The objective of these coding procedures is to distinguish conflict phases and their sequential order in conflict narratives and chronologies for the purpose of making them comparable for further research and providing a common form for the creation of an extendable database.
1. Coding Procedure
2. Analytical Framework Underlying the Coding Procedures
We distinguish six conflict phases:
Phase 1: Dispute Phase
Phase 2: Crisis Phase
Phase 3: Limited Violence Phase
Phase 4: Massive Violence Phase
Phase 5: Abatement Phase
Phase 6: Settlement Phase
Phase 1: Dispute Phase
A dispute phase stands at the beginning of a conflict. It is characterized
by opposing claims that are expressed in ways that use existing institutional
processes. This alone does not distinguish a dispute from other disagreements
and define any political process. The distinguishing characteristic is
rather the expectation of a crisis, that is, the existing institutions
for accomodating divergent claims and interests are threatened or expected
to be disabled or sidestepped. No violence connected to the dispute does
occur.
The opposition underlying a crisis phase is expressed in ways that use the existing institutional processes, but their substitution with violence is openly threatened or expected. Contrary to a dispute phase in which not the use but the threat of using violence is expected, a crisis phase is characterized by the expectation of a regular and systematic use of violence. In fact, incidental and sporadic violence can already occur and give further reason to believe that the way in which the underlying opposition is expressed might soon involve the regular and systematic use of violence. Phase 3: Limited Violence Phase
The regular and systematic use of violence implies that the underlying opposition is no longer expressed within the existing institutional processes to peacefully accomodate diverging claims. In fact, the legitimacy or usefulness of these processes is called into question, and the systematic and regular use of force is considered justified and permissible. However, even if the regular and systematic use of force is justified, not all uses of force are equally justified. For instance, a government might engage in selective military actions against a group of rebels without unduly implicating the civilian population in that region, or unduly interfering with the everyday activities of the rest of the population. We can therefore distinguish a form of conflict that is characterized by a restrained use of force from another form of conflict that is characterized by the unrestrained use of force. We call the former a limited violence phase and the latter a massive violence phase. They usually, but not necessarily, coincide with lower and higher numbers of casualities. The defining characteristic of a limited violence phase is that an unrestrained use of force, and thus a massive violence phase, can be expected. Phase 4: Massive Violence Phase
A massive violence phase is characterized by the regular, systematic, and unrestrained use of force. Institutional processes for peacefully accomodating diverging claims are disabled or avoided, and the opposition underlying the conflict is expressed in using the full range of violent means available. For instance, a government might feel compelled, and could thus justify, that its military actions do not discriminate between the group of rebels against which the actions are directed from the civilian population among which the rebels operate. Notice that our definition of an underlying opposition is sufficiently broad to not only include conflictual behavior that involves the mutual use of violence but also the exclusive use of violence by one group against another. If such violence is used in an unrestrained manner not only war but also genocide and politicide can be characterized in this manner. The unrestrained use of force gives rise to the expectation of destruction or elimination of a party. Phase 5: Abatement Phase
Each of the previous conflict phases is characterized by particular values attributed to the three defining elements - opposition, use of violence, and expectations - and an abatement phase is characterized if certain actions or events temporarily suspend these defining features. Phase 6: Settlement Phase
A settlement phase is characterized by the resolution of the opposition underlying the conflict which establishes or re-establishes mutually recognized institutional processes in which opposing claims are accomodated peacefully.
2. Analytical Framework Underlying the Coding Procedures
We hypothesize that three elements are constitutive of conflicts, that is, a particular configuration of these elements defines a situation as a conflict. The three constitutive elements are:
1) Conflictual Opposition:
A conflictual opposition is one in which two or more parties are pitted
against each other over one or more issues.
2) Use of Violence:
The use of violence is an expression of conflictual behavior. It can be
used in an incidental or sporadic manner in which case the conflict is
embedded within the existing political and social order; or it can be
used in a systematic and regular manner in which case it transforms the
existing political and social order.
3) Expectations:
Expectations refer to the possible developments of the conflict as seen
from the participants' perspective.
A forth element - which is not constitutive - takes account of divergent perspectives on the conflict.
4) Recognition:
Recognition refers to the legitimacy granted by the participants to the
other's claims and status. Recognition does not affect the definition
of a situation as being conflictual, but it does affect the definition
of what type of conflict characterizes a situation.
Depending on the values attributed to these elements different forms and types of conflict can be distinguished. They are represented in Table 1.
Table 1: A Typology of Conflicts
|
Variable
Form of Conflict |
Opposition underlying conflict | Use of violence | Expectation | Recognition | Variable Type of Conflict |
| Dispute | divergent claims are accomodated within existing institutional processes | none | threats of using violence | mutual recognition | international or domestic dispute |
| Crisis | divergent claims are accomodated within existing institutional processes | incidental and sporadic | use of limited or massive violence | mutual recognition | international or regime crisis |
| a party is not recognized | international or domestic terrorism | ||||
| Limited Violence | divergent claims are expressed by the use of violence | regular, systematic, and restrained | use of massive violence | mutual recognition | international intervention or civil war |
| a warring party is not recognized | guerilla war | ||||
| a non-warring party is not recognized | persecution | ||||
| Massive Violence | divergent claims are expressed by the use of violence | regular, systematic, and unrestrained | destruction or elimination | mutual recognition | international war |
| a warring party is not recognized | civil war | ||||
| a non-warring party is not recognized | genocide |
The nominal distinction of forms of conflicts can be translated into conflict phases in order to capture the temporal unfolding of conflicts. This translation is represented in Table 2.
Table 2: Translation of Forms of Conflict into Conflict Phases
|
|
Forms of Conflict |
|
||
| Dispute | Dispute Phase - Opposition is expressed within institutional processes - No violence occurs - Expectation of crisis |
Abatement Phase
- Opposition persists - No violence occurs - Expectation of crisis is suspended |
||
| Crisis | Crisis Phase - Opposition is expressed within institutional processes - Incidental or sporadic violence can occur - Expectation of violence |
Abatement Phase - Opposition persists - No violence occurs - Expectation of violence is suspended |
||
| Limited Violence | Limited Violence Phase - Opposition is expressed by the use of force - Regualar, systematic, and restrained use of force - Expectation of massive violence |
Abatement Phase - Opposition persists - Systematic violence is suspended although sporadic violence can still occur - Expectation of massive violence is suspended |
||
| Massive Violence | Massive Violence Phase - Opposition is expressed by the use of force - Regular, systematic, and unrestrained use of force - Expectation of destruction or elimination |
Abatement Phase - Opposition persists - Systematic violence is suspended although sporadic violence can still occur - Expectation of destruction or elimination is suspended |
||
| Settlement Phase - Opposition is dissolved - No violence occurs - No threat of violence is expected |
||||
An abatement phase is characterized not only as a transitional stage in each of the four forms of conflict, but also demarcates the end of an escalatory trajectory and a potential turning-point in a conflict. Whatever follows an abatement phase it is not simply a continuation of what preceded it. We therefore distinguish conflict episodes as phase sequences that are demarcated by abatement phases. The distinction of conflict episodes is a useful way to represent some of the larger themes of a conflict history, and to connect them to the more detailed aspects of a conflict trajectory. In other words, a more context-sensitive representation of conflict is produced if the history of a conflict is structured in terms of thematically coherent conflict episodes which are not simply recorded as a timeless sequence of previous conflict phases, but whose re-interpretions can be traced and their effects on the further unfolding of a conflict trajectory can be explained.
The sequential composition of conflict phases into conflict episodes is graphically represented in Figure 1:
Figure 1: Graphic Representation of Possible Conflict Phase Sequences
