Suchergebnisse

Im populären und politischen Diskurs werden häufig ökonomische Verhältnisse (wie Armut, Ungleichheit oder Wachstumsschwäche) als Gründe für die Entstehung und den Export von Terrorismus aus ärmeren Ländern genannt. Zugleich gelten wirtschaftlich erfolgreiche Staaten häufig als Ziele des Terrorismus. In der vorliegenden Untersuchung wird aufgezeigt, dass und warum die Empirie hierzu widersprüchliche Ergebnisse liefert. Politische, gesellschaftliche und demographische Gegebenheiten korrelieren stark mit ökonomischen Variablen, sodass eine Nichtberücksichtigung entsprechender Variablen in einer systematischen Überschätzung ökonomischer Einflüsse auf den Terrorismus resultieren kann. Weiterhin wird argumentiert, dass auch die Kausalitätsrichtung zwischen ökonomischen Variablen und Terrorismus a priori unklar ist und damit ebenfalls zu Fehlinterpretationen führen kann. ; In the public and political discourse economic conditions (such as poverty, inequality and low growth rates) are often named as causal factors for the genesis and export of terrorism from poor countries. At the same time, economically successful countries are considered as the prime targets of terrorism. In this paper we show that empirical estimates do not provide unambiguous results. Political, social and demographic conditions tend to correlate strongly with economic factors. Ignoring these variables may therefore result in a systematic overestimation of the role of economic variables. In addition, we argue that the direction of causality between economic conditions and terrorism is a priori unclear. This may also lead to an incorrect interpretation of the economy-terrorism nexus.

Abstract
How does anti-American terrorism in recipient countries respond to US military aid? Does aid protect United States interests abroad or does it have unintended consequences for US security? To answer these questions, we estimate the effect of US military aid on anti-American terrorism in recipient countries for a sample of 174 countries between 1968 and 2018. We find that higher levels of aid especially for military financing and education are associated with a higher likelihood of anti-American terrorism in aid-receiving countries. Examining potential transmission channels, we show that more US military aid correlates with lower military capacity and increases in corruption and exclusionary policies in recipient countries. Our findings are consistent with the argument that military aid aggravates local grievances, creating anti-American resentment and leading to anti-American terrorism. Indeed, we also provide tentative evidence that US military aid is associated with lower public opinion about the United States in recipient countries.

summary
We study the link between temperature and economic development at the sub-national level, employing cross-sectional data from two distinct sources. In contrast to much of the existing cross-country literature on the temperature–income relationship, our setting allows for the inclusion of country-fixed effects. Once we account for country-fixed effects, we do not find a statistically robust relationship between regional temperature and three different measures of regional economic development (per capita GDP, nightlights and gross cell production). We also test whether temperature is non-linearly related to regional income (with hotter regions being potentially particularly prone to adverse effects of temperature on income) but find no systematic evidence in favour of such a relationship. Finally, we examine whether the effect of temperature on economic development is especially pronounced in poorer regions (e.g., due to weaker adaptation). Again, we find no statistically robust link.

We examine the effect of class cleavages on terrorist activity by anarchist and leftist terrorist groups in 99 countries over the 1860–1950 period. We find that higher levels of political exclusion of the poor, our main measure of class conflict, were associated with higher levels of social-revolutionary terrorist activity during this time period. This finding is robust to an instrumental-variable approach and further robustness checks. We argue that class cleavages – in the form of the monopolization of political power by the rich – perpetuated and exacerbated the socio-economic ordeal of the poor, while simultaneously curtailing their means to effect relief in the ordinary political process. Consistent with our expectations, this provoked terrorist violence by groups whose ideological orientation highlighted concerns over class conflict, economic equality and the political participation of the poor. Indeed, our empirical analysis also shows that terrorist groups motivated by other ideologies (e.g. extreme nationalism) did not respond to political exclusion of the poor in the same manner, which further emphasizes the role of ideological inclinations in the terrorist response to class antagonisms.

We examine the effect of class cleavages on terrorist activity by anarchist and leftist terrorist groups in 99 American, Asian and European countries over the 1860-1950 period. We find that higher levels of political exclusion of the poor, our main measure of class conflict, were associated with higher levels of socialrevolutionary terrorist activity during this time period. This finding is robust to an instrumental-variable approach and a battery of additional robustness checks. We argue that class cleavages - in the form of the monopolization of political power by the rich - perpetuated and exacerbated the socio-economic ordeal of the poor, while simultaneously curtailing their means to effect relief in the ordinary political process. Consistent with our expectations, this provoked terrorist violence by groups whose ideological orientation highlighted concerns over class conflict, economic equality and the political participation of the poor. Indeed, our empirical analysis also shows that terrorist groups motivated by other ideologies (e.g. extreme nationalism) did not respond to political exclusion of the poor in the same manner, which further emphasizes the role of ideological inclinations in the terrorist response to class antagonisms.

We examine the effect of class cleavages on terrorist activity by anarchist and leftist terrorist groups in 99 American, Asian and European countries over the 1860-1950 period. We find that higher levels of political exclusion of the poor, our main measure of class conflict, were associated with higher levels of social-revolutionary terrorist activity during this time period. This finding is robust to an instrumental-variable approach and a battery of additional robustness checks. We argue that class cleavages – in the form of the monopolization of political power by the rich – perpetuated and exacerbated the socio-economic ordeal of the poor, while simultaneously curtailing their means to effect relief in the ordinary political process. Consistent with our expectations, this provoked terrorist violence by groups whose ideological orientation highlighted concerns over class conflict, economic equality and the political participation of the poor. Indeed, our empirical analysis also shows that terrorist groups motivated by other ideologies (e.g. extreme nationalism) did not respond to political exclusion of the poor in the same manner, which further emphasizes the role of ideological inclinations in the terrorist response to class antagonisms.

We examine the effect of class cleavages on terrorist activity by anarchist and leftist terrorist groups in 99 countries over the 1860–1950 period. We find that higher levels of political exclusion of the poor, our main measure of class conflict, were associated with higher levels of social-revolutionary terrorist activity during this time period. This finding is robust to an instrumental-variable approach and further robustness checks. We argue that class cleavages – in the form of the monopolization of political power by the rich – perpetuated and exacerbated the socio-economic ordeal of the poor, while simultaneously curtailing their means to effect relief in the ordinary political process. Consistent with our expectations, this provoked terrorist violence by groups whose ideological orientation highlighted concerns over class conflict, economic equality and the political participation of the poor. Indeed, our empirical analysis also shows that terrorist groups motivated by other ideologies (e.g. extreme nationalism) did not respond to political exclusion of the poor in the same manner, which further emphasizes the role of ideological inclinations in the terrorist response to class antagonisms.