CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 78Political Conflict and GovernanceTransboundary Water Resource ManagementPeacebuilding and International Security

Local conditions of drought-related violence in sub-Saharan Africa

Detges, Adrien·2016·Journal of Peace Research
DOI 10.1177/0022343316651922
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Despite growing concerns about the possible security implications of extreme precipitation shortfalls in vulnerable and politically fragile regions, the particular conditions that make armed violence more or less likely in times of drought remain poorly understood. Using a spatially disaggregated research design and focusing on sub-Saharan Africa, the present analysis assesses how far violent and nonviolent outcomes in the wake of drought can be accounted for by regional differences in the provision of key infrastructures that help coping with drought and preventing violence. The results indicate that civil conflict events in connection with drought are more likely in administrative areas with poorly developed road infrastructures. Drought-related communal violence, on the other hand, is more likely in regions where an important part of the population lacks access to an improved water source. Thus, while the provision of key infrastructures seems to moderate local conflict risks in connection with drought, there are nevertheless important distinctions with regard to different types of infrastructures and forms of armed violence. However, the importance of precipitation shortfalls as a conflict-facilitating factor in sub-Saharan Africa should not be overstated, as the overall contribution of drought measures to predicting violent events is modest in all calculated models.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0022343316651922

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • A drought-conflict nexus only manifests if contextual factors are present, including absence of wells, dams, and irrigation infrastructure, agricultural dependence, ethnic discrimination, pre-existing grievances, and lack of proper state action.

    “However, climate-related precipitation declines are not the most important conflict drivers, and a drought-conflict nexus only manifests if a number of contextual factors are present.”

    From The impacts of climate change on violent conflict risk: a review of causal pathways (2024) · cites this paper as Detges 2016

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 61 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Detges, A.
Affiliations
Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Detges, Adrien
Venue
Journal of Peace Research
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2016-07-21
Volume
53
Issue
5
Pages
696-710
ISSN
  • 0022-3433 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-3578
DOI
10.1177/0022343316651922
OpenAlex
W2502587379
Cited by
78
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5
FWCI
20.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Peace Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Transboundary Water Resource Management
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Peacebuilding and International Security
Keywords
drought, armed conflict, communal violence, infrastructure, road infrastructure, water access, conflict risk, sub-Saharan Africa

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