What Do We Know about Natural Resources and Civil War?
What Do We Know about Natural Resources and Civil War?
复制标题
我们对自然资源和内战了解多少？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2004
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Michael L. Ross
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Michael L. Ross
自20世纪90年代末以来，出现了大量关于自然资源和内战的研究。本文回顾了最近14项跨国经济计量研究，以及许多定性研究，这些研究揭示了自然资源与内战之间的关系。它表明，这些因素合在一起意味着四个潜在的问题：首先，石油增加了冲突的可能性，特别是分离主义冲突;第二，宝石和毒品等“可掠夺”的商品并没有使冲突更有可能开始，但它们往往延长现有的冲突;第三，法律的农业商品和内战之间没有明显的联系;最后，初级商品-一个包括石油和农产品的广泛类别-与内战爆发之间的关联并不强。第一部分讨论了这四个方面的证据，并审查了一些理论论据，可以解释他们。第二部分表明，计量经济学研究中存在的一些不一致之处可能是由于它们对内战编码和科普缺失数据的方式不同造成的。第三部分强调了资源-内战关系的一些仍然知之甚少的进一步方面。
Since the late 1990s, there has been a flood of research on natural resources and civil war. This article reviews 14 recent cross-national econometric studies, and many qualitative studies, that cast light on the relationship between natural resources and civil war. It suggests that collectively they imply four underlying regularities: first, oil increases the likelihood of conflict, particularly separatist conflict; second, ‘lootable’ commodities like gemstones and drugs do not make conflict more likely to begin, but they tend to lengthen existing conflicts; third, there is no apparent link between legal agricultural commodities and civil war; and finally, the association between primary commodities - a broad category that includes both oil and agricultural goods - and the onset of civil war is not robust. The first section discusses the evidence for these four regularities and examines some theoretical arguments that could explain them. The second section suggests that some of the remaining inconsistencies among the econometric studies may be caused by differences in the ways they code civil wars and cope with missing data. The third section highlights some further aspects of the resource-civil war relationship that remain poorly understood.