The Experts below are selected from a list of 22230 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Paul D. Williams - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Security Council's Peacekeeping trilemma
International Affairs, 2019Co-Authors: Paul D. WilliamsAbstract:Abstract The United Nations (UN) Security Council is stuck in a Peacekeeping trilemma. This is a situation where the Council's three strategic goals for Peacekeeping operations—implementing broad mandates, minimizing peacekeeper casualties and maximizing cost-effectiveness—cannot be achieved simultaneously. This trilemma stems from longstanding competing pressures on how the Council designs UN Peacekeeping operations as well as political divisions between Peacekeeping's three key groups of stakeholders: the states that authorize Peacekeeping mandates, those that provide most of the personnel and field capabilities, and those that pay the majority of the bill. Fortunately, the most negative consequences of the trilemma can be mitigated and perhaps even transcended altogether. Mitigation would require the Council to champion and implement four main reforms: improving peacekeeper performance, holding peacekeepers accountable for misdeeds, adopting prioritized and sequenced mandates, and strengthening the financial basis for UN Peacekeeping. Transcending the trilemma would require a more fundamental reconfiguration of the key stakeholder groups in order to create much greater unity of effort behind a re-envisaged Peacekeeping enterprise. This is highly unlikely in the current international political context.
-
the oxford handbook of united nations Peacekeeping operations
Published in 2015 - 2015 in Oxford by Oxford University Press, 2015Co-Authors: Joachim A. Koops, Norrie Macqueen, Thierry Tardy, Paul D. WilliamsAbstract:The Oxford Handbook of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations presents an innovative, authoritative, and accessible examination and critique of all United Nations Peacekeeping operations launched between 1948 and 2013. Since the late 1940s, but particularly since the end of the Cold War, Peacekeeping has been the most visible and one of the most important activities of the United Nations and a significant part of global security governance and conflict management. The volume offers a chapter-by-chapter chronological analysis, designed to provide a comprehensive overview that highlights the evolution and impact of UN Peacekeeping. It also includes a collection of thematic chapters that examine key issues such as “major trends of peace operations,” “the link between Peacekeeping, humanitarian interventions and the responsibility to protect,” “Peacekeeping and international law,” “the UN's inter-organizational partnerships” and “how to evaluate success or failure.” The volume brings together leading scholars and senior practitioners in order to provide a comprehensive assessment of the successes, failures and lessons learned of UN Peacekeeping since 1948. As with all Oxford Handbooks, the volume will be agenda-setting in importance, providing the authoritative point of reference for all those working throughout international relations and beyond.
-
The Oxford Handbook of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations - The Oxford handbook of United Nations Peacekeeping operations
2014Co-Authors: Joachim A. Koops, Norrie Macqueen, Thierry Tardy, Paul D. WilliamsAbstract:The Oxford Handbook of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations presents an innovative, authoritative, and accessible examination and critique of all United Nations Peacekeeping operations launched between 1948 and 2013. Since the late 1940s, but particularly since the end of the Cold War, Peacekeeping has been the most visible and one of the most important activities of the United Nations and a significant part of global security governance and conflict management. The volume offers a chapter-by-chapter chronological analysis, designed to provide a comprehensive overview that highlights the evolution and impact of UN Peacekeeping. It also includes a collection of thematic chapters that examine key issues such as “major trends of peace operations,” “the link between Peacekeeping, humanitarian interventions and the responsibility to protect,” “Peacekeeping and international law,” “the UN's inter-organizational partnerships” and “how to evaluate success or failure.” The volume brings together leading scholars and senior practitioners in order to provide a comprehensive assessment of the successes, failures and lessons learned of UN Peacekeeping since 1948. As with all Oxford Handbooks, the volume will be agenda-setting in importance, providing the authoritative point of reference for all those working throughout international relations and beyond.
Megan Shannon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Peacekeeping in the Midst of War
2019Co-Authors: Lisa Hultman, Jacob D Kathman, Megan ShannonAbstract:Are United Nations Peacekeeping missions effective at reducing violence in civil wars? Although UN Peacekeeping is a notable intervention tool, the international community lacks systematic knowledge of how well it mitigates civil war violence. Given that UN Peacekeeping is increasingly used in the midst of war, this is a significant research gap with direct policy relevance. This book systematically explores if and how the capacity and constitution of UN Peacekeeping missions affect the amount of violence in civil conflicts. It argues that Peacekeeping effectiveness needs to be assessed in relative terms, theorizing that more robust missions are increasingly capable of addressing combatant incentives for employing violence. The authors conduct large-n analyses of the number of combatants and civilians killed during each month for all civil wars globally from 1992 to 2014, measuring the capacity and constitution of UN missions with unique data on the number and type of Peacekeeping personnel deployed. The analyses reveal that increasing UN military troop and police personnel deployed to a conflict significantly reduces violence against civilians, and increasing UN military troop personnel significantly mitigates battle-related violence. By contrast, smaller missions and missions composed of observers are not associated with reduced violence. The book complements the large-n analyses with qualitative explorations of Peacekeeping mechanisms on violence in Côte d’Ivoire and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The authors conclude that while Peacekeeping is not without detriments, it is an effective tool of violence reduction.
-
Peacekeeping in the Midst of War - Measuring Peacekeeping Effectiveness
Peacekeeping in the Midst of War, 2019Co-Authors: Lisa Hultman, Jacob D Kathman, Megan ShannonAbstract:This chapter describes how United Nations Peacekeeping effectiveness has previously been studied and measured in the academic literature. Peacekeeping is designed to first reduce the violence of civil conflicts before pursuing higher-order goals such as political stability, democratization, and peace consolidation. Yet much research on Peacekeeping makes “absolutist” judgements about success or failure in achieving higher-order outcomes without recognizing that Peacekeeping must first stop violence. The chapter establishes a metric for Peacekeeping effectiveness that is used throughout the book: the reduction of violence in civil wars. It then discusses that peacekeepers often intervene while violence is ongoing, which makes mitigating hostilities a challenging task for the United Nations.
-
united nations Peacekeeping and civilian protection in civil war
American Journal of Political Science, 2013Co-Authors: Lisa Hultman, Jacob D Kathman, Megan ShannonAbstract:Does United Nations Peacekeeping protect civilians in civil war? Civilian protection is a primary purpose of UN Peacekeeping, yet there is little systematic evidence for whether Peacekeeping prevents civilian deaths. We propose that UN Peacekeeping can protect civilians if missions are adequately composed of military troops and police in large numbers. Using unique monthly data on the number and type of UN personnel contributed to Peacekeeping operations, along with monthly data on civilian deaths from 1991 to 2008 in armed conflicts in Africa, we find that as the UN commits more military and police forces to a Peacekeeping mission, fewer civilians are targeted with violence. The effect is substantial - the analyses show that, on average, deploying several thousand troops and several hundred police dramatically reduces civilian killings. We conclude that although the UN is often criticized for its failures, UN Peacekeeping is an effective mechanism of civilian protection.
Benjamin Nyblade - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Peacekeeping for profit? The scope and limits of ‘mercenary’ UN Peacekeeping
Journal of Peace Research, 2018Co-Authors: Katharina P. Coleman, Benjamin NybladeAbstract:Developing states furnish the vast majority of UN Peacekeeping troops, a fact academics and policymakers often attribute (at least partly) to developing states’ supposed ability to derive a profit from UN Peacekeeping reimbursements. In this article, we argue that this ‘Peacekeeping for profit’ narrative has been vastly overstated. The conditions for significantly profiting from UN Peacekeeping are in fact highly restrictive, even for developing states. We begin by highlighting two potent reasons for re-examining the Peacekeeping for profit narrative: developing states emerged as the UN’s principal troop contributors in a period of stagnant reimbursement rates when UN Peacekeeping was becoming less financially attractive; and the quantitative evidence scholars have presented as supporting the Peacekeeping for profit narrative is flawed. We then identify the scope conditions within which Peacekeeping for profit provides a plausible explanation for a developing state’s UN troop contributions. First, the deployment and its attendant reimbursements must be significant not only in absolute and per-soldier terms but also in relation to the state’s total armed forces and military expenditure. Second, the state must have an exceptional ability, compared with other troop contributors, to benefit from UN reimbursements. The scope for generalized profit-making from either equipment or personnel contributions is limited by intense political pressure against reimbursement rate increases. Individual states can nevertheless make a profit if they (1) invest in inexpensive and old but functional equipment, especially if deployed with usage restrictions, and/or (2) limit the deployment allowances (rather than salaries) they pay their peacekeepers. We establish that only a limited subset of developing states meets the plausibility conditions for the Peacekeeping for profit narrative – and many top UN troop contributors do not.
-
Peacekeeping for profit the scope and limits of â mercenaryâ un Peacekeeping
Journal of Peace Research, 2018Co-Authors: Katharina P. Coleman, Benjamin NybladeAbstract:Developing states furnish the vast majority of UN Peacekeeping troops, a fact academics and policymakers often attribute (at least partly) to developing states’ supposed ability to derive a profit from UN Peacekeeping reimbursements. In this article, we argue that this ‘Peacekeeping for profit’ narrative has been vastly overstated. The conditions for significantly profiting from UN Peacekeeping are in fact highly restrictive, even for developing states. We begin by highlighting two potent reasons for re-examining the Peacekeeping for profit narrative: developing states emerged as the UN’s principal troop contributors in a period of stagnant reimbursement rates when UN Peacekeeping was becoming less financially attractive; and the quantitative evidence scholars have presented as supporting the Peacekeeping for profit narrative is flawed. We then identify the scope conditions within which Peacekeeping for profit provides a plausible explanation for a developing state’s UN troop contributions. First, the deployment and its attendant reimbursements must be significant not only in absolute and per-soldier terms but also in relation to the state’s total armed forces and military expenditure. Second, the state must have an exceptional ability, compared with other troop contributors, to benefit from UN reimbursements. The scope for generalized profit-making from either equipment or personnel contributions is limited by intense political pressure against reimbursement rate increases. Individual states can nevertheless make a profit if they (1) invest in inexpensive and old but functional equipment, especially if deployed with usage restrictions, and/or (2) limit the deployment allowances (rather than salaries) they pay their peacekeepers. We establish that only a limited subset of developing states meets the plausibility conditions for the Peacekeeping for profit narrative – and many top UN troop contributors do not.
Lisa Hultman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Peacekeeping in the Midst of War
2019Co-Authors: Lisa Hultman, Jacob D Kathman, Megan ShannonAbstract:Are United Nations Peacekeeping missions effective at reducing violence in civil wars? Although UN Peacekeeping is a notable intervention tool, the international community lacks systematic knowledge of how well it mitigates civil war violence. Given that UN Peacekeeping is increasingly used in the midst of war, this is a significant research gap with direct policy relevance. This book systematically explores if and how the capacity and constitution of UN Peacekeeping missions affect the amount of violence in civil conflicts. It argues that Peacekeeping effectiveness needs to be assessed in relative terms, theorizing that more robust missions are increasingly capable of addressing combatant incentives for employing violence. The authors conduct large-n analyses of the number of combatants and civilians killed during each month for all civil wars globally from 1992 to 2014, measuring the capacity and constitution of UN missions with unique data on the number and type of Peacekeeping personnel deployed. The analyses reveal that increasing UN military troop and police personnel deployed to a conflict significantly reduces violence against civilians, and increasing UN military troop personnel significantly mitigates battle-related violence. By contrast, smaller missions and missions composed of observers are not associated with reduced violence. The book complements the large-n analyses with qualitative explorations of Peacekeeping mechanisms on violence in Côte d’Ivoire and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The authors conclude that while Peacekeeping is not without detriments, it is an effective tool of violence reduction.
-
Peacekeeping in the Midst of War - Measuring Peacekeeping Effectiveness
Peacekeeping in the Midst of War, 2019Co-Authors: Lisa Hultman, Jacob D Kathman, Megan ShannonAbstract:This chapter describes how United Nations Peacekeeping effectiveness has previously been studied and measured in the academic literature. Peacekeeping is designed to first reduce the violence of civil conflicts before pursuing higher-order goals such as political stability, democratization, and peace consolidation. Yet much research on Peacekeeping makes “absolutist” judgements about success or failure in achieving higher-order outcomes without recognizing that Peacekeeping must first stop violence. The chapter establishes a metric for Peacekeeping effectiveness that is used throughout the book: the reduction of violence in civil wars. It then discusses that peacekeepers often intervene while violence is ongoing, which makes mitigating hostilities a challenging task for the United Nations.
-
united nations Peacekeeping and civilian protection in civil war
American Journal of Political Science, 2013Co-Authors: Lisa Hultman, Jacob D Kathman, Megan ShannonAbstract:Does United Nations Peacekeeping protect civilians in civil war? Civilian protection is a primary purpose of UN Peacekeeping, yet there is little systematic evidence for whether Peacekeeping prevents civilian deaths. We propose that UN Peacekeeping can protect civilians if missions are adequately composed of military troops and police in large numbers. Using unique monthly data on the number and type of UN personnel contributed to Peacekeeping operations, along with monthly data on civilian deaths from 1991 to 2008 in armed conflicts in Africa, we find that as the UN commits more military and police forces to a Peacekeeping mission, fewer civilians are targeted with violence. The effect is substantial - the analyses show that, on average, deploying several thousand troops and several hundred police dramatically reduces civilian killings. We conclude that although the UN is often criticized for its failures, UN Peacekeeping is an effective mechanism of civilian protection.
Hirofumi Shimizu - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
personnel contributions to un and non un Peacekeeping missions
Journal of Peace Research, 2015Co-Authors: Khusrav Gaibulloev, Todd Sandler, Justin George, Hirofumi ShimizuAbstract:Based on spatial panel regressions for 1990–2012, this article draws publicness differences between Peacekeeping personnel contributions to UN and non-UN Peacekeeping operations. The analysis shows that UN missions are much less responsive to personnel spillovers, derived from other contributors’ peacekeepers, than is the case of non-UN missions. UN Peacekeeping missions display either no response or free riding to these personnel spillovers, while non-UN missions indicate spillover complementarity. Moreover, a number of controls distinguish the two kinds of Peacekeeping, where non-UN missions display income normality and UN missions’ deployments increase with the number of concurrent Peacekeeping missions. The latter suggests that some countries specialize in supplying UN peacekeepers as a money-making venture. The positive response to the population variable supports this conjecture for UN missions, because a greater population base provides the recruits for Peacekeeping operations. Our spatial empirical analysis accounts for the endogeneity of peacekeeper spillovers. The article concludes with a host of robustness tests that account for the alternative classes of peacekeepers, African Union and ECOWAS missions, and other empirical variants.
-
Recent Peacekeeping burden sharing
Applied Economics Letters, 2010Co-Authors: Hirofumi Shimizu, Todd SandlerAbstract:This article investigates Peacekeeping burden sharing during the period 2001 to 2006 for NATO allies and a more inclusive sample, which contains the main Peacekeeping contributors. A Kendall rank correlation test for Peacekeeping burdens and gross domestic product is applied to ascertain whether rich countries assume disproportionately large burdens. With recent increases in Peacekeeping expenditures, burdens are being disproportionately shouldered by the rich countries for UN-financed operations. For non-UN-financed Peacekeeping missions, disproportionality of burden sharing holds for NATO allies but not for the large sample. Unequal burden sharing is most prevalent in the years where Peacekeeping spending is the greatest.
-
Peacekeeping and burden sharing 1994 2000
Journal of Peace Research, 2002Co-Authors: Hirofumi Shimizu, Todd SandlerAbstract:This article updates earlier analyses of Peacekeeping burden-sharing for the 1994-2000 period. In particular, we apply a Kendall tau test to determine whether Peacekeeping burdens are being shouldered by the large countries for the small countries in recent years. This test indicates the rank correlation between GDP and Peacekeeping burdens. Two sets of countries are examined: NATO allies and a broader sample of the primary supporters of Peacekeeping missions. The study investigates burden-sharing not only for UN-led Peacekeeping missions, but also for UN-led and non-UN-led missions (for example, Implementation Force in Bosnia, the Kosovo Force). Our spending proxy for non-UN-led Peacekeeping missions relies on troop expense and is much more systematic than proxies in prior studies. The statistical findings indicate that burden-sharing is disproportionate during recent years when compared with the Cold War era. This result suggests that Peacekeeping has a relatively large share of purely public benefits, which is leading to some `exploitation of the large by the small'. It is anticipated that this disproportionality will increase over time and lead to more suboptimal allocation of resources to Peacekeeping from a global vantage point. This article also extends the analysis to investigate the rank correlation between GDP per capita and Peacekeeping burdens in order to ascertain whether the rich are being exploited by the poor. There is some evidence of disproportionate burdens being carried by the rich for just the NATO sample during two recent years when both UN-led and non-UN-led missions are included.
-
The Demand for Un Peacekeeping, 1975-1996
Kyklos, 1999Co-Authors: Jyoti Khanna, Todd Sandler, Hirofumi ShimizuAbstract:A reduced-form equation for UN Peacekeeping contributions is derived, based on a joint product model of Peacekeeping for which both nation-specific and worldwide benefits are associated with Peacekeeping. A Peacekeeping demand equation is then estimated for each of the 25 primary contributing countries for 1975-96. To identify the best set of estimates, we apply a host of specification tests. Results show that contributors responded both to the complementarity of the jointly produced Peacekeeping benefits and to the assessment formula. There is little evidence of free riding among sample countries. Peacekeeping spillins represent the most important determinant of a nation's Peacekeeping contributions, while a contributor's trade total is a second significant determinant for just over a third of the sample. For almost every country, income is not a significant factor. Copyright 1999 by WWZ and Helbing & Lichtenhahn Verlag AG
-
UN Peacekeeping as a public good: analyses of the UN member states' Peacekeeping financial contribution behavior
1Co-Authors: Hirofumi ShimizuAbstract:This dissertation analyzes UN Peacekeeping as a public good. The first chapter discusses the basics of UN Peacekeeping: the UN organs involved in Peacekeeping, the main characteristics of various types of peace operations, the 50-year history of UN Peacekeeping, the financing methods used by the United Nations for its Peacekeeping operations. As an attempt to survey the change in suboptimality of UN Peacekeeping efforts, the second chapter of this dissertation examines the financial burden-sharing patterns of selected UN member states for the period of 1975-96. Using non-parametric statistical tests, this chapter studies the rank correlation between GDP and share of GDP devoted to UN Peacekeeping for four different subsets of UN member states. The test results show evidence of increased disproportionate burden sharing by wealthy countries in the first half of 1990s for a sample which includes only NATO member states. In the third chapter, a reduced-form UN Peacekeeping contribution function is derived using a joint-product model, in which Peacekeeping efforts are assumed to produce contributor-specific benefits as well as purely public benefits.;The contribution functions are estimated for a sample of 25 UN member states for the period of 1975-96. The two-stage least square method is used to get rid of the simultaneity problem associated with public good allocation problem. The estimation results indicate that countries' Peacekeeping contributions react positively to spillins, and react very little to income fluctuations. The fourth chapter analyzes the effects of special assessment system on UN member states' peace-keeping contributions. Countries' actual contribution patterns under the assessment system are examined, and a theoretical model which explains the patterns is developed. The author argues that even without effective sanctions against undercontribution, the existence of assessments increase a country's contribution by increasing its contributor-specific benefits. This chapter also explores a theoretical possibility of increasing the total contribution of each country by redistributing its assessments across Peacekeeping operations according to the value placed on each operation by the country.