How does armed conflict impact on households and how do they respond to and cope with it? This paper from the Institute of Development Studies examines the direct and indirect effects of conflicts and shows that the indirect effects are channelled through markets, political institutions and social networks. Until there is more research on the fundamental processes linking armed civil conflict and household welfare, it will be difficult to develop effective policies for preventing and resolving conflicts.
Insecure socio-economic environments in developing countries force vulnerable people into deprivation and distress. Outbreaks of armed conflict are likely to increase insecurity further. These are typically associated with the destruction of essential infrastructure and social services, the breakdown of the rule of law, as well as with significant reductions in private and public investment. Armed conflicts kill and displace populations, often limiting the access of households to employment and income (such as the effect of the death or inability to recruit young adult males), and increasing levels of instability and loss of trust. This situation can be aggravated once displaced and refugee populations, and demobilised combatants, return to their communities in post-conflict situations, particularly when food aid and medical help may no longer be available.
The micro-level processes are generally absent from policy programmes aimed at preventing, managing and resolving violent conflicts. The difficulties associated with micro-level research of armed conflict mean that such policies are being designed on the basis of little evidence.
The ability to identify how individuals and households behave and relate to other households in armed conflict settings, as well as an understanding of the consequences of violence on their welfare and behaviour, are critical to the design of effective post-conflict recovery policies.
- Despite the various strategies adopted by households living in areas of armed conflict, vulnerability and deprivation remain high.
- There are often severe market imperfections, such as limited opportunities to use assets due to violence, as well as constraints in credit and insurance markets.
- There are problems with adopting effective forms of income diversification due to poor property rights, limited access to existing or new market opportunities, a breakdown of the rule of law and increases in physical insecurity.
- The challenges of reintegrating ex-fighters and displaced populations, and of rebuilding institutions, infrastructure and communities torn by violence, further hinder the process of reconstructing household welfare.
Policies aimed at promoting sustainable peace structures must address the breakdown of households and communities caused by armed conflicts.
- Displaced populations and demobilised soldiers left without social and economic options are particularly vulnerable. Unless their conditions are improved, they can undermine attempts for sustainable conflict resolution.
- Attempts to end internal conflicts and eradicate their initial causes must be built upon an understanding of the dynamics of displacement, as well as patterns of resettlement during and after conflicts.
- Young people are an important target group for post-conflict reconstruction policies.
- The success and sustainability of post-conflict reconstruction policies will depend greatly on the meaningful participation of refugees in decision- and policy-making processes.
- The generation of employment opportunities and enhancement of the productive capacity of households are important for the reconstruction of household welfare.
- There must be a focus of post-conflict reconstruction policies on guaranteeing the well-functioning of property rights and of credit and financial institutions.
