Collaborative Research: The Multistage Path to Peace in Civil Conflicts

国内冲突对国际社会极为重要，因为这些冲突的后果往往跨越国家边界，例如通过难民流和武器流动。然而，我们对内战中的和平谈判进程知之甚少。该项目的目标是更好地了解谈判和平协定以结束国内冲突的进程。为此，报告分析了和平进程的多个阶段：启动(谈判提议)、谈判前(同意谈判)、谈判(达成协议)和执行(结束冲突)。了解每个阶段很重要，因为在整个和平进程中往往有多个开始和结束。鉴于世界各地有这么多人因国内冲突而丧生和流离失所，了解这一多阶段进程的特殊性，以及国际行为体的行动如何能够促进(或实际上可能阻碍)这一进程，对国际和平与安全至关重要。这一项目研究和平进程的复杂性，可以使国际行为者更有效地努力结束国内冲突。虽然对国内冲突的结果以及有时结束冲突的和平协定的特点进行了几项研究，但对这一进程本身缺乏了解：交战各方何时和为什么将选择通过其多个阶段向前推进，以及他们何时和为什么可能退出这一进程。为了填补这一空白，主要调查人员正在利用主要和次要文件，创建关于1945-2016年国内冲突中和平谈判的全面数据集。主要来源包括联合国和其他国际组织的文件以及签署的和平协议。第二资料来源包括对世界各地国内冲突的历史描述。数据集对谈判过程的每个阶段(谈判、协议和实施)进行编码。如果在任何阶段发生崩溃，数据集包括关于哪一方(政府或反叛团体)拒绝在和平进程中向前推进(拒绝谈判、退出谈判或未能执行协议)的详细信息。还将收集第三方行动，如调解或军事、经济或外交干预。这一新的数据集将使主要调查员能够对和平进程在各种国内冲突中展开时的情况以及在不同阶段取得成功或失败的情况进行详细、定量的调查。首席调查员还将通过各种统计方法处理非随机挑选交战方进入和平进程后期阶段的问题。调查结果阐明了政府和反叛组织如何在国内冲突中成功引导和平进程，以及第三方行为者在促进这一进程中发挥了什么作用。这一裁决反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力优势和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Civil conflicts are critically important to the international community due to the fact that the consequences of those conflicts often spill across state borders, such as through refugee flows and weapons movements. Yet we understand relatively little about the process of negotiating peace in civil wars. The goal of this project is to better understand the process of negotiating peace agreements to end civil conflicts. To that end, it analyzes the multiple stages of the peace process: initiation (negotiation offers), pre-bargaining (agreeing to negotiate), negotiations (reaching an agreement), and implementation (ending the conflict). Understanding each stage is important because there are often multiple starts and stops throughout the peace process. With so many killed and displaced by civil conflicts around the world, understanding the particularities of this multi-stage process, and how the actions of international actors can facilitate (or may actually hamper) the process, is of critical importance for international peace and security. This project studies the complexities of the peace process, can enable international actors to be more effective in their efforts to end civil conflicts. While there are several studies on the outcomes of civil conflicts, as well as characteristics of the peace agreements that sometimes end them, there is a dearth of knowledge about the process itself: when and why warring parties will choose to move forward through its multiple stages and when and why they might withdraw from the process. To fill this gap, the principle investigators are drawing on primary and secondary documentation to create a comprehensive dataset on peace negotiations in civil conflicts from 1945-2016. Primary sources include UN and other international organization documents and signed peace agreements. Secondary sources include historical accounts of civil conflicts around the world. The dataset codes each stage of the negotiation process (negotiation, agreement, and implementation). If a breakdown occurred at any stage, the dataset includes detailed information on which of the parties (government or rebel group) refused to move forward in the peace process (refused to negotiate, walked away from negotiations, or failed to implement the agreement). Third-party actions such as mediation or military, economic, or diplomatic intervention will also be collected. This new dataset will allow the principle investigators to conduct a detailed, quantitative investigation of the peace process as it played out across a wide variety of civil conflicts, and the conditions under which successes or breakdowns occurred at the various stages. The principal investigators will also address the non-random selection of belligerents into later stages of the peace process through a variety of statistical methods. The findings illuminate how governments and rebel groups can navigate the peace process in civil conflicts successfully and what role third party actors play in facilitating that process.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.