Periodic Reporting for period 4 - NASTAC (Nationalist State Transformation and Conflict)
Periodo di rendicontazione: 2023-05-01 al 2024-10-31
The NASTAC project analyzes how nationalism has transformed the state with respect to its outer shape, internal institutions, and conflict behavior. The original proposal states four main objectives, each one corresponding to a work package. While the first objective concerns state formation in Europe before the age of nationalism, the second one addresses how nationalism reshaped the state both internally and externally, also in Europe. The third objective broadens this analysis to the rest of the world after World War II, while keeping studying post-nationalist processes including power sharing. A fourth objective focuses on generating new data on the substantive topics addressed by the three first objectives. The NASTAC project aims to provide information that is relevant to the understanding and prevention of conflict and geopolitical stability caused by nationalism.
Project team:
Lars-Erik Cederman, PI
Luc Girardin, IT expert
Carl-Müller Crepon, postdoc
Yannick Pengl, postdoc
Guy Schvitz, postdoc
Dennis Atzenhofer, PhD student
Paola Galano Toro, PhD student
Maria Muños, PhD student
Roberto Valli, PhD student
Project team:
Lars-Erik Cederman, PI
Luc Girardin, IT expert
Carl-Müller Crepon, postdoc
Yannick Pengl, postdoc
Guy Schvitz, postdoc
Dennis Atzenhofer, PhD student
Paola Galano Toro, PhD student
Maria Muños, PhD student
Roberto Valli, PhD student
The first phase of the project focused on data collection and integration covering state and ethnic boundaries, conflict patterns and railroads (see Work Package 4). The main innovation in this respect is the reliance on historical maps that were scanned, processed and integrated into analyzable datasets used in Work Packages 1-3. As regards Work Package 1, a new article confirms Charles Tilly’s dictum that “war made the state, and the state made war” in early modern Europe.
In connection with Work Package 2, two new papers study the size and shape respectively of states after the French Revolution. The papers offer evidence in line with the idea that nationalism has influenced the external dimensions of states. Further contributing to Work Package 2 but also to Work Package 3, our main research efforts concern the link between ethno-nationalist configurations and the outbreak of conflict. While the existing literature on nationalism has relatively little to say about the precise conditions under which nationalist politics trigger internal and interstate conflict, these articles show that specific ethno-nationalist configurations, especially irredentist ones can be linked to a higher risk of political violence.
Moreover, we have found evidence pointing to interaction between internal and interstate conflicts. We have also been able to establish that those ethnic groups that were subjected to a loss of political power and/or unity are over-represented in our conflict statistics. Without questioning the fundamental modernity of contemporary nations, these findings rely on data that go back as far back as 1100 AD.
Finally, using railroad data as a measure of the European states’ penetration of their territories, analysis also indicate that such modernization forays tend to trigger separatism rather than merely integrating them. This analysis focuses primarily on Europe, but as suggested by the third objective, some of them extend the scope of the entire world based on more recent samples. Generally, the findings suggest that the more aligned state borders are with ethnic ones, the less likely conflict becomes. However, this does not imply that border change, for instance through partition is the best way to reduce conflict.
Indeed, as a part of Work Package 3, a separate study shows that partition of states can bring peace by eliminating alien rule, but that power sharing arrangements also help to pacify potentially causing less geopolitical side-effects. So far, we have been able to publish nine articles, and have one more paper under review. In addition, building on these papers, a book is forthcoming with Cambridge University Press with the title “Nationalism and the Transformation of the State: Border Change and Political Violence in the Modern World.”
In connection with Work Package 2, two new papers study the size and shape respectively of states after the French Revolution. The papers offer evidence in line with the idea that nationalism has influenced the external dimensions of states. Further contributing to Work Package 2 but also to Work Package 3, our main research efforts concern the link between ethno-nationalist configurations and the outbreak of conflict. While the existing literature on nationalism has relatively little to say about the precise conditions under which nationalist politics trigger internal and interstate conflict, these articles show that specific ethno-nationalist configurations, especially irredentist ones can be linked to a higher risk of political violence.
Moreover, we have found evidence pointing to interaction between internal and interstate conflicts. We have also been able to establish that those ethnic groups that were subjected to a loss of political power and/or unity are over-represented in our conflict statistics. Without questioning the fundamental modernity of contemporary nations, these findings rely on data that go back as far back as 1100 AD.
Finally, using railroad data as a measure of the European states’ penetration of their territories, analysis also indicate that such modernization forays tend to trigger separatism rather than merely integrating them. This analysis focuses primarily on Europe, but as suggested by the third objective, some of them extend the scope of the entire world based on more recent samples. Generally, the findings suggest that the more aligned state borders are with ethnic ones, the less likely conflict becomes. However, this does not imply that border change, for instance through partition is the best way to reduce conflict.
Indeed, as a part of Work Package 3, a separate study shows that partition of states can bring peace by eliminating alien rule, but that power sharing arrangements also help to pacify potentially causing less geopolitical side-effects. So far, we have been able to publish nine articles, and have one more paper under review. In addition, building on these papers, a book is forthcoming with Cambridge University Press with the title “Nationalism and the Transformation of the State: Border Change and Political Violence in the Modern World.”
Relying on historical maps and innovative spatial statistical tools, the NASTAC project introduces data on state and ethnic boundaries, conflict patterns, and railroads . Our findings support Charles Tilly’s assertion that “war made the state, and the state made war” in early modern Europe. Moving into the era of nationalism, our analysis explores how nationalism influenced state boundaries post-French Revolution and investigates the link between ethno-nationalist configurations and conflict patterns. The studies reveal that specific configurations, especially irredentist ones, correlate with higher political violence risks. Evidence also indicates interactions between internal and interstate conflicts, with over-representation of ethnic groups that lost political power or unity in conflict data, dating back to 1100 AD.
An analysis using railroad data suggests that modernization efforts often trigger separatism rather than integration. While aligning state and ethnic borders generally reduces conflict, the findings do not necessarily favor border change or partition as a conflict reduction strategy. Additional research indicates that while partition can bring peace by ending alien rule, power-sharing arrangements may also help mitigate conflict with fewer geopolitical side effects.
The project has published nine articles, with one more under review, and a book titled Nationalism and the Transformation of the State: Border Change and Political Violence in the Modern World is forthcoming with Cambridge University Press.
An analysis using railroad data suggests that modernization efforts often trigger separatism rather than integration. While aligning state and ethnic borders generally reduces conflict, the findings do not necessarily favor border change or partition as a conflict reduction strategy. Additional research indicates that while partition can bring peace by ending alien rule, power-sharing arrangements may also help mitigate conflict with fewer geopolitical side effects.
The project has published nine articles, with one more under review, and a book titled Nationalism and the Transformation of the State: Border Change and Political Violence in the Modern World is forthcoming with Cambridge University Press.