1. Inequality and radicalisation: Assessing the research evidence
Tomislav Pavlović* and Renata Franc
Ivo Pilar Institute of Social Sciences
ISPP Annual meeting
, Lisbon
*Tomislav Pavlović’s work on DARE has been supported by a Croatian Science Foundation within Young Researchers’ Career Development Project – Training of Doctoral Students (DOK ) financed by the European Union from the European Social Fund (ESF). This publication reflects
only the views of the authors; the European Commission and Research Executive Agency are not responsible for any information it contains.

2. INTRODUCTION
Presumption: inequality is positively related to radicalisation
Unbalanced distribution of economic, social, political or other x across individuals or groups within a society
Process by which individuals or groups come to embrace attitudes or engage in actions that support violence in the pursuit of extremist causes
Sources of this presumption:
Early social scientists who observed the relationship between inequality and violent revolutions (e.g., Marx, Toucqueville; as cited in Davies, 1952)
Structural theories of political violence (e.g., Newman, 2006)
Psychological studies of radicalisation as a process (e.g., Borum, 2003; Moghaddam, 2005) …
Empirical support?
Inconsistent findings of empirical studies
Several reviews, none focusing specifically on inequality-radicalisation relationship
Also inconsistent results
Radicalisation the process by which individuals or groups come to embrace attitudes or engage in actions that support violence in the pursuit of extremist causes (Doosje et al., 2016: 79; Alonso et al., 2008)
a relative concept - ‘radical or extremist ideologies matter, whether accompanied or not by violent action, while what causes individuals to cross the threshold into violence remains important’ (DARE, 2016: 17)
a context-bound phenomenon (Alonso et al., 2008)
cognitive and behavioural radicalisation

3. DARE: Systematic review of quantitative findings
Aim and research questions:
To enhance understanding of the role of inequality in radicalisation
Is inequality associated with radicalisation?
If so, how (positively or negatively), when, where and what can explain this association?

4. Flowchart of the literature search
Data sources:
7 well-known databases
Gray literature
Expert consultation
EMPIRICAL studies
Relevant to both radicalisation and inequality
1 January December 2017
In English

5. 84 macro-level (terrorism) studies
141 studies analysed:
Dominant disciplines
Political science and economics
Dominant study types
Descriptive case studies and cross-sectional studies
Type of radicalisation / terrorism
Islamist / general
Context
predominantly Muslim countries, Western Europe and Worldwide studies
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL
42 survey research
non-radicalised individuals
15 biographical evidence
radicalised individuals
SOCIAL LEVEL
84 macro-level (terrorism) studies

6. Conceptualising the inequality-radicalisation relationship

7. FINDINGS - INDIVIDUAL LEVEL

8. do not consistently predict radicalisation
ECONOMIC INEQUALITY
Objective: education, income, living in poverty
Subjective: income dissatisfaction, poverty
do not consistently predict radicalisation
IMPORTANCE OF CONTEXT? Islamist behavioural radicalisation
predominantly Muslim countries
Inconsistent findings or more educated individuals
Low number of studies
Role in the terrorist group
Participation in violence
Type of violence! (e.g., against humans or objects)
Contextual characteristics such as poverty at an individual and district level
…should also be taken into account.
Western European countries
Less educated and those of a lower economic status

9. SOCIO-POLITICAL INEQUALITY
PERCEIVED
personal deprivation
group deprivation
unfair treatment
discrimination
injustice
intergroup attitudes
social identities
ideological and religious beliefs
Cognitive radicalisation
positive relationship between PERCEIVED (subjective) social inequality and cognitive radicalisation
probably indirect
Regardless of the ideological orientation of radicalisation (Islamist or far-right) and context!

10. FINDINGS - SOCIAL LEVEL

11. do not consistently linearly predict radicalisation
ECONOMIC INEQUALITY
economic development
GDP p.c.
HDI
Adult literacy
Unemployment rates
Education level
However…
do not consistently linearly predict radicalisation
GDP p.c.
Economic distribution
GINI
Poverty
Interregional inequality
Low number of studies!
transnational terrorism
domestic terrorism

12. SOCIO-POLITICAL INEQUALITY
abuse of physical integrity rights
repression
more terrorism
democracy
civil right
public liberties
women’s rights
However…
do not consistently linearly predict radicalisation
democracy

13. CONCLUSIONS
Inequality, especially socio-political inequality is most probably related to radicalisation.
However,…
the complexity of inequality-radicalisation relationship
the limitations of the evidence base
the limitations of applied methodological approaches
the limitations of applied statistical procedures
…should be taken into account!
all conclusions remain provisional

14. Thank You