@article{ref1,
title="State capacity, regime type, and sustaining the peace after civil war",
journal="International interactions",
year="2017",
author="Mason, T. David and Greig, J. Michael",
volume="43",
number="6",
pages="967-993",
abstract="About half of the nations that experience civil war eventually relapse into renewed conflict within a few years after the original war ends. This observation has motivated a stream of research into the factors that affect the risk of peace failure in the aftermath of civil war. While the outcome of the previous civil war--for example, military victory versus peace agreement--structures the post-war environment in ways that affect the risk of peace failure, the capacity of the post-war state to enact and implement policies that affect the incentives for and capacity of groups to undertake armed violence as a means of advancing their interests should also affect the risks of peace failure. Using Geddes' categories of nondemocratic regime types, we will present a theory of how different regime types have varying capacities to repress and/or implement accommodative policies that affect the risk of peace failure. We test propositions derived from this theory with a series of event history models. Our findings suggest that while peace agreements significantly increase the duration of post-civil war peace, peace agreements involving some types of nondemocratic regimes actually increase the risk of post-civil war peace failure.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0305-0629",
doi="10.1080/03050629.2017.1260012",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050629.2017.1260012"
}