The conflict poverty trap

The adverse economic effects of war are obvious. Money which would otherwise have been spent on productive things gets diverted to pay for weapons. Buildings and goods are destroyed; people are injured and require hospitalisation, at considerable cost. Frequently, large numbers of people are displaced from their houses, and as refugees they are no longer able to work as productively as they normally would, and they frequently become subject to disease and malnutrition. Consequently, there is a close relationship between conflict and poverty.

However, many assumptions which are often made about what makes a country prone to conflict are not necessarily correct, according to former World Bank director of research Paul Collier in his book The Bottom Billion. Statistically speaking, civil war is more likely to break out in a low-income country. Slow growth, stagnation and decline are also factors which increase the likelihood of conflict, as is dependence on primary commodity exports such as diamonds or oil for the country’s major source of export income. Countries which have recently experienced conflict are statistically likely to experience more conflict.

On the other hand, there is very little statistical evidence linking well-founded grievances with the likelihood of conflict, although rebel movements tend to use alleged grievances in the same way that advertisers use brands. Ethnic diversity and even inter-ethinic dislike do not increase the risk of conflict, although ethnic dominance by one group does.