Suchergebnisse

This edited collection by 41 accomplished scholars examines economic aspects of genocides, other mass atrocities, and their prevention. Chapters include numerous case studies (e.g., California's Yana people, Australia's Aborigines peoples, Stalin's killing of Ukrainians, Belarus, the Holocaust, Rwanda, DR Congo, Indonesia, Pakistan, Colombia, Mexico's drug wars, and the targeting of suspects during the Vietnam war).

A survey of the peace economics literature / Walter Isard, Charles H. Anderton -- The basic economics of arms reduction / Kenneth J. Arrow -- Impact of military cuts on the Soviet and Eastern European economies : models and simulations / Lawrence R. Klein, Miroslaw Gronicki, Hiroyuki Kosaka -- Conflict and trade : an economics approach to political international interactions / Solomon William Polachek -- On modeling the impact of arms reductions on world trade / Jeffrey H. Bergstrand -- The new strategic environment and economic factors in the future of nuclear defense / Martin C. McGuire -- Competing optima in the Gulf War / Murray Wolfson [and others] -- Determinants of military expenditure / Carlos Seiglie -- Disarmament negotiations as an exercise in mature rivalry / Robert E. Kuenne -- Wars and famines : on divisions and incentives / Amartya Sen -- Regional Conflict and military spending in the developing countries / Manas Chatterji -- Do arms races lead to peace? / Jean-Christian Lambelet -- Key directions for research / Walter Isard, Charles Anderton.

The subject of peace economics and its ramifications are comprehensively and deeply attacked in this book. First of all the book presents a compact survey of significant contributions already made, and then it provides a broad theoretical background for examining the subject by evaluating four different approaches, those of 1) neoclassical welfare theory, 2) Keynesian and modern versions of macroeconomics, 3) modern growth theory and 4) political choice theory. A number of contributions deal with major questions on issues such as the impact of military cutbacks in the Eastern European economie.

Our research question is: Does inter-group horizontal economic inequality elevate state-perpetrated mass atrocity risk? Theoretical perspectives in genocide studies show how economic and other forms of discrimination against ethnic or religious groups can elevate the risk of government violence against them. Among the approximately five dozen large-sample empirical studies of mass atrocity risk, only a few consider the effects of economic discrimination. Moreover, no large-sample empirical studies, to the best of our knowledge, test hypotheses related to how inter-group horizontal economic inequalities (as distinct from vertical economic inequalities based on GINI coefficients or quantile income or wealth measures) affect mass atrocity risk. Drawing upon two data sources, we construct four horizontal economic inequality measures for groups within nations. The measures relate to access to economic resources in general and to electricity in particular. We then empirically test hypotheses related to horizontal economic inequality and mass atrocity risk for a sample of 175 nations spanning the period 1946–2019. We find modest support that horizontal economic inequality elevates mass atrocity risk broadly defined, but not genocide risk. We also find that vertical income inequality measures do not usually elevate mass atrocity or genocide risk.

Our research question is: Do state-sponsored genocides and mass atrocities disrupt trade? In the "conflict disrupts trade" literature there is substantial research on how interstate and intrastate conflict and terrorism affect trade, but very little research on the possible trade disruption effects of genocides and mass atrocities. Our work helps fill this research gap. We bring a suite of estimation methodologies and robustness checks to the question for a pooled sample of 175 countries for the time period 1970–2017. We also test for trade disruption individually for 26 countries that experienced genocide or mass atrocity. Unlike much of the "conflict disrupts trade" literature, we find little empirical support that genocide disrupts trade and at best weak evidence that mass atrocity disrupts trade. Our results have important implications for atrocity prevention policy; when potential atrocity architects evaluate the expected benefits and costs of carrying out atrocity, it seems that, in most cases, they need not worry about trade disruption costs. Our results also matter for empirical research on risk factors for genocides and mass atrocities, particularly for studies that hypothesize risk reduction properties associated with trade.