Political Research Quarterly · 2016 · 14 citations · 35 references
Social SciencesConflict StudiesPolitical ScienceConflict ResolutionNegotiationPeacebuildingBargaining TheoryNegotiation Decision MakingNegotiation OutcomesPeace NegotiationPeace SettlementsSettlement NegotiationCohesionConcession DynamicsConflict BargainingConsensusGrant AutonomyProbit RegressionRebel Group Organization
What increases warring parties’ ability to reach a negotiated settlement? In this study, I answer this question by examining the political environment a government and rebel group leadership internally encounter during a peace process. I disaggregate in-group dynamics of governments and rebels into their respective political elements that either grant autonomy or create constraints for resolution, namely, their constituencies and elites. I argue that willingness to end fighting does not always translate into the ability to make concessions. Although battlefield-related indicators may increase the likelihood of negotiations, it is internal cohesion that increases combatants’ credibility as bargaining partners and improves the likelihood of settlement. To test these arguments, I introduce original data on negotiations for internal conflict-dyad-years between 1980 and 2005. Findings using two-stage censored probit models demonstrate that war-weariness increases willingness for negotiations whereas internal consensus creates opportunity for settlement.
35
Leo Kuper, Donald L. Horowitz · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · 1986 · 4.9K citations
Rationalist explanations for war
James D. Fearon · International Organization · 1995 · 4K citations
Ethnic and Cultural Diversity by Country*
James D. Fearon · Journal of Economic Growth · 2003 · 1.8K citations