Introducing MACEDA: New micro-data on an indigenous self-determination conflict
| Author | Pedro Cayul,Alejandro Corvalan,Dany Jaimovich,Matteo Pazzona |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/00223433211064778 |
| Published date | 01 November 2022 |
| Date | 01 November 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Special Data Features |
Introducing MACEDA: New micro-data
on an indigenous self-determination conflict
Pedro Cayul
Department of International Economics,
Graduate Institute, Geneva
Alejandro Corvalan
Department of Industrial Engineering,
Universidad de Chile
Dany Jaimovich
Faculty of Economics and Business, Universidad
de Talca
Matteo Pazzona
Department of Economics and Finance, Brunel
University London
Abstract
This article introduces MACEDA, a micro-level dataset on the self-determination (SD) conflict between the Chilean
state and the indigenous Mapuche. Although SD disputes are one of the most common conflicts in the world, and
indigenous movements represent about 40% of all SD movements, this is the first micro-dataset focused on an
indigenous SD conflict. MACEDA covers the period 1990–2016, including more than 2,600 events collected from
local media. As indigenous conflicts are much less violent in terms of casualties, we take a flexible definition of
conflict, based on its constituent events, and we discuss the comparability and generalization of our approach. To
illustrate the usefulness of these micro-data in the analysis of conflict-related theories, we present a descriptive
empirical analysis on the strategies of indigenous resistance, and we discuss how the data can be used in the causal
analysis of conflicts.
Keywords
conflict database, indigenous, Mapuche, self-determination
Introduction
Recent research on conflict points out self-determination
(SD) disputes as one of the more prevalent around the
world. Cross-country databases on SD conflicts (Cun-
ningham, 2014), movements (Sambanis, Germann &
Scha
¨del, 2018), and organizations (Cunningham, Dahl
& Fruge
´, 2020) have contributed to delimiting the scope
and importance of these struggles. To further improve
our knowledge about SD conflicts, it is relevant to
develop detailed data at a more disaggregated level and
to understand differences among movements claiming
SD. We tackle both challenges by introducing the first
micro-data on an indigenous SD conflict.
Indigenous groups are ‘conquered descendants of ear-
lier inhabitants of a region who live primarily in confor-
mity with traditional social, economic, and cultural
customs that are sharply distinct from those of dominant
groups’ (Gurr, 1993).
1
The indigenous SD movements
are prevalent all over the world, and they represent about
40% of all SD movements.
2
Their conflicts have specific
Corresponding author:
corvalan.tmp@gmail.com
1
Another widely used definition of indigenous is based on ILO’s
Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (no. 169).
2
Considering groups described in MAR (Gurr, 1993), 38% of the
SD movements reported by Sambanis, Germann & Scha
¨del (2018)
and 25% of the SD organizations in Cunningham, Dahl & Fruge
´
(2020) are indigenous. Nevertheless, many SD movements are not
included in the list by MAR. To address this issue, we have used a
broader list of indigenous groups based on ILO’s definition. Using
that list, we find that 42% of the SD movements in Sambanis,
Germann & Scha
¨del (2018) and 46% of SD organizations in
Cunningham, Dahl & Fruge
´(2020) are indigenous.
Journal of Peace Research
2022, Vol. 59(6) 903–912
ªThe Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00223433211064778
journals.sagepub.com/home/jpr
To continue reading
Request your trial