Suchergebnisse

The article of record as published may be found at https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2017.1405235 ; The article of record as published may be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2017.1394309 ; This paper examines the impact of civil war on military expenditure. We employ two measures of military expenditure: the share of military expenditure in general government expenditure and the logarithm of military expenditures. We would reasonably expect a priori that military expenditure as a share of general government expenditure increases during a civil war and that such increases would taper off over the duration of a civil war. We also explore whether the termination of a civil war induces a decline in the share of military expenditure as a share of the general government expenditure in the short-run. We find evidence the of share of military expenditure increases during a civil war and falls in the year succeeding the end of a civil war, and, in particular, if a war ends in a peace treaty. The level of military expenditures, however, rises during civil wars and does not appear to decline in the short-term after the end of a civil war.

The article of record may be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2014.1000529 ; This article examines the impact of civil war on democratization, particu- larly focusing on whether civil war provides an opportunity for institu- tional reform. We investigate the impact of war termination in general, along with prolonged violence, rebel victory and international interven- tion on democratization. Using an unbalanced panel data set of 96 coun- tries covering a 34-year period, our analysis suggests that civil war lowers democratization in the succeeding period. Our findings also suggest that United Nations intervention increases democratization, as do wars ending in stalemates. However, wars ending in rebel victories seem to reduce democratization. These findings appear robust to conditioning, different instrument sets, modelling techniques and the measurement of democracy.

Final Manuscript copy. ; The article of record as published may be located at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2014.1000529 ; Dataset is included. ; This paper examines the impact of civil war on democratization, particularly focussing on whether civil war provides an opportunity for institutional reform. We investigate the impact of war termination in general, along with prolonged violence, rebel victory, and international intervention on democratization. Using an unbalanced panel data set of 96 countries covering a 34-year period, our analysis suggests that civil war lowers democratization in the succeeding period. Our findings also suggest that United Nations intervention increases democratization, as do wars ending in stalemates. However, wars ending in rebel victories seem to reduce democratization. These findings appear robust to conditioning, different instrument sets, modelling techniques, and the measurement of democracy.

Draft 6/4/2013 ; This paper examines the impact of civil war on democracy. Drawing from the literature on war and democracy, we investigate the impact of prolonged violence, war termination, rebel victory, and international intervention on democratization. Using an unbalanced panel data set of 96 countries covering a 34-year period, our analysis suggests that civil war lowers democratization in the succeeding period. Our findings suggest that United Nations intervention increases democratization, as do wars ending in stalemates. However, wars ending in rebel victories seem to reduce democracy. These findings appear robust to conditioning, different instrument sets, and the measurement of democracy.

The article of record as published may be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2863615 ; Exploiting a database of administrative records for 300,000 members of the US Armed Forces, we find evidence of severe bias in the selection of personnel deployed to serve in Afghanistan and Iraq. Of most concern, we find that African American were far less likely than other service members to have been deployed to serve in combat zones, and were less likely to face intense combat if deployed.

Preprint ; The recent global transition to a more diffuse distribution of economic power points to a shift in the balance of global growth from rich to low- and middle- income economies. Colombia may be a prime example as its recent rapid per capita income growth of 10.2% on average since 1999 points to the potential for Colombia's convergence to the ranks of rich countries. However, Colombia's economic growth has been constrained by over 40 years of a costly and ineffective drug war policy that has failed. The illicit activity of drug production and trafficking grosses approximately $10-$20 billion a year; it does not enter into the GDP accounting. In addition, the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) has stifled Colombia's drive towards economic prosperity. Barring the social and political impasse, the economy would flourish.

The article of record as published may be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3237059 ; Our research examines the effect of combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan on casualties. We use restricted data from the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) and Social Security Administration (SSA) to construct a panel of all U.S. Active Duty service members having served at some point during the years 2001-2012. Casualties disproportionately occur at higher rates among (i) young, white, males (ii) enlisted personnel (iii) less educated personnel (iv) and those in combat job types. Our estimates indicate that overall U.S. military personnel who deployed in an individual year to Iraq or Afghanistan had a 48 per 100,000 higher probability of death than non-deployed military personnel who remained stateside. The increased fatal injury risk of deployed U.S. military personnel is 15 times higher than the national average civilian workplace fatality rate, but roughly equal to the fatal injury risk faced in some of the most dangerous civilian occupations. Our estimates suggest a compensating wage differential equal to $808 per month would be appropriate, in comparison to the current status quo of $225 per month in danger pay (and additional tax benefits) provided to U.S. military personnel deployed into combat zones. The additional compensation should also be adjusted by service or job type.