Abstract
ABSTRACTFour hypotheses concerning the relationship between climate-related disasters and conflict are tested using archaeological data in a controlled cross-cultural comparison. The four hypotheses are (1) Conflict increases following climate-related disasters because local economic conditions deprive polities of tax revenue so that they can no longer suppress conflict; (2) Conflict increases following climate-related disasters because existing social inequalities lead to conflicts over differential access to resources; (3) Conflict increases following climate-related disasters because migration forces population into condensed settlements ripe for conflict; and (4) Conflict increases following climate-related disasters in polities where leaders tightly control access to political authority because leaders may use violence to maintain control over the resources they use to secure support from other elites. Only the fourth hypothesis is supported. It is argued that understanding pre-disaster political strategies is key to understanding post-disaster conflict.
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.
