Peacekeeping and development in fragile states: Micro-level evidence from Liberia
| Published date | 01 May 2021 |
| Date | 01 May 2021 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0022343320912813 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Peacekeeping and development in fragile
states: Micro-level evidence from Liberia
Eric Mvukiyehe
Research Department, World Bank
Cyrus Samii
Politics Department, New York University
Abstract
Peacekeeping operations are integral to multilateral strategies to help establish stable, self-sustaining peace and
development in countries coming out of civil war. While we know, from macro-level empirical studies, that these
operations contribute to the durability of peace, the evidence on their effectiveness at the micro level remains scant.
Using surveys and administrative data from postwar Liberia, we test the hypothesis that peacekeeping deployments
build peace ‘from the bottom up’ through contributions to local security and local economic and social vitality. The
hypothesis reflects official thinking about how peacekeeping works via ‘peacebuilding’. We create a quasi-experiment
by applying coarsened exact matching to administrative data used in mission planning, identifying sets of commu-
nities that were similarly likely to receive bases. We do not find effects on local security measured in terms of physical
victimization, fear of victimization, or migration patterns. We find only modest effects on socio-economic vitality.
NGOs tend to work in areas where deployments are not present, contrary to the hypothesis. Thus, we are less
inclined to believe that peacekeepers build peace from the bottom up, leaving macro-level mechanisms such as
signaling and deterrence at the level of leaders as worthy of more attention. In terms of policy, peacekeeping missions
should re-evaluate their methods for providing local security.
Keywords
civil war, livelihoods, peacekeeping, post-conflict, violence
Introduction
Peacekeeping operations are integral to multilateral
efforts to stabilize and consolidate peace in countries
affected by fragility, conflict and violence, the vast major-
ity of which also face daunting development challenges
(Sambanis, 2007). Traditionally, these operations, par-
ticularly those carried out under the United Nations
(UN) banner, have focused on helping belligerents to
implement ceasefires and peace agreements through
monitoring, supervising disarmament, demobilization
and reintegration, and other processes designed to alle-
viate commitment problems between parties to the con-
flict (Fortna, 2008).
Since the 1990s, however, UN peacekeeping opera-
tions have seen a dramatic expansion of their mandate to
include non-military objectives. This includes
revitalizing the economy, rebuilding infrastructure, fos-
tering democracy, and promoting human rights, among
others (Cousens, Kumar & Wermester, 2001; Kumar,
1998; Boutros-Ghalis, 1995). These so-called ‘peace-
building’ activities resemble traditional development
interventions (Tschirgi, 2004; Woodward, 2002) and
aim to lower the potential for renewed conflict through
economic and social transformation (Paris, 2004;
Boutros-Ghali, 1995). Another feature of contemporary
peacekeeping operations is that they often penetrate soci-
eties in recipient countries with unprecedented levels of
breath and depth, directly influencing the social, eco-
nomic, and political aspects of people’s lives (Autesserre,
Corresponding author:
emvukiyehe@worldbank.org, cds2083@nyu.edu
Journal of Peace Research
2021, Vol. 58(3) 368–383
ªThe Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0022343320912813
journals.sagepub.com/home/jpr
2017, 2014; Pouligny, 2000; Risley & Sisk, 2005;
Talentino, 2007). By providing local-level security and
assistance that facilitates economic and social revitaliza-
tion, peacekeeping operations are presumed to raise the
opportunity costs of war and empower those seeking
peace (Doyle & Sambanis, 2006; Stedman, Rothchild
& Cousens, 2002).
While macro-level empirical studies have established
that UN peacekeeping operations tend to reduce large-
scale violence and thereby prolong the durability of peace
agreements (Fortna, 2008; Gilligan & Sergenti, 2008;
Doyle & Sambanis, 2006), evidence of peacekeeping
effectiveness at the local level is more limited (Fortna
& Howard, 2008). To be sure, the last decade has seen
a surge in micro-level empirical studies of local effects of
UN peacekeeping operations, leveraging variation in
subnational deployment of peacekeeping deployments
within recipient countries and newly available data on
Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project
(ACLED).
1
Findings from these studies are broadly con-
sistent with the evidence from the macro-level literature
and suggest that UN peacekeeping deployments at the
local level tend to reduce battlefield violence and the risk
of deliberate targeting civilians in the context of ongoing
conflict (Fjelde, Hultman & Nilsson, 2019; Ruggeri,
Dorussen & Gizelis, 2016, 2017; Costalli, 2014; Pow-
ers, Reeder & Townsen, 2015; Melander, 2009).
However, the existing literature on local-level effects
has two shortcomings. First, it tends to focus on out-
comes of ‘negative’ peace typically measured in terms of
violence reduction between armed factions and against
civilians. By contrast, with the exception of Di Salvatore
(2019) and Kathman & Wood (2016), very few empiri-
cal studies investigate crime and anti-civilian violence
outcomes likely to prevail in postwar contexts (Muggah,
2008; Tschirgi, 2004; Orr, 2002). Furthermore, several
studies (e.g. Call & Cousens, 2008; Jarstad & Sisk,
2008) have pointed out potential tensions between pos-
itive peace and negative peace, while others (e.g. Autes-
serre, 2017, 2014, 2010; Kalyvas, 2006) have suggested
conflict and peacebuilding dynamics may operate under
different logics at the macro level and at the micro level.
For these reasons, we feel it important to extend research
to consider local security perceptions and criminal
victimization.
Second, existing studies have given less attention to
socio-economic welfare of the local population. This
neglect is surprising, especially because these outcomes
are presumed to constitute the micro-foundations of
durable and ‘positive’ peace (Call & Cousens, 2008;
Doyle & Sambanis, 2006, 2000). Local-level security
and socio-economic outcomes could be more under the
control of peacekeeping missions insofar as they are
direct effects of specific programs and activities than is
the end outcome of macro-level peace. The latter is likely
to be overdetermined by factors outside the control of
peacekeeping missions. From a policy perspective, exam-
ining local-level outcomes may make it possible to deter-
mine what about peacekeeping works and what does not.
On the other hand, as researchers like Autesserre (2010)
have noted, local-level security dynamics may be more
complex than macro-level political conflicts and ongoing
local conflicts may impede political consolidation. Then,
ineffectiveness at the local level could compromise a
peacekeeping mission’s ability to usher in macro-peace.
Either possibility motivates a need to understand peace-
keeping’s local effects.
This article extends the micro-level literature of UN
peacekeeping effectiveness, addressing the shortcomings
laid out above. We use matching methods, original sur-
vey data, and administrative data to measure local effects
of the United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL) on
security and socio-economic outcomes. We exploit the
fact that when establishing deployment locations in the
Liberian countryside, UNMIL peacekeepers had limited
information with which to work. Using coarsened exact
matching on administrative data used in UNMIL plan-
ning, we identify sets of communities that, presumably,
were similarly likely to receive a peacekeeping base.
The evidence from our study suggests very limited
effects at the local level. We do not find effects on local
security measured in terms of physical victimization, fear
of victimization, or migration patterns. We find modest
effects of deployments on socio-economic vitality. Inter-
estingly, we find that NGOs tend to work in areas where
UNMIL deployments are not present. We are less
inclined to believe that peacekeeping, on its own, con-
tributes to positive peace from the bottom up, at least in
the case of UNMIL, leaving macro-level mechanisms
such as signaling and deterrence among faction leaders
as explanations worthy of more attention for the positive
association between peacekeeping and macro-level peace.
The article proceeds as follows. The next section dis-
cusses two hypotheses implicit in arguments linking
peacekeeping interventions to security and socio-
economic outcomes. We follow with a brief background
to the Liberian civil war and UNMIL’s intervention. The
next sections describe our methods for identifying micro-
1
ACLED collects disaggregated and geo-referenced data on conflict
and violence events; see https://www.acleddata.com/about-acled/.
Mvukiyehe & Samii 369
To continue reading
Request your trial