The Impact of Civil War Settlements on Citizens’ Attitudes and Agency

Session Submission Type: Full Paper Panel

Session Description

Much of what we know about peace agreements in civil wars centers on the interests of elite actors and the groups that they lead. In contrast, we know very little about the factors that shape citizen’s perceptions of the settlement, the manner in which citizens engage with these factors, and how citizens’ perceptions of the terms of a peace agreement and of its outcomes affect the subsequent quality of the peace. For instance, how do citizens assess power-sharing arrangements against the background of their ethnic affiliations and the grievances of their ethnic groups? How do individuals judge economic redistribution in the aftermath of a negotiated settlement to violent conflict? And under which conditions do citizens regain political trust in the elites and institutions of a post-conflict country?

Knowledge regarding the issue of citizens’ role in and perception of civil war settlements and peace processes is important since, arguably, the, acquiescence of at least some part of the citizenry to a peace agreement is necessary for a post-civil war peace to take hold. Accordingly, the contributors to this panel seek to fill a gap in our understanding of the process of civil war termination by exploring citizens’ perceptions of and agency within peace agreements after civil war.

The first paper by Carey et al., for example, uses an original survey conducted in Sri Lanka to explore citizens’ perceptions of personal freedoms, feelings of security, and the overall quality of peace ten years after the end of the civil war. The panel’s second paper by Hartzell and Hoddie also uses new survey data in order to examine the long-term effects of autonomy arrangements on public good delivery and political trust among members of aggrieved groups in the Mindanao region of the Philippines. The third paper by Kaplan and Young analyzes how and why reassurances through agreements shape citizens’ willingness to return home after internal displacement, based on experimental results from novel survey data from Colombia. Finally, Haass and Ottmann investigate how citizens’ involvement in wartime institutions shape war-to-democracy transitions mandated by peace agreements. Their analysis rests on quantitative and qualitative data collected in the Indonesian province of Aceh.

Sub Unit

• DIVISION 21: Conflict Processes

Individual Presentations

• Shades of Peace: Perceptions of Security in Sri Lanka - Sabine C. Carey, University of Mannheim; Belen Gonzalez, University of Mannheim; Christian Gläßel, University Mannheim

• Building Trust After Civil War: Settlements and the Provision of Political Goods - Caroline A. Hartzell, Gettysburg College; Matthew Hoddie, Towson University

• Coming Home: Forced Displacement and Return after Armed Conflict - Oliver Kaplan, University of Denver; Joseph K. Young, American University

• How Wartime Institutions Shape Electoral Performance after Civil Conflicts - Felix Haass, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies; Martin Ottmann, University of Birmingham

Chair

• Martin Ottmann University of Birmingham

Discussants

• Susanna Campbell American University

• Matthew Nanes Saint Louis University