Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
A Comparative Analysis of One-Sided Violence and Civil War Peace Agreement Implementation Cover

A Comparative Analysis of One-Sided Violence and Civil War Peace Agreement Implementation

By:   
Open Access
|May 2020

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Annualized average CPA implementation rate.

Figure 2

One-sided violence in the post-CPA periods.

Table 1

Descriptive statistics.

VariableObs.MeanStd. Dev.Min.Max.
CPA Implementation Rate32363.4722.142.22100
CPA Implementation Rate t–128862.6021.962.22100
All Actor One-Sided Violence32374.73287.2703426
All Actor One-Sided violence t–128877.91298.2403426
One-Sided Violence State32320.96203.0103426
One-Sided Violence State t–128822.30214.6803426
One-Sided Violence Rebels32322.9997.100980
One-Sided Violence Rebels t–128822.0887.050980
One-Sided Violence Non-State Actors32330.78158.7802127
One-Sided Violence Non-State Actors t–128833.53167.3202127
Conflict Type t–12880.460.5001
Post-Accord Direct Violence t–1288162.25436.6803974
Polity2 t–12963.304.99–710
GDP Growth Rate t–12744.959.20–50.2588.96
Dispute Resolution Mechanism (0–3) t–12881.361.3903
Power-sharing Government (0–3) t–12881.081.3003
Verification Mechanism (0–3) t–12881.991.3003
Donor Support (0–3) t–12881.261.3303
United Nations Peacekeeping (0–3) t–12880.951.3703
Table 2

Effect of one-sided violence on CPA implementation.

(1)(2)(3)(4)
All actorsOther non-stateRebelState
One-Sided Violence–0.106*–0.334*–0.376*–0.158*
(0.038)  (0.169)  (0.180)  (0.078)  
Post-Accord Direct Violence t–10.005  0.016  0.031*–0.011  
(0.007)  (0.010)  (0.013)  (0.012)  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism (0–3) t–18.343  7.200  9.386  8.260  
(6.743)  (9.305)  (5.998)  (8.651)  
Power-sharing Government (0–3) t–10.215  –10.082  –0.637  5.309  
(4.186)  (7.680)  (3.706)  (5.994)  
Verification Mechanism (0–3) t–112.514*22.771*17.868*5.251  
(6.297)  (10.234)  (6.214)  (8.754)  
Donor Support (0–3) t–110.406*10.642*5.815*11.348*
(3.368)  (4.684)  (3.126)  (4.477)  
United Nations Peacekeeping (03) t–13.483  11.279  17.977*–5.748  
(7.663)  (11.050)  (9.254)  (11.107)  
Constant19.498  3.689  –2.757  34.583  
(14.987)  (21.390)  (15.758)  (21.374)  
Observations256  256  256  256  
Number of Panels33  33  33  33  
Wald chi21542.29  810.18  1970.13  936.07  
Prob>chi20.000  0.000  0.000  0.000  
Overall R20.254  0. 117  0.219  0.142  
VIF2.08  2.06  2.18  2.06  
Sargan-Hansen statistic (p-value)0.691  0.953  0.131  0.878  

[i] Two tail tests, * p < .05. One-sided violence is an instrumented variable. Standard errors are in parentheses.

Figure 3

Marginal effects with 95% confidence interval.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/sta.774 | Journal eISSN: 2165-2627
Language: English
Page range: 11 - 11
Submitted on: Jan 28, 2020
Accepted on: Apr 26, 2020
Published on: May 29, 2020
Published by: Department of Peace Studies and International Development, University of Bradford
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2020 Madhav Joshi, published by Department of Peace Studies and International Development, University of Bradford
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.