IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joupea/v62y2025i6p2162-2174.html

Expanding the Peace Accords Matrix Implementation Dataset: Partial peace agreements in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement negotiation and implementation process, 1989–2021

Author

Listed:
  • Madhav Joshi

    (Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, University of Notre Dame’s Keough School of Global Affairs, USA)

  • Matthew Hauenstein

    (Lucy Family Institute for Data & Society, University of Notre Dame, USA)

  • Jason Quinn

    (Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, University of Notre Dame’s Keough School of Global Affairs, USA)

Abstract

This article presents an expansion of the Peace Accords Matrix Implementation Dataset, incorporating data on partial agreements and newly established Comprehensive Peace Agreements. The new Peace Accords Matrix Implementation Dataset now includes coding for 51 provisions across 42 Comprehensive Peace Agreements and 236 partial peace agreements (with 78% of these negotiated prior to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and 22% negotiated during the 10-year Comprehensive Peace Agreement implementation process). This expanded dataset offers nuanced insights into the negotiation and implementation processes of Comprehensive Peace Agreements, the types of provisions negotiated within partial agreements, those later incorporated into Comprehensive Peace Agreements, and those renegotiated throughout the Comprehensive Peace Agreement implementation period. The article details the methodology and criteria employed for integrating partial agreements into the Peace Accords Matrix Implementation Dataset, provides descriptive statistics on the provisions within these agreements, and examines the implementation trajectories of pre-Comprehensive Peace Agreement partial agreements and Comprehensive Peace Agreements for up to 10 years. Additionally, it examines the interrelatedness among partial agreements, Comprehensive Peace Agreements, and Comprehensive Peace Agreement implementation processes. One of the key applications of the partial peace agreement data presented is the empirical testing of the gradualism proposition in trust-building. The findings indicate that Comprehensive Peace Agreements exhibit a higher overall implementation rate when a greater number of partial agreements are negotiated beforehand. However, this is conditional and influenced by the duration of the negotiation process. The article concludes with a discussion of the challenges and limitations encountered, along with suggestions for future research on civil war peace agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Madhav Joshi & Matthew Hauenstein & Jason Quinn, 2025. "Expanding the Peace Accords Matrix Implementation Dataset: Partial peace agreements in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement negotiation and implementation process, 1989–2021," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(6), pages 2162-2174, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:62:y:2025:i:6:p:2162-2174
    DOI: 10.1177/00223433251322596
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00223433251322596
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00223433251322596?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. Levke Aduda, 2019. "Failed agreements and their impact on subsequent mediation onset and success in intrastate conflicts," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(5), pages 893-916, September.
    2. Alyssa K Prorok & Deniz Cil, 2022. "Cheap talk or costly commitment? Leader statements and the implementation of civil war peace agreements," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(3), pages 409-424, May.
    3. Madhav Joshi & Jason Michael Quinn & Patrick M Regan, 2015. "Annualized implementation data on comprehensive intrastate peace accords, 1989–2012," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 52(4), pages 551-562, July.
    4. Nilsson, Desiree, 2008. "Partial peace rebel groups inside and outside civil war settlements," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4572, The World Bank.
    5. Lindsey Doyle & Lukas Hegele, 2021. "Talks before the talks: Effects of pre-negotiation on reaching peace agreements in intrastate armed conflicts, 2005–15," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(2), pages 231-247, March.
    6. Madhav Joshi & SungYong Lee & Roger Mac Ginty, 2017. "Built-in Safeguards and the Implementation of Civil War Peace Accords," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(6), pages 994-1018, November.
    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. Wakako Maekawa & Barış Arı & Theodora-Ismene Gizelis, 2019. "UN involvement and civil war peace agreement implementation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 178(3), pages 397-416, March.
    2. Dominic Rohner, 2018. "Success Factors for Peace Treaties: A Review of Theory and Evidence," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 18.08, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    3. Hanne Fjelde & Desirée Nilsson, 2018. "The rise of rebel contenders," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 55(5), pages 551-565, September.
    4. Julia Palik & Mauricio Rivera Celestino & David Gomez-Triana & Nicholas Marsh & Ida Rødningen, 2025. "Disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration in peace agreements (1975–2021): Introducing the DDR dataset," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(7), pages 2454-2465, December.
    5. Thomas Bassetti & Raul Caruso & Darwin Cortes, 2015. "Behavioral differences in violence: The case of intra-group differences of Paramilitaries and Guerrillas in Colombia," DISCE - Working Papers del Dipartimento di Politica Economica ispe0073, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    6. Lisa Hultman & Jacob D. Kathman & Megan Shannon, 2016. "United Nations peacekeeping dynamics and the duration of post-civil conflict peace," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 33(3), pages 231-249, July.
    7. Sumeyye Kaya Uyar, 2025. "Exploring Covert Diplomacy in Peace Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 13.
    8. Julián Arévalo Bencardino, 2014. "Construcción de paz y un nuevo modelo de construcción de Estado: una lectura de los dos primeros acuerdos de La Habana," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 16(30), pages 131-169, January-J.
    9. Johannes Karreth & Jason Quinn & Madhav Joshi & Jaroslav Tir, 2023. "International Third Parties and the Implementation of Comprehensive Peace Agreements After Civil War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 67(2-3), pages 494-521, February.
    10. Nils-Christian Bormann & Burcu Savun, 2018. "Reputation, concessions, and territorial civil war," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 55(5), pages 671-686, September.
    11. Sarah Zukerman Daly, 2021. "Political life after civil wars: Introducing the Civil War Successor Party dataset," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(4), pages 839-848, July.
    12. Lesley-Ann Daniels, 2025. "Identity concessions in ethnic civil wars: When are they given and with what outcomes for peace?," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(4), pages 1191-1204, July.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Uzoma Iloanugo & Indranil Dutta & M. Emranul Haque, 2020. "Do Amnesty Policies Reduce Conflict? Evidence from the Niger-Delta Amnesty Program," Economics Discussion Paper Series 2011, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    16. Angelika Rettberg & Federico Dupont, 2022. "Peace Agreement Implementation (PAI): What Matters? A Review of the Literature," Documentos CEDE 20509, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    17. Xu, Cheng, 2025. "Autonomy, interrupted: constitutional weakening of indigenous activism from civil war to civil society," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    18. Sam R. Bell & Risa Kitagawa, 2023. "Human rights organizations and transitional justice agenda-setting: Evidence from peace agreement provisions," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 40(1), pages 65-87, January.
    19. Dominic Rohner, 2024. "Mediation, Military, and Money: The Promises and Pitfalls of Outside Interventions to End Armed Conflicts," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 62(1), pages 155-195, March.
    20. Adedokun, Ayokunu, 2017. "Post-conflict peacebuilding: A critical survey of the literature and avenues for future research," MERIT Working Papers 2017-016, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).

    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:62:y:2025:i:6:p:2162-2174. 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.