Natural Resources and Civil War in Sub- Saharan Africa A combined quantitative and comparative perspective on resource specific conditions Diferentes recursos, diferentes conflictos? Una exploración de la economía política regional del conflicto armado colombiano 24 de abril de 2009 Auditorio Mario Laserna Universidad de los Andes 9 a.m. – 5 p.m. Organized by the Universidad de los Andes and the IDRC Dr. Matthias Basedau Dr. Tim C. Wegenast German Institute of Global and Area Studies Institute of African Affairs

Outline of Presentation Motivation and research questions Quantitative study Comparative medium-N study of 15 oil and diamond producers in sub-saharan Africa Summary and conclusions Discussion

Motivation Conventional wisdom that natural resources (NR) encourage civil conflict (since Collier/Hoeffler ‘98) NR may create both motive and opportunity for violence as well as indirect institutional and economic causes of violence However, relationship more complex: Only robust finding in quantitative studies: oil exporters are, on average, more prone to civil war Effects depend on context, incl. (widely untested) resource specific conditions (e.g. type, dependence, abundance, management, mode of extraction, location) Moreover: Sub-Saharan Africa has been neglected in recent years

Research Questions Do natural resources impact on civil war propensity in sub-Saharan Africa and how does Africa relate to “the rest of the world”? (quantitative study) Do different resource types matter? (quantitative study) Do (further) resource specific conditions explain why some major resource producing countries suffer from civil war while others do not? (medium-N study)

Quantitative study Newly compiled data set on the basis of Hegre and Sambanis (2006) and others Two sub-samples: Africa and "the rest of the world" Different resource types (fuels, agricultural commodities, primary commodities, minerals, diamonds) Different dimensions of resources (dependence & abundance) Different measures for civil war onset Usual controls (income, rough terrain, population size, regime type etc.) Logit regressions

Results of Quantitative Study: Resource Type Matters Primary commodities are robustly and signficantly linked to civil war onset in Africa but not in the rest of the world Only oil production robust and significant vis-à-vis different civil war onset measures worldwide Apparently, very high abundance per capita in oil and gas reduces the propensity for violence globally but not in Africa. Other resource types such as agricultural commodities, diamonds and minerals do not impact on the likelihood of civil war onset.

Important (non) Resource-specific Context Conditions

Medium-N Study: Resource-specific Context Conditions in African Oil and Diamond Producers Sample (& two sub-samples) of 15 sub-Saharan oil and diamond producers with non-trivial resource income Dividing the sample in conflict-ridden and peaceful cases Testing six resource specific conditions on whether their values (by setting pertinent thresholds) explain civil war or not Not a natural experiment but capable of testing otherwise uncaptured conditions, keeping single cases identifiable, of identifying necessary and sufficient conditions

Operationalization of Resource Specific Risks Potential riskIndicatorSourceThreshold High dependenceResource exports/total exports Afrika-Jahrbuch 1994 based on EIU > 50% Low abundanceResoure revenue per capita Ross (2006) for 1990< US$ 500 No large scale (re-)distribution Government expenditure p.c. ADI (1992) for 1990< US$ 300 Small security apparatus Military/1,000 inhabitants WBDI for 1990< 4 Intercommunal problems in resource region Minority at risk in producing region MAR, ethnologue, PETRODATA, DIADATA Yes Lootable resources in remote areas Alluvial diamonds or onshore oil in peripheral region Arc-GIS, PETRODATA, DIADATA Yes

Results of Medium-N Study Resource specific risk factors can explain presence of civil war or peace: fit of variables at 73% One outlier (Cameroon), other peaceful cases have a maximum of 50% risk factors Conflict cases at least 67% risk factors Low abundance per capita and lootable resources in remote areas are necessary conditions for civil war Dependence, distribution, MAR in producing regions good predictors, security apparatus worst predictor (still 57%)

Medium-N: Caveats Model works better for diamonds than oil Some countries with civil war onset/resource production before/after 1990 Study remains silent on duration and intensity Some countries have additional natural resources, problem of unreliabe data or unreported income Not all resource-specific context conditions captured (e.g. other resource types, ownership, tax base, external influence) In some cases, resources may play a less prominent role; interplay with general surrounding conditions needs further investigation

Summary and Conclusions Resource type and Africa matter for the resource-conflict link Resource specific risk factors matter for civil war Typical conflict-ridden oil and diamond producer characterized by: high dependence, low abundance, no distribution, small security apparatus, intercommunal problems in resource regions, as well as lootable resources in remote areas Future research needs more detailed theory and respective empirical studies, including (indepth) comparisons within and across countries Policy recommendations must take into account resource specific risks and have to be tailor-made for single countries

Thank you!

The ambivalence of natural resources vis-à-vis conflict Table I. Causal Mechanisms Connecting Resources to Civil War Onset Source: Basedau/Lay (forthchcoming) on the basis of Humphreys (2005), Le Billon (2001) and others.

Results

Context: Level of oil wealth & civil war Table III. Oil Wealth and Civil Conflict in Highly Dependent Net Oil Exporters Source: Authors’ compilation. Note: In parentheses the cumulated domestic conflict intensities according to PRIO UCDP data set ; * Oil and Gas; ** No substantial oil production in 1996, ‘oil rich’ since 1999.

Context conditions and direction of effect of natural resources 1. Fuelling war High dependence on one single resource (oil), relatively low per capita earnings (perception of) Relative deprivation of resource producing region (carrying ecological burden) Negative economic effects by, e.g., "Dutch disease" High corruption in the (state) resource sector Weak state (as a result/ or as initial context condition) "lootable" resources (e.g. alluvial diamonds, timber, drugs) 2. Avoiding war Low dependence, high per capita earnings from resources Income used for the following policies: - High spending on health, education, subsidies etc. - Selective cooptation of (potential) opponents - high spending on/and effective security apparatus & monopoly on the use of force Strong state (as a result/ or as initial context condition) "Non lootable" resources (production sites under firm state control, deep shaft diamonds, off shore oil) Outside protectors (military base)