Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-xtvcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-20T20:12:21.689Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do Commodity Price Shocks Cause Armed Conflict? A Meta-Analysis of Natural Experiments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 January 2021

GRAEME BLAIR Open the ORCID record for GRAEME BLAIR [Opens in a new window] ,
DARIN CHRISTENSEN Open the ORCID record for DARIN CHRISTENSEN [Opens in a new window]  and
AARON RUDKIN Open the ORCID record for AARON RUDKIN [Opens in a new window]
GRAEME BLAIR*
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
DARIN CHRISTENSEN*
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
AARON RUDKIN*
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
*
Graeme Blair, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, UCLA, [email protected].
Darin Christensen, Assistant Professor of Public Policy and Political Science, Luskin School of Public Affairs, UCLA, [email protected].
Aaron Rudkin, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, UCLA, [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Scholars of the resource curse argue that reliance on primary commodities destabilizes governments: price fluctuations generate windfalls or periods of austerity that provoke or intensify civil conflict. Over 350 quantitative studies test this claim, but prominent results point in different directions, making it difficult to discern which results reliably hold across contexts. We conduct a meta-analysis of 46 natural experiments that use difference-in-difference designs to estimate the causal effect of commodity price changes on armed civil conflict. We show that commodity price changes, on average, do not change the likelihood of conflict. However, there are cross-cutting effects by commodity type. In line with theory, we find price increases for labor-intensive agricultural commodities reduce conflict, while increases in the price of oil, a capital-intensive commodity, provoke conflict. We also find that price increases for lootable artisanal minerals provoke conflict. Our meta-analysis consolidates existing evidence, but also highlights opportunities for future research.

Type
Letter
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 115 , Issue 2 , May 2021 , pp. 709 - 716
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ahmadov, Anar K. 2014. “Oil, Democracy, and Context: A Meta-Analysis.” Comparative Political Studies 47 (9): 1238–1267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazzi, Samuel, and Blattman, Christopher. 2014. “Economic Shocks and Conflict: Evidence from Commodity Prices.” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 6 (4): 1–38.Google Scholar
Besley, Timothy, and Persson, Torsten. 2011. “The Logic of Political Violence.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 126 (3): 1411–1445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, Graeme, Christensen, Darin, and Rudkin, Aaron. 2020. “Replication Data for: Do Commodity Price Shocks Cause Armed Conflict? A Meta-Analysis of Natural Experiments.” Harvard Dataverse. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/BGCVOW.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, and Smith, Alastair. 2010. “Leader Survival, Revolutions, and the Nature of Government Finance.” American Journal of Political Science 54 (4): 936–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carreri, Maria, and Dube, Oeindrila. 2017. “Do Natural Resources Influence Who Comes to Power, and How?” The Journal of Politics 79 (2): 502–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, Darin. 2019. “Concession Stands: How Mining Investments Incite Protest in Africa.” International Organization 73 (1): 65–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Collier, Paul, and Hoeffler, Anke. 2004. “Greed and Grievance in Civil War.” Oxford Economic Papers 56 (4): 563–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crost, Benjamin, and Felter, Joseph H.. 2019. “Export Crops and Civil Conflict.” Journal of the European Economic Association 18 (3): 1484–1520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dal Bó, Ernesto, and Bó, Pedro Dal. 2011. “Workers, Warriors, and Criminals: Social Conflict in General Equilibrium.” Journal of European Economic Association 9 (4): 646–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DerSimonian, Rebecca, and Laird, Nan. 1986. “Meta-Analysis in Clinical Trials.” Controlled Clinical Trials 7 (3): 177–188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dube, Oeindrila, and Vargas, Juan F.. 2013. “Commodity Price Shocks and Civil Conflict: Evidence from Colombia.” The Review of Economic Studies 80 (4): 1384–1421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James D. 1995. “Rationalist Explanations for War.” International Organization 49 (3): 379–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James D., and Laitin, David. 2003. “Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War.” American Political Science Review 101 (1): 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Michelle R., and Skaperdas, Stergios. 2007. “Economics of Conflict: An Overview.” In Handbook of Defense Economics, ed. Sandler, Todd and Hartley, Keith, 2: 649–709. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Gehring, Kai, Langlotz, Sarah, and Stefan, Kienberger. 2018. “Stimulant or Depressant? Resource-Related Income Shocks and Conflict.” Working Paper. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3224444.Google Scholar
Gelb, Alan H. 1988. Oil Windfalls: Blessing or Curse? New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guardado, Jenny. 2018. “Land Tenure, Price Shocks, and Insurgency: Evidence from Peru and Colombia.” World Development 111: 256–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, Macartan. 2005. “Natural Resources, Conflict, and Conflict Resolution: Uncovering the Mechanisms.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 49 (4): 508–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imai, Kosuke, and Kim, In Song. Forthcoming. “On the Use of Two-Way Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Panel Data.” Political Analysis. doi:10.1017/pan.2020.33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalyvas, Stathis N. 2003. “The Ontology of ‘Political Violence’: Action and Identity in Civil Wars.” Perspectives on Politics 1 (3): 475–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keen, David. 1998. “The Economic Functions of Violence in Civil Wars.” Adelphi Papers 38 (320): 1–89.Google Scholar
Laitin, David D. 2007. Nations, States, and Violence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahdavy, Hussein. 1970. “The Patterns and Problems of Economic Development in Rentier States: The Case of Iran.” In Studies in Economic History of the Middle East, ed. Cook, M. A., 428–467. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McGuirk, Eoin, and Burke, Marshall. 2020. “The Economic Origins of Conflict in Africa.” Journal of Political Economy 128 (10): 3940–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mummolo, Jonathan, and Peterson, Erik. 2018. “Improving the Interpretation of Fixed Effects Regression Results.” Political Science Research and Methods 6 (4): 829–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brochta, William. 2019. “A Meta-Analysis of Natural Resources and Conflict.” Research & Politics 6 (1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168018818232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, Kenneth, Higgins, Julian P. T., and Lumley, Thomas. 2018. “A Re-Evaluation of Fixed Effect(s) Meta-analysis.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A 181 (1): 205–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rigterink, Anouk S. 2020. “Diamonds, Rebel’s and Farmer’s Best Friend: Impact of Variation in the Price of a Lootable, Labor-intensive Natural Resource on the Intensity of Violent Conflict.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 64 (1): 90–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, Robert, and Rubin, Donald B.. 1982. “Comparing Effect Sizes of Independent Studies.” Psychological Bulletin 92 (2): 500–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, Michael L. 2004. “What Do We Know about Natural Resources and Civil War?” Journal of Peace Research 41 (3): 337–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, Richard, and Bhavnani, Ravi. 2005. “Diamonds, Blood, and Taxes: A Revenue-Centered Framework for Explaining Political Order.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 49 (4): 563–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UNCTAD. 2018. Free Market Commodity Price Index: Methodological Note. Technical Report.Google Scholar
UNCTAD. 2019. Countries Dependent on Commodities Hit 20-Year High, Says UN. Press Release.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Blair et al. Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/BGCVOW
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Blair et al. supplementary material

Blair et al. supplementary material

Download Blair et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 842.8 KB
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.