Battlefield Costs and Rebel Incentives for Violence," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(4), pages 979-999, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Austin L. Wright, 2016. "Economic Shocks and Rebel," HiCN Working Papers 232, Households in Conflict Network.
    2. Kirssa Cline Ryckman & Jessica Maves Braithwaite, 2020. "Changing horses in midstream: Leadership changes and the civil war peace process," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(1), pages 83-105, January.
    3. Marius Mehrl & Tobias Böhmelt, 2021. "How mediator leadership transitions influence mediation effectiveness," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(1), pages 45-62, January.
    4. Stephen Nemeth & Brian Lai, 2022. "When do natural disasters lead to negotiations in a civil war?," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(1), pages 28-42, January.
    5. Charles H. Anderton, 2017. "The bargaining theory of war and peace," Economics of Peace and Security Journal, EPS Publishing, vol. 12(2), pages 10-15, October.
    6. Clayton L. Thyne, 2006. "Cheap Signals with Costly Consequences," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(6), pages 937-961, December.
    7. Chan, Kenneth S. & Laffargue, Jean-Pierre, 2016. "Plunder and tribute in a Malthusian world," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 138-150.
    8. Herbst, Luisa & Konrad, Kai A. & Morath, Florian, 2017. "Balance of power and the propensity of conflict," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 168-184.
    9. Jonathan M. DiCicco & Jack S. Levy, 1999. "Power Shifts and Problem Shifts," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 43(6), pages 675-704, December.
    10. Azam, Jean-Paul, 2023. "Was Lucifer a Gambler? A Rational-Choice Hermeneutic of Peter Olivi’s Treatise on Demons," TSE Working Papers 23-1483, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Nov 2024.
    11. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Morgan, T. Clifton & Syropoulos, Constantinos & Yotov, Yoto V., 2021. "Understanding economic sanctions: Interdisciplinary perspectives on theory and evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    12. Anesi, Vincent, 2012. "Secessionism and minority protection in an uncertain world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 53-61.
    13. Anesi, Vincent, 2012. "Secessionism and minority protection in an uncertain world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 53-61.
    14. Jeffry Frieden & Stefanie Walter, 2019. "Analyzing inter-state negotiations in the Eurozone crisis and beyond," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(1), pages 134-151, March.
    15. Robert Brown, 2010. "Measuring Delegation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 141-175, June.
    16. Roland Hodler & Paul Schaudt & Alberto Vesperoni, 2023. "Mining for Peace," CESifo Working Paper Series 10207, CESifo.
    17. William Spaniel, 2019. "Rational Overreaction to Terrorism," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(3), pages 786-810, March.
    18. Bonfatti, Roberto & O'Rourke, Kevin Hjortshøj, 2014. "Growth, Import Dependence and War," CEPR Discussion Papers 10073, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Wagner, Matthew L, 2016. "The civil war puzzle revisited: The use of post-conflict elections as part of peace agreements," International Journal of Development and Conflict, Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 1-24.
    20. John Tyson Chatagnier, 2015. "Conflict bargaining as a signal to third parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(2), pages 237-268, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:35:y:2018:i:5:p:523-543. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.