Abstract
Many civil wars have been terminated with a peace agreement that ends the fighting, but these agreements have not always resulted in lasting peace. Earlier research on peace agreements has missed important points during which justice principles can play a role in establishing durable peace – during the negotiation process itself (procedural justice: PJ) and as incorporated into the negotiated outcome (distributive justice: DJ). Nor has the earlier research simultaneously considered the variety of dimensions that define durable peace, including reconciliation, security reform, governance, and economic growth. This study fills these gaps by examining the relationship between the justice and peace variables in 50 civil wars. Our analyses show that PJ and DJ led to more stable agreements and to a more durable peace: A significant time-lagged path from the justice to peace variables was demonstrated. The results suggest that just negotiation processes and outcomes are important contributors to peace.
This paper received the best paper award at the June 2016 Group Decision and Negotiation (GDN) conference in Bellingham, Washington.
The original version of this chapter has been revised: Copy editing mistakes have been corrected throughout the chapter. The erratum to this chapter is available at DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-52624-9_13
An erratum to this chapter can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52624-9_13
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
In our previous work, we used the phrase durable agreements (DA). In this paper, we use the phrase stable agreements (SA). The change in terminology was motivated by an attempt to clarify the distinction between implementing agreements and societal peace. Using the word “durable” for both may be confusing to readers. Thanks go to Ari Kacowicz for suggesting this distinction.
- 2.
Forty-two of the cases are included in the UCDP data set. For the remaining eight cases, a research assistant reviewed case data and assessed this variable.
- 3.
Some PKOs were in the country before the peace agreement was adopted, in which case this measure begins counting years when the agreement was adopted, and not total number of years of the PKO. In a few cases, the PKOs continue to the present day. The calculation for these cases goes to October 2014, when the variable was developed. The measure incorporates multiple PKOs in some cases, where successive PKOs were approved at the conclusion of the previous PKO.
- 4.
We evaluate the CE index based on absolute values and divided by population, but do not find different results with the population-adjusted figures. The correlations reported in the paper are based on the absolute values.
- 5.
Correlations were also computed with a three-component DP index that excludes economic growth. The pattern of correlations between this index, SA, and the justice variables is only marginally higher than those reported with the four-component index. The two indexes are very highly correlated (.98).
- 6.
Interestingly the 16 cases used in Wagner and Druckman [43] also used PK missions following the agreements. The correlations between PJ and reconciliation were almost identical for the two PK data sets: .66 and .65.
- 7.
The shorter paths (single mediating variables) are stronger when evaluated with Sobel’s z statistic. DJ is shown to mediate the relationship between PJ and DP at a borderline level of significance (z = 1.54, p < .06, one-tailed) as well as between PJ and reconciliation (z = 1.43, p < .08, one-tailed). SA also mediates the relationship between DJ and DP (z = 1.65, p < .05, one-tailed).
References
Adams, J.S.: Inequity in social exchange. In: Berkowitz, L. (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 2, pp. 267–299. Academic Press, New York (1965)
Albin, C., Druckman, D.: Equality matters: negotiating an end to civil wars. J. Conflict Resolut. 56(2), 155–182 (2012)
Albin, C., Druckman, D.: Procedures matter: justice and effectiveness in international trade negotiations. Eur. J. Int. Relat. 20(4), 1014–1042 (2014)
Ambrose, M.L., Cropanzano, R.: A longitudinal analysis of organizational fairness: an examination of reactions to tenure and promotion decisions. J. Appl. Psychol. 88(2), 266–275 (2003)
Ball, N., Halevy, T.: Making Peace Work: The Role of the International Development Community. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (1996)
Binningsbø, H.M., Loyle, C.E., Gates, S., Elster, J.: Armed conflict and post-conflict justice, 1946–2006: a dataset. J Peace Res. 49(5), 731–740 (2012)
Brockner, J., Tyler, T.R., Cooper-Schneider, R.: The influence of prior commitment to an institution on reactions to perceived unfairness: the higher they are, the harder they fall. Adm. Sci. Q. 37, 241–261 (1992)
Brockner, J., Wiesenfeld, B.M.: An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychol. Bull. 120, 189–208 (1996)
Brockner, J.: Scope of justice in the workplace: the case of survivors’ reactions to co-worker layoffs. J. Soc. Issues 46, 95–106 (1990)
Brockner, J., DeWitt, R., Grover, S., Reed, T.: When it is especially important to explain why: factors affecting the relationship between managers’ explanations of a layoff and survivors’ reactions to the layoff. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 26, 389–407 (1990)
Burton, J.W.: The history of international conflict resolution. In: Azar, E.E., Burton, J.W. (eds.) International Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice, pp. 40–55. Lynne Reinner, Boulder (1986)
Collier, P.: On the economic consequences of civil war. Oxford Econ. Pap. 51(1), 168–183 (1999)
Cook, K.S., Hegtvedt, K.A.: Distributive justice, equity, and equality. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 9, 217–241 (1983)
Cousens, E.M., Kumar, C., Wermester, K. (eds.): Peacebuilding as Politics: Cultivating Peace in Fragile Societies. Lynne Rienner, Boulder (2001)
Deutsch, M.: Distributive Justice: A Social-Psychological Perspective. Yale University Press, New Haven (1985)
Diehl, P.F., Druckman, D.: Peace operation success: the evaluation framework. In: Druckman, D., Diehl, P.F. (eds.) Peace Operation Success: A Comparative Analysis. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden (2013)
Diehl, P.F., Druckman, D.: Evaluating Peace Operations. Lynne Rienner, Boulder (2010)
Diehl, P.F., Druckman, D., Wall, J.: International peacekeeping and conflict resolution: a taxonomic analysis with implications. J. Conflict Resolut. 42(1), 33–55 (1998)
Downs, G., Stedman, S.J.: Evaluation issues in peace implementation. In: Stedman, S.J., Rothchild, D., Cousens, E.M. (eds.) Ending Civil Wars: The Implementation of Peace Agreements. Lynne Rienner, Boulder (2002)
Druckman, D.: Settlements and resolutions: consequences of negotiation processes in the laboratory and in the field. Int. Negot. 7(3), 313–338 (2002)
Druckman, D., Albin, C.: Distributive justice and the durability of peace agreements. Rev. Int. Stud. 37(3), 1137–1168 (2011)
Druckman, D., Wagner, L.: Justice and negotiation. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 67, 387–413 (2016)
Harmon, D., Kim, P.: Trust repair via distributive justice rationales: the contingent implications of equity, equality, and need. In: 26th Meeting of the International Association of Conflict Management, Takoma, WA (2013)
Hartzell, C., Hoddie, M.: Institutionalizing peace: power sharing and post-civil war conflict management. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 47(2), 318–332 (2003)
Hauenstein, N.M.A., Mcgonigle, T., Flinder, S.W.: A meta-analysis of the relationship between procedural justice and distributive justice: implications for justice research. Empl. Responsib. Rights J. 13(1), 39–56 (2001)
Hayes, A.F.: Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-based Approach. The Guilford Press, New York (2013)
Hayner, P.B.: Unspeakable Truths: Transitional Justice and the Challenge of Truth Commissions. Routledge, New York (2011)
Hollander-Blumoff, R., Tyler, T.R.: Procedural justice in negotiation: procedural fairness, outcome acceptance, and integrative potential. Law Soc. Inq. 33, 473–500 (2008)
Kabanoff, B.: Equity, equality, power, and conflict. Acad. Manag. Rev. 16, 416–441 (1991)
Kapstein, E.B.: Fairness considerations in world politics: lessons from international trade negotiations. Polit. Sci. Q. 123, 229–245 (2008)
Lind, E.A., Tyler, T.R.: The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. Plenum, New York (1988)
Markusen, A., DiGiovanna, S., Leary, M.C. (eds.): From Defense to Development? International Perspectives on Realizing the Peace Dividend. Routledge, London (2003)
Martin, P.: Coming together: power-sharing and the durability of negotiated peace settlements. Civ. Wars 15(3), 332–358 (2013)
Mitchell, S.M., Diehl, P.F., Morrow, J.D.: Guide to the Scientific Study of International Processes. Wiley, New York (2012)
O’Reilly, C.: Investment and institutions in post-civil war recovery. Comp. Econ. Stud. 56, 1–24 (2014)
Paris, R.: At War’s End: Building Peace After Civil Conflict. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)
Shapiro, D.L.: The effect of explanations on negative reactions to deceit. Adm. Sci. Q. 36, 614–630 (1991)
Stedman, S.J.: Introduction. In: Stedman, S.J., Rothchild, D.E., Cousens, E.M. (eds.) Ending Civil Wars: The Implementation of Peace Agreements. Lynne Rienner, Boulder (2002)
Szablewska, N., Bachmann, S.-D. (eds.): Current Issues in Transitional Justice: Towards a More Holistic Approach. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)
Thoms, O., Ron, N.T., Paris, R.: State-level effects of transitional justice: what do we know? Int. J. Transit. Justice 4, 329–354 (2010)
United Nations: Report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations. United Nations (2000)
Wagner, L., Druckman, D.: The role of justice in historical negotiations. Negot. Confl. Manag. Res. 5(1), 49–71 (2012)
Wagner, L., Druckman, D.: Drivers of durable peace: The role of justice in negotiating civil war termination. Grp. Decis. Negot. 26(1), 45–67 (2017)
Zartman, I.W., Druckman, D., Jensen, L., Pruitt, D.G., Young, H.P.: Negotiation as a search for justice. Int. Negot. 1(1), 79–98 (1996)
Acknowledgments
Support for this study was provided by a Swedish Research Council grant [C0114201; registration number 421-2012-1142] for a research project titled, “From peace negotiation to durable peace: The multiple roles of justice.” Special thanks go to Sayra van den Berg and Annerose Nisser for their excellent work on coding the documents for each case.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Druckman, D., Wagner, L. (2017). Negotiating Peace: The Role of Procedural and Distributive Justice in Achieving Durable Peace. In: Bajwa, D., Koeszegi, S., Vetschera, R. (eds) Group Decision and Negotiation. Theory, Empirical Evidence, and Application. GDN 2016. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 274. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52624-9_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52624-9_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-52623-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-52624-9
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)