Floods, communal conflict and the role of local state institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa
Open accessAbstract
Does the occurrence of flood disaster increase the risk of communal conflict and if so, does trust in state political institutions mitigate the adverse effect? This study addresses these questions by studying the intervening effect of trust in local governmental institutions at a sub-national level. The effect of flood disasters on the risk of communal violence is expected to be contingent on peoples’ trust that local political structures are able to address potential disputes between groups. Violent conflicts, in that sense, are neither inevitable nor directly determined by the occurrence of disasters. They largely depend on the context of a given society and political response to these external shocks. To test this expectation, the study uses survey data on trust in local state institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa from the Afrobarometer (2005–2018), combined with geo-referenced communal conflict and flood data. In line with theoretical expectations, results suggest that flood disasters are associated with communal violence only for administrative districts that are governed by distrusted local state institutions. Conversely, flood disasters tend to be negatively associated with the risk of communal clashes in the presence of highly trusted local government councils and (especially) trusted judicial courts. Changing model specifications and estimation techniques produces similar results. An out-of-sample cross-validation also shows that accounting for political variables, in addition to flood disasters, improves the predictive performance of the model.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is ample evidence of protests and riots occurring after governments mishandling disaster preparation and relief.
“There is also ample evidence of protests and riots occurring after governments mishandling disaster preparation and relief (Ide et al 2021, Petrova 2022).”
From The impacts of climate change on violent conflict risk: a review of causal pathways (2024) · cites this paper as Petrova 2022
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 94 · Cited by 39
- Authors
- Petrova, K.
- Affiliations
- Uppsala University (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Petrova, Kristina
- ORCID
- Petrova, Kristina
- Venue
- Political Geography
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-01
- Volume
- 92
- Pages
- 102511
- ISSN
- 0962-6298 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3201882950
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 94
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 7.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Political Geography (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Uppsala University Publications (Uppsala University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas
- Vetenskapsrådet (2016-06389)
- Styrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Peacebuilding and International Security
- Keywords
- floods, community conflict, communal violence, trust in local government, courts, disaster risk, external shocks, sub-Saharan Africa, local government councils, public trust in government
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review