Abstract
This article re-examines recent studies that link different forms of social diversity—ethnic polarization and fractionalization—to underdevelopment and an increased risk of civil war. We review theoretical arguments in favor of a connection between diversity and these social outcomes and discuss the inter-linkage between economic growth and internal conflict in situations of extreme diversity. Our analysis confirms that the relationship between ethnic polarization and civil war is ambiguous and depends on the use of civil war incidence or civil war onset as an outcome variable. Furthermore, fractionalization rather than polarization seems to be negatively related to economic growth.
Highlights
Throughout the past decade, the social and political implications of social diversity have received widespread attention in economics and the social sciences
In this article we contrast the two most frequently used diversity indicators, ―fractionalization‖ and ―polarization‖, which according to recent studies can be seen as explanations of both violent internal conflict and economic stagnation
The results suggest that the relationship between polarization and conflict is ambiguous and that it might be rather fractionalization and fragmentation that hinders economic growth
Summary
Throughout the past decade, the social and political implications of social diversity have received widespread attention in economics and the social sciences. This article evaluates recent conceptual innovations and empirical findings on the effects of diversity on the risk of internal war and on economic growth. In this article we contrast the two most frequently used diversity indicators, ―fractionalization‖ and ―polarization‖, which according to recent studies can be seen as explanations of both violent internal conflict and economic stagnation. We believe that this pioneering work provides an excellent point of departure to re-examine these findings and highlight problems in the study of diversity To this end, we first identify theoretical problems that emerge when we try to link the different facets of diversity to a wide range of social ills. The article concludes with the recommendation that the study of diversity in the social sciences should rely on empirical indicators that are more closely linked to rigorous theoretical reasoning and that move away from the conviction that one particular measure of diversity can be successfully applicable to all contexts
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.
