Economic Development, Inequality, War and State Violence
WAYNE E. NAFZIGER AND JUHA AUVINEN
Andrea Bittnerová, 397711

Introduction I
uAim: how various factors within the political economy lead to humanitarian emergencies
characterized by war, state violence, and refugee displacement
u
uAreas of interest:
uStagnation and decline in incomes
uIncome inequality
uCompetition for natural resources
uOther factors
uEthnicity
u

Introduction II
uConcepts:
uEconomic stagnation
uPolitical decay
uDeadly political violence
u
uEconomic and political factors => WAR => adverse effect on economic growth and political
development
u
u

Introduction III
uEconomic factors
uStagnation and decline in real GDP
uHigh income inequality
uHigh ratio of military expenditures to national income
uTradition of violent conflict
u
uPolitical factors
uPredatory rule
uAuthoritarianism
uState decay and collapse
u

Stagnation and decline in incomes I
uLow and middle-income countries
uWeak or failing
uStagnation in real GDP (+trade deficit and growing external debt)
uBreakdown in law and public services
uInequality
uVertical (class)
uHorizontal (regional or communal)
u
u
u
u

Stagnation and decline in incomes II
urelative deprivation =>
usocial discontent =>
umotivation for collective violence
uWAR AND VIOLENCE
u=>social disruption
u=>political instability
u=>undermining economic activity
u=>spreading hunger and disease
u=>fuelling refugee flows
u

Stagnation and decline in incomes III
uOnly a portion of violence results from insurgent action
uPolicies of governing elites are at the root of most humanitarian emergencies
uE. g. direct violence or withholding food
uCase study: Africa
uNegative per capita growth in the 1970s and 1980s
uVirtual stagnation in the 1990s
u=>intrastate political conflict and humanitarian emergencies
u=>highest death rates from wars
u
u

Income inequality
uPolicies of predatory and authoritarian rules
uSevere social tensions may even arise under conditions of positive growth
uInfluence:
uHistorical legacies of discrimination (colonialism)
uDistributing land and other assets
uTaxation
uBenefits of public expenditure
uRegional and ethnic economic competition (education and employment differentials)

Competition for natural resources
uPossession of primary commodities (especially exports – agricultural, mineral) increases the
occurrence and duration of civil war uThe higher the per capita availability…of mineral wealth, the
greater the incidence of conflict uRulers and warlords use exclusive contracts with foreign firms
for diamonds and other minerals to regularize sources of revenue uIn weak or failed state
=>warlords and traders more likely to profit from violence and war

Oher factors
uMilitary centrality
uA strong military can overthrow either a democratic or authoritarian regime =>political
instability, humanitarian crises
uPowerful armed forces = constant threat to civilian regimes
uRegimes afraid to cut back military spending
uConflict tradition is an indicator of the legitimacy of political violence!
u
uStrengthen military to save off threats from the opposition =>heavy socioeconomic risks on the
population =>further discontent => risk of rebellion

Ethnicity
uEthnicity is artificial
uIn many instances, ethnic antagonism emerges during a conflict rather than being the cause of the
conflict! uEthnic grievance is actively manufactured by the rebel organizations as a necessary way
of motivating its forces u=>where conflicts occur in ethnically diverse societies, they will look
and sound as though they were caused by ethnic hatreds u=>the parties to the conflict have used the
discourse of group hatred to build fighting organizations

Conclusion I
uThird World states, together with the international community, must strengthen and restructure the
political economy of poor and weak states
uEconomic and political changes needed:
uDevelopment of a legal system
uEnhanced financial institutions
uIncreased taxing capacity
uGreater investment in basic education and other forms of social capital
uWell-functioning resource and exchange markets
uPrograms to target weaker segments of the population
uDemocratic institutions

Conclusion II
uIndustrialized countries and international agencies bear substantial responsibility for modifying
the international  economic order
uWhat can they do to help?
uShift in the goals and openness of IMF and WB
uRestructuring of the international economic system for trade and capital flows
uOpening of rich countries’ markets
uMore technological transfer by foreign companies
uBilateral donors and international agencies
uGreater coherence of aid programs
uIncreased international funding to food crises

Critical reflection
uOverall understandable, a lot of known and logical information
uA recommendation in the conclusion
uMany case studies
u
uAll the main points mentioned in the conclusion
uMethodology not so clear (research based on 13 case studies 1980-2000    x different authors)