Abstract
The study models the spread of Nepal's civil war across geography and over time. The potential effects of poverty, geography, caste, and prewar election outcomes on the spread and intensity of war-violence is examined, using data from the 1996 to 2006 Nepalese-Maoist civil war. Results suggest, first, that proximity to war-affected area is the key determinant of whether or not war spreads to another area and, second, that the intensity of violence increases as time elapses. Once proximity to areas already affected by war is accounted for, socioeconomic conditions related to poverty and geography are statistically insignificant in explaining either the spread of war or its escalation in intensity.
Highlights
An area becomes engaged in civil war in a certain location at a certain point in time
The novelty of this article lies not in its qualitative finding but in its quantitative demonstration: First, the geographically closer an unaffected area lies to an affected area, the more quickly it gets drawn into the violence and, second, the earlier the exposure to violence, the higher its eventual intensity
The percentage of the population of a district living below the national poverty line before the war is used to measure relative poverty in a district. This data comes from the Nepal Living Standard Survey qualitative finding but in its quantitative demonstration: First, the geographically closer a war-unaffected area lies to a war-affected one, the more quickly it gets drawn into the violence and, second, the earlier the exposure to violence, the higher its eventual intensity
Summary
Note: The intensity of the violence scale goes from light to darker shades of green, to yellow, orange, and red, the last being the most violent. A district’s socioeconomic conditions (poverty, literacy, etc.) do not statistically influence the onset or spread of violence (column I), and its strategic importance (stronghold, ethnicity) is only marginally significant. The most influential variable in explaining war intensity is its duration In both cases—distance and duration—the statistically significant negative sign on the squared terms says that the further away is a district in space and time when violence is first experienced, the better. Lower literacy rates, and rugged terrain have long been thought to affect the spread the war and its duration, it may seem puzzling that none of these variables are statistically significant, at least not for Nepal for the years 1996 to 2001. The relative unimportance of geography reported in this article does not appear surprising.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
