Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Change Preferences
Sign In
X (Twitter)
There is abundant literature explaining why private firms would be reluctant to participate in the provision of public goods in contexts of violence, yet public goods are provided in these contexts and private partners play an important role in such provision. What explains private participation in the provision of public goods in contexts of violence? I argue that the provision of public goods through private participation can increase when political institutions are co-opted by actors that are interested in attracting private investment and able to provide a safety net for private partners to carry on with their business as usual. To test this claim, I analyze the effect of paramilitary cooptation on private participation in the provision of roads.