Econ Papers Daily / 期刊论文
是丰裕还是稀缺？重新评估淡水资源与内战爆发（1960–2023）
Is it abundance or scarcity? Reassessing freshwater resources and civil war onset (1960–2023)
摘要
Popular policy arguments indicate freshwater scarcity leads to civil wars. Yet, studies are unclear about this relationship with arguments based on scarcity, abundance, and human adaptation competing. In this article, I clarify this debate by conducting survival analysis with global data from 1960 to 2023. I construct a short-term freshwater shock variable – separated by positive (flood) and negative (drought) – that addresses the methodological limitations of the literature. My results show that both positive and negative shocks increase the likelihood of civil wars but with different temporal patterns. Negative shocks have immediate same-year positive association with conflict hazard, whereas positive shocks have a one-year delay. Interaction models further indicate that this relationship is not moderated by level of democracy, agriculture-dependence, or ethnic division contexts, while arid conditions amplify the hazard from negative shocks. Conclusions indicate policy must accentuate freshwater concerns to mitigate potential civil wars, as climate change brings drastic freshwater crises.
中文摘要
流行的政策论点表明，淡水稀缺会导致内战。然而，相关研究对这一关系尚不明确，基于稀缺、丰裕与人类适应能力的论点相互竞争。本文通过运用1960年至2023年的全球数据进行生存分析，以厘清这一争论。我构建了一个短期淡水冲击变量——按正向（洪水）和负向（干旱）加以区分——以解决文献中的方法论局限。我的结果表明，正向和负向冲击都会增加内战的可能性，但具有不同的时间模式。负向冲击与冲突风险在同年即呈正向关联，而正向冲击则有一年的滞后。交互模型进一步表明，这一关系不受民主水平、农业依赖程度或族群分裂背景的调节，而干旱条件会放大负向冲击带来的风险。结论表明，政策必须强调淡水关切，以缓解潜在的内战，因为气候变化会带来剧烈的淡水危机。