Positive trend for world peace – except in new democracies

One type of conflict cannot be predicted by the researchers' model: In countries such as Syria and Libya where demands for democratisation create violent conflicts.

In November last year, Håvard Hegre took over the Dag Hammarskjöld Professorship in Uppsala after Peter Wallansteen. He came directly from Oslo - from the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO) and the University of Oslo - where he previously in same year presented his forecast for peace and conflicts in the world, which was made in collaboration with Uppsala University.

The forecast gives an optimistic picture: In 2050, the percentage of countries in conflict will have fallen to 7 per cent from 16.5 per cent in 2012. Just over one per cent - two countries - will be involved in conflicts that cause 1000 or more deaths per year.

This optimistic scenario attracted a great deal of attention both locally and internationally,’ explains Håvard Hegre.

‘Of course it is controversial to make this kind of forecast and naturally there are many factors that can change, but our model is based on extensive research and data about conflicts between 1946 and 2012 from the Uppsala Conflict Data Project.

One of the most important trends is that poverty in the world is on the decrease. It also means fewer conflicts, as countries where a large part of the population is poor, uneducated and young, are more likely to enter into conflict.

More than half of the world's conflicts in 2012 were in the poorest quarter of the countries.

‘There are several reasons for this.’ Poverty is a motivation for conflict and can lead to revolts. Besides, it is easy to recruit soldiers in countries with many poor and the elite lose less due to the economic impact of the conflict. Therefore, the reduction in poverty is one of the most important factors in our model.

Another factor is the so-called “conflict trap”. The longer there has been peace in a country, the less chance of war.

‘Conflicts beget conflicts and peace fosters peace. Five years after a conflict, the risk of a new conflict is five times greater than before the conflict. Every year of peace makes a difference,’ says Håvard Hegre.

A positive trend can also be seen here. In 2012, the world's countries had on average had 42 years of peace, as compared with the average in 1960 of 27 years.

‘As we have experienced a trend of decreasing conflicts over the past 20 years, you can be optimistic about the next 40 years.

Another important factor is that attitudes to violence and conflict have changed,’ says Håvard Hegre.

‘The war between the USA and Vietnam would not have been possible today.’ It was only 40 years ago, but since then there has been a dramatic change in our attitude towards the use of violence.

However, another kind of conflict, which could not be predicted by the model developed by researchers, is increasing: In countries such as Syria and Libya where demands for democratisation create violent conflicts.

‘We need to build democratisation into our model to be able to provide a better prognosis. This means that we must be able to predict changes in political systems in the coming years, which increases the complexity.’

In the long-term, democratisation is a factor that strengthens peace. It usually results in increased levels of education, reduced poverty and higher incomes. So despite these new conflicts, the forecast of fewer wars in the world remains.

It's not the picture you get when you follow the news?

‘The media are conflict-oriented, and their selection is not representative. There is a strong focus on the conflict in Syria, but not much is written about Colombia where the conflict is almost over,’ says Håvard Hegre.

---

FACTS/Factors that affect peace

* Fighting poverty and education (fewer conflicts)

* Decolonisation and division of states (initially more conflicts)

* UN peacekeeping operations (fewer conflicts)

* Democratisation (initially more, but in the long term fewer conflicts)

* Growing population (more conflicts in large populations, but fewer conflicts per capita)