Microfoundations of civil conflict reconciliation: Ethnicity and context

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The research paper analyzes individual-level support for the 2001 Framework Agreement in Macedonia using a geo-referenced survey from 2005. The authors test whether local ethnic settlement patterns or proximity to conflict zones influence reconciliation preferences. The primary finding is that ethnic identity is the dominant factor, with ethnic Albanians strongly supporting the agreement and ethnic Macedonians predominantly opposing it, while contextual factors like local ethnic parity or distance to violence have only feeble or insignificant effects.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Ethnic identity is the most powerful determinant of support for the peace agreement, far outweighing other individual or contextual factors. Ethnic Albanians show very strong support, while ethnic Macedonians remain predominantly opposed several years after the conflict.
  • The 'contact hypothesis', which suggests that relative ethnic parity in a local area reduces inter-group discrepancies in preferences, was not supported by the empirical data.
  • There is indicative evidence for a 'dominance perspective' regarding decentralization: ethnic Macedonians living in municipalities with a high share of Albanians are less likely to support the transfer of power from the central state to local authorities.
  • Physical proximity to conflict zones has a small effect on support for decentralization, where those furthest from violent events tend to be more supportive, but it does not increase polarization between the two ethnic groups.
  • The degree of polarization is significantly higher regarding minority rights than regarding decentralization; ethnic identity explains 75% of the variance in support for minority rights compared to 26% for decentralization.

Cite the original document

APA
DYRSTAD, K., BUHAUG, H., RINGDAL, K., SIMKUS, A., & LISTHAUG, O. (n.d.). Microfoundations of civil conflict reconciliation: Ethnicity and context. Peace Research Institute Oslo. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/23ea6672-0312-405c-9802-b1b1491130a6/Microfoundations of Civil Conflict Reconciliation Ethnicity and Context.pdf?inline=true
Chicago
DYRSTAD, KARIN, HALVAD BUHAUG, KRISTEN RINGDAL, ALBERT SIMKUS, and OLA LISTHAUG. Microfoundations of civil conflict reconciliation: Ethnicity and context. Peace Research Institute Oslo, n.d. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/23ea6672-0312-405c-9802-b1b1491130a6/Microfoundations of Civil Conflict Reconciliation Ethnicity and Context.pdf?inline=true.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=DYRSTAD |first1=KARIN |last2=BUHAUG |first2=HALVAD |last3=RINGDAL |first3=KRISTEN |last4=SIMKUS |first4=ALBERT |last5=LISTHAUG |first5=OLA |title=Microfoundations of civil conflict reconciliation: Ethnicity and context |publisher=Peace Research Institute Oslo |url=https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/23ea6672-0312-405c-9802-b1b1491130a6/Microfoundations of Civil Conflict Reconciliation Ethnicity and Context.pdf?inline=true |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{dyrstadndmicrofoundations, author = {DYRSTAD, KARIN and BUHAUG, HALVAD and RINGDAL, KRISTEN and SIMKUS, ALBERT and LISTHAUG, OLA}, title = {{Microfoundations of civil conflict reconciliation: Ethnicity and context}}, institution = {Peace Research Institute Oslo}, url = {https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/23ea6672-0312-405c-9802-b1b1491130a6/Microfoundations of Civil Conflict Reconciliation Ethnicity and Context.pdf?inline=true}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated