No abstract

We know little about the general geographic allocation of development projects in post-conflict regions, and specifically of gender-focused projects. In this study, we explore whether donor agencies prefer to work in “safe” places or dare to operate in conflict-affected zones. Using Colombia as a case study, we combine data on battle deaths from the UCDP Georeferenced Event Dataset (1994–2004) with georeferenced information on the location of development projects from the Colombia AIMS dataset (2006–2013) and manually geocode data for German-funded development projects (2012–2018) with gender as a significant objective. Using count models (N = 1120), we find a statistically strong and positive relationship: an increase in battle deaths increases the number of development projects (with and without gender-focus) in a municipality. Interaction models further reveal an amplification of this relationship for regions with a large proportion of female-headed households, as well as a high number of formally employed and literate women. A context-sensitive interpretation of our findings suggests that (1) development projects in general, and German-funded gender-focused projects in particular, dare to operate in post-conflict settings; (2) women may play an active role as community leaders and mobilizers to influence the allocation of development programs to certain regions.

Quantitative research into the causes of violent intrastate conflicts has recently shifted away from classical country-year-level regression analyses. When taking steps in new directions, researchers should be mindful of the extent and quality, and indeed of the limitations, of the knowledge accumulated by the scholarly endeavors in the booming period between 2000 and 2015. This article traces trends and patterns regarding the use of explanatory variables and datasets in ninety-four individual studies. It synthesizes findings with regard to 107 explanatory concepts. Drawing on the sign test, the analysis identifies a set of consensus variables likely to determine the onset and incidence of violent intrastate conflict. These factors capture robust covariations and lend themselves as elements of a “standard model specification.” Turning to causal mechanisms, the article discusses why variables that turn out to be significant in statistical analyses should have any effect. This is completed by a substantial discussion of the remaining theoretical problems and of methodological prospects that promise paths for future research.

No abstract