Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Browse Sessions by Fields of Interest
Browse Papers by Fields of Interest
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Why are some negotiated settlements in intrastate armed conflicts inclusive while others are not? Whereas previous research shows that peace agreements in which civil society are included as signatories are more likely to lead to sustainable peace, little effort has gone into explaining inclusion itself. This study is therefore the first to systematically examine the causes of inclusive peace agreements. We argue that the context of the disputes can help to explain the level and type of inclusion. In general, the armed actors in religiously defined conflicts are less open to the wider civil society, and are thereby reluctant to accept the presence of civil society organizations at the negotiation table. We explore this argument empirically using newly collected data on the involvement of civil society actors in negotiation processes in all intrastate armed conflicts 1989–2018, combined with existing data on religious dimensions in armed conflicts. In our analysis, we account for the vibrancy of civil society in different societies since this is likely to be associated with inclusive peace processes. Through our analysis we are also able to shed light on whether inclusion of various types of civil society organizations, such as women’s groups and religious actors follow different trajectories in terms of inclusion.