CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 65Natural Resources and Economic DevelopmentPolitical Conflict and GovernanceExtractivism and Socioeconomic Issues

No extraction without representation: The ethno-regional oil curse and secessionist conflict

Hunziker, Philipp, Cederman, Lars-Erik·2017·Journal of Peace Research
DOI 10.1177/0022343316687365
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A large body of literature claims that oil production increases the risk of civil war. However, a growing number of skeptics argue that the oil–conflict link is not causal, but merely an artifact of flawed research designs. This article re-evaluates whether – and where – oil causes conflict by employing a novel identification strategy based on the geological determinants of hydrocarbon reserves. We employ geospatial data on the location of sedimentary basins as a new spatially disaggregated instrument for petroleum production. Combined with newly collected data on oil field locations, this approach allows investigating the causal effect of oil on conflict at the national and subnational levels. Contrary to the recent criticism, we find that previous work has underestimated the magnitude of the conflict-inducing effect of oil production. Our results indicate that oil has a large and robust effect on the likelihood of secessionist conflict, especially if it is produced in populated areas. In contrast, oil production does not appear to be linked to center-seeking civil wars. Moreover, we find considerable evidence in favor of an ethno-regional explanation of this link. Oil production significantly increases the risk of armed secessionism if it occurs in the settlement areas of ethnic minorities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0022343316687365

Cites

48 of 48 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?

  • The link between oil and civil war operates primarily through an ethnoregional mechanism.

    “recent studies demonstrate that the link between oil and civil war operates primarily through an ethnoregional mechanism (Hunziker and Cederman 2017, cf. Ross 2015).”

    From Dynamics and Logics of Civil War (2017) · cites this paper as Hunziker and Cederman 2017

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 50 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hunziker, P., & Cederman, L.-E.
Affiliations
  • Northeastern University (US)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Hunziker, Philipp
ORCID
Cederman, Lars-Erik
Venue
Journal of Peace Research
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2017-05-01
Volume
54
Issue
3
Pages
365-381
ISSN
  • 0022-3433 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-3578
DOI
10.1177/0022343316687365
OpenAlex
W2611127081
Cited by
65
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
26.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Peace Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Natural Resources and Economic Development
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Extractivism and Socioeconomic Issues
Keywords
oil curse, secessionist conflicts, civil war, oil production, sedimentary basins, hydrocarbon reserves, ethnic minorities, subnational conflict

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