Coming Together: Power-Sharing and the Durability of Negotiated Peace Settlements

Martin, Philip

doi:10.1080/13698249.2013.842747

Cited by 27 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many studies assess "peace" based on the length that a peace agreement remains in force (Salehyan and Thyne 2012: 199). Martin (2013), for example, uses a dependent variable labeled 'Peace Duration', which measures the number of months from the signing of the agreement until its failure. The main contribution of this research is the development of a new index that goes beyond the absence of active conflict (or negative peace).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of Durable Peace: The Role of Justice in Negotiating Civil War Termination

Wagner

Druckman

2016

Group Decis Negot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attaining durable peace after a civil war has become a major challenge, as many negotiated settlements relapse into violence. How can civil war negotiations be conducted and peace agreements formulated so as to contribute to lasting, durable peace? Previous research has focused on the durability of peace agreements, measured as the absence of violence. This study develops an index to measure durable peace for a period of 8 years after the agreement had been reached, and evaluates the new measure using an existing data set. We ask whether impacts on durable peace are Support for this study was provided by a Swedish Research Council Grant [C0114201; Registration Number 421-2012-1142] for a research Project titled "From peace negotiations to durable peace: The multiple roles of justice." Special thanks go to Sayra van den Berg for her diligent assistance with the coding and to the many colleagues who provided helpful advice on earlier drafts including those who heard our presentations at the International Studies Association (New Orleans, March 2015) and at the International Association for Conflict Management (Clearwater, Florida, June 2015). Electronic supplementary material

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of Durable Peace: The Role of Justice in Negotiating Civil War Termination

Wagner

Druckman

2016

Group Decis Negot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much of the literature on power sharing pays tribute to Lijphart′s (, ) notion of consociationalism, which responded to scholars who questioned the viability of democracy and stability in “plural societies” (e.g., Dahl ; Rabushka and Shepsle ). Lijphart argued that the combination of a grand coalition, mutual veto rights, segmental autonomy, and proportionality should allow for the peaceful coexistence of distinct social groups (see, most recently, Martin )…”

Section: The Literature On Power Sharing and Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research on civil war onset tends to focus on the impact of electoral rules, parliamentary or presidential regimes, and the design of federal structures (e.g., Cohen ; Reynal‐Querol ; Roeder ; Schneider and Wiesehomeier ; Selway and Templeman ). In contrast, studies of conflict recurrence spearheaded by Hartzell and Hoddie () usually examine the individual or joint effects of a mix of political, military, and territorial power‐sharing provisions in peace agreements (see Hartzell and Hoddie ; Jarstad ; Jarstad and Nilsson ; Martin ; Mattes and Savun ; Mehler ; Mukherjee ; Walter ). Partly due to different operationalizations of power sharing, scholars have yet to reach a consensus on its actual effects.…”

Section: The Literature On Power Sharing and Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power Sharing: Institutions, Behavior, and Peace

Bormann

Cederman

Gates

et al. 2018

American J Political Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grievances that derive from the unequal treatment of ethnic groups are a key motivation for civil war. Ethnic power sharing should therefore reduce the risk of internal conflict. Yet conflict researchers disagree on whether formal powersharing institutions effectively prevent large-scale violence. We can improve our understanding of the effect of power-sharing institutions by analyzing the mechanisms under which they operate. To this effect, we compare the direct effect of formal power-sharing institutions on peace with their indirect effect through power-sharing behavior. Combining data on inclusive and territorially dispersive institutions with information on power-sharing behavior, we empirically assess this relationship on a global scale. Our causal mediation analysis reveals that formal power-sharing institutions affect the probability of ethnic conflict onset mostly through power-sharing behavior that these institutions induce.

show abstract

“…It goes against the political impulse to form minimum-winning coalitions, requiring an expanded win-set. It sometimes requires politicians to govern with those they consider to be murderers, making cooperation unpalatable (Martin 2013). Yet in contexts where there are 'more than one people with reasonable claims' (O'Leary 2005b:xxi), power-sharing serves as the best hope for stability, democracy, and inclusion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Power‐Sharing Performance: A Lifecycle Approach

McCulloch

McEvoy

2020

Studies Ethnicity & National

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Power-sharing is a leading institutional strategy for the management of ethnic conflict. Yet its performance is uneven. It often delivers a peace dividend: stopping violence, avoiding minority exclusion, and reducing group-based insecurity. Its decision-making efficiency and governance record, however, have weaker evaluations. We conceptualize 'the power-sharing lifecycle' to better understand the reasons for this uneven record. Exploring power-sharing performance through a lifecycle lens helps illuminate the experiences ofand potential forpower-sharing in the post-uprisings Arab world and beyond. The Power-Sharing Lifecycle Power-sharing is a leading institutional strategy for the management of ethnic conflict. Yet its performance is uneven. It often delivers a peace dividend: stopping violence, avoiding minority exclusion, and reducing group-based insecurity. Its decision-making efficiency and governance record, however, have weaker evaluations. Power-sharing thus works in some places on some issues at some times but it does not work everywhere all of the time (McGarry 2020). We conceptualize 'the power-sharing lifecycle' to better understand the reasons for this uneven record. Exploring power-sharing performance through a lifecycle lens helps illuminate the experiences ofand potential forpower-sharing in the post-uprisings Arab world and beyond.

show abstract

Coming Together: Power-Sharing and the Durability of Negotiated Peace Settlements

Cited by 27 publications

References 0 publications

Drivers of Durable Peace: The Role of Justice in Negotiating Civil War Termination

Drivers of Durable Peace: The Role of Justice in Negotiating Civil War Termination

Power Sharing: Institutions, Behavior, and Peace

Understanding Power‐Sharing Performance: A Lifecycle Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About