IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joupea/v61y2024i5p760-777.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Caring is sharing: Why independent commissions in post-conflict societies have power-sharing arrangements

Author

Listed:
  • Dawn Walsh

    (School of Politics and International Relations, University College Dublin)

  • Natascha S Neudorfer

    (Department of Political Science and International Studies, University of Birmingham)

Abstract

The inclusion of conflict parties in independent commissions through power-sharing has been found to reduce the reoccurrence of conflict. Yet, the theoretical and empirical literature explaining why independent commissions include power-sharing is very limited. Previous publications have focused on in-depth case studies that explain how power-sharing prevents conflict recurrence in specific post-conflict societies but do not provide a general argument or widescale testing beyond individual case studies. This article provides a new systematic, general theoretical argument and novel empirical testing that explains why there is power-sharing on some commissions but not others. We argue that conflict parties adopt power-sharing provisions in independent commissions because doing so allows them to overcome significant credible commitments problems that are inherent to the ending of intrastate conflict. Using a new and comprehensive dataset, Independent Commissions in Post-Conflict Societies, which includes information on 580 commissions (1990–2016), this article applies a combination of decision trees and regression analysis to test our hypotheses. The findings indicate that power-sharing is adopted where credible commitment problems are acute and show that commissions working on political or security issues and those with monitoring or verification roles, or that work on the implementation of peace agreements, are more likely to include power-sharing arrangements.

Suggested Citation

  • Dawn Walsh & Natascha S Neudorfer, 2024. "Caring is sharing: Why independent commissions in post-conflict societies have power-sharing arrangements," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 61(5), pages 760-777, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:61:y:2024:i:5:p:760-777
    DOI: 10.1177/00223433231164448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00223433231164448
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00223433231164448?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giuditta Fontana & Argyro Kartsonaki & Natascha S Neudorfer & Dawn Walsh & Stefan Wolff & Christalla Yakinthou, 2021. "The dataset of Political Agreements in Internal Conflicts (PAIC)," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(3), pages 338-364, May.
    2. Fearon, James D., 1995. "Rationalist explanations for war," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 379-414, July.
    3. Sascha O Becker & Thiemo Fetzer & Dennis Novy, 2017. "Who voted for Brexit? A comprehensive district-level analysis," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 32(92), pages 601-650.
    4. Chelsea Johnson, 2021. "Power-sharing, conflict resolution, and the logic of pre-emptive defection," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(4), pages 734-748, July.
    5. James D. Fearon, 2004. "Why Do Some Civil Wars Last So Much Longer than Others?," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 41(3), pages 275-301, May.
    6. ELGIE, ROBERT & McMENAMIN, IAIN, 2005. "Credible Commitment, Political Uncertainty or Policy Complexity? Explaining Variations in the Independence of Non-majoritarian Institutions in France," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(3), pages 531-548, July.
    7. Sascha O Becker & Thiemo Fetzer & Dennis Novy, 2018. "Erratum to: Who voted for Brexit? A comprehensive district-level analysis," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 33(93), pages 179-180.
    8. Chris Hanretty & Christel Koop, 2013. "Shall the law set them free? The formal and actual independence of regulatory agencies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 195-214, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dani Rodrik, 2018. "Populism and the economics of globalization," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 12-33, June.
    2. Maxime Menuet & Petros G. Sekeris, 2021. "Overconfidence and conflict," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(4), pages 1483-1499, October.
    3. Manuel Funke & Moritz Schularick & Christoph Trebesch, 2023. "Populist Leaders and the Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(12), pages 3249-3288, December.
    4. Gabrielle Demange, 2018. "New electoral systems and old referendums," PSE Working Papers hal-01852206, HAL.
    5. Anastasia Litina & Luca J. Uberti & Skerdilajda Zanaj, 2023. "Women Directors and Cost Efficiency," DEM Discussion Paper Series 23-18, Department of Economics at the University of Luxembourg.
    6. Gabriel J. Felbermayr & Clemens Fuest & Hans Gersbach & Albrecht O. Ritschl & Marcel Thum & Martin T. Braml, 2019. "Hard Brexit ahead: breaking the deadlock," EconPol Policy Brief 12, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    7. Thiemo Fetzer & Stephan Kyburz, 2024. "Cohesive Institutions and Political Violence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 106(1), pages 133-150, January.
    8. Sascha O. Becker & Thiemo Fetzer, 2018. "Has Eastern European Migration Impacted UK-born Workers?," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 376, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    9. Magnus Lundgren, 2017. "Which type of international organizations can settle civil wars?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 613-641, December.
    10. Maurice Obstfeld, 2021. "Globalization and nationalism: Retrospect and prospect," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(4), pages 675-690, October.
    11. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Neil Lee & Cornelius Lipp, 2021. "Golfing with Trump. Social capital, decline, inequality, and the rise of populism in the US," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 14(3), pages 457-481.
    12. Braml, Martin & Felbermayr, Gabriel, 2018. "Understanding Free Trade Attitudes: Evidence from Europe," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181591, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    13. Sebastian Doerr & Stefan Gissler & José‐Luis Peydró & Hans‐Joachim Voth, 2022. "Financial Crises and Political Radicalization: How Failing Banks Paved Hitler's Path to Power," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(6), pages 3339-3372, December.
    14. Amory Gethin & Clara Martínez-Toledano & Thomas Piketty, 2022. "Brahmin Left Versus Merchant Right: Changing Political Cleavages in 21 Western Democracies, 1948–2020," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 137(1), pages 1-48.
    15. Thiemo Fetzer, 2019. "Did Austerity Cause Brexit?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(11), pages 3849-3886, November.
    16. Anesi, Vincent, 2012. "Secessionism and minority protection in an uncertain world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 53-61.
    17. Anand, Kartik & Gai, Prasanna & König, Philipp Johann, 2020. "Leaping into the dark: A theory of policy gambles," Discussion Papers 07/2020, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    18. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    19. Bachtrögler, Julia & Oberhofer, Harald, 2018. "Euroscepticism and EU Cohesion Policy: The Impact of Micro-Level Policy Effectiveness on Voting Behavior," Department of Economics Working Paper Series 273, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    20. Anesi, Vincent, 2012. "Secessionism and minority protection in an uncertain world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 53-61.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:61:y:2024:i:5:p:760-777. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.prio.no/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.