SavedAdd your journal

Journals / All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace / 2020 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1

A Dynamic Model of the Spread of Intrastate War

Ali FİSUNOĞLU
Pages
23–59
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Consistent with the existing literature, the results of the modelsuggest that refugees are a means to carry the conflict disease from the initialcountry by disturbing economic and social dynamics of the host whereas politicalcapacity acts as the immune system, reducing the likelihood of conflict contagion.The results of the simulations, obtained using theoretical parameters, are mainlyconsistent with the expectations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The spread of intrastate war has gained increasing prominence, especially in therecent past.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This paper studies the spread of intrastate war as a result of anotherintrastate war in a neighboring country using a system dynamics modelingapproach.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Consistent with the existing literature, the results of the modelsuggest that refugees are a means to carry the conflict disease from the initialcountry by disturbing economic and social dynamics of the host whereas politicalcapacity acts as the immune system, reducing the likelihood of conflict contagion.The results of the simulations, obtained using theoretical parameters, are mainlyconsistent with the expectations.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The spread of intrastate war has gained increasing prominence, especially in therecent past. This paper studies the spread of intrastate war as a result of anotherintrastate war in a neighboring country using a system dynamics modelingapproach. The model employed is a modification of the SIR, a spread of diseasemodel taken from epidemiology. Revising the SIR model with relevant politicaland economic variables, the model seeks to explain the mechanism through whichan intrastate conflict is spread from an "infected" country to a "susceptible"country. Although diffusion and contagion of civil wars have been widelyexamined in the past, a dynamic modeling approach has not been adequatelyused in this area. Consistent with the existing literature, the results of the modelsuggest that refugees are a means to carry the conflict disease from the initialcountry by disturbing economic and social dynamics of the host whereas politicalcapacity acts as the immune system, reducing the likelihood of conflict contagion.The results of the simulations, obtained using theoretical parameters, are mainlyconsistent with the expectations.

🔖

Cite This Article

FİSUNOĞLU, A. (2022). A Dynamic Model of the Spread of Intrastate War. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1, 23–59. https://ajindex.com/articles/434976

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Akgul, Oner. “A Bibliographical Study on the Academic Research of Peace and Conflict in Turkey.” Paper presented at the 7th Eurasian Peace Science Meeting, İstanbul, 2018.
  2. Altmann, Michael. “Susceptible-Infected-Removed Epidemic Models with Dynamic Partnerships.” Journal of Mathematical Biology 33, no. 6 (1995): 661–75. Aydin,Mustafa, Fulya Hisaroglu, and Korhan Yazgan. “Türkiye’de uluslararası iliskiler akademisyenleri ve alana yönelik yaklaşımları üzerine bir inceleme: TRIP 2014 sonuçları.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 12, no. 48 (2016): 3–35.
  3. Barro, Robert J., and Xavier Sala-i Martin. “Converge.” Journal of Political Economy 100, no. 2 (1992): 223–51.
  4. Benson, Michelle, and Jacek Kugler. “Power Parity, Democracy and the Severity of Internal Violence.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 42, no. 2 (1998): 196–209.
  5. Bosker, Maarten, and Joppe de Ree. “Ethnicity and the Spread of Civil War.” Journal of Development Economics 108 (2014): 206–21.
  6. Braithwaite, Alex. “Location, Location, Location… Identifying Hot spots of International Conflict.” International Interactions 31, no. 3 (2007): 251–73.
  7. Braithwaite, Alex. “Resisting Infection: How State Capacity Conditions Conflict Contagion.” Journal of Peace Research 47, no. 3 (2010): 311–19.
  8. Brannan, James R., and William E. Boyce. Differential Equations: An Introduction to Modern Methods and Applications. 3rd ed. New York: Wiley, 2015.
  9. Buhaug, Halvard, and Kristian Skrede Gleditsch. “Contagion or Confusion? Why Conflicts Cluster in Space.” International Studies Quarterly 52, no. 2 (2008): 215–33.
  10. Cederman, Lars–Erik, Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, and Halvard Buhaug. Inequality, Grievances, and Civil War. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
  11. Danneman, Nathan, and Emily Hencken Ritter. “Contagious Rebellion and Preemptive Repression.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 58, no. 2 (2014): 254–79.
  12. Fearon, James D. “Commitment Problems and the Spread of Ethnic Conflict.” In The International Spread of Ethnic Conflict: Fear, Diffusion, and Escalation, edited by David A. Lake and Donald S. Rothchild, 107–26. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998.
  13. Fearon, James D., and David D. Laitin. “Ethnicity, Insurgency and Civil War.” The American Political Science Review 97, no. 1 (2003): 75–90.
  14. Feenstra, Robert C., Robert Inklaar and Marcel P. Timmer. “The Next Generation of the Penn World Table.” American Economic Review 105, no. 10 (2015): 3150–82.
  15. Forsberg, Erika. “Diffusion in the Study of Civil Wars: A Cautionary Tale.” Internatio