IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Military Effectiveness and Economic Efficiency in Peacekeeping: Public Versus Private

Listed author(s):
  • Jared Lawyer
Registered author(s):

    The main question addressed by this research is whether or not there is a measurable difference in the use of private or public peacekeepers. The article examines differences in military effectiveness and economic efficiency as evidenced from four major civil wars that occurred in the countries of Somalia, Sierra Leone, Angola and Liberia from 1993 to 2003. Two different methods of conflict cessation are contrasted: Private Military Corporation forces (PMC) and United Nation Peacekeeping forces (UNPK). A further distinction is made between peacekeeping and peace enforcement, arguing that the UN, by using a neutral approach, may be more costly in the long run than a coercive approach that would enforce peace and allow social and economic development to begin. This analysis also shows that policy-makers need to think seriously about the ability of the UN either to enforce peace coercively through military engagement or to move to private enforcers.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Oxford Development Studies.

    Volume (Year): 33 (2005)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 99-106

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:oxdevs:v:33:y:2005:i:1:p:99-106
    DOI: 10.1080/13600810500099709
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:oxdevs:v:33:y:2005:i:1:p:99-106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.