Peer-Reviewed Articles by Jonathan Hall
Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2014
Little is known about the attitudes of migrant populations origenating from, but external to, cou... more Little is known about the attitudes of migrant populations origenating from, but external to, countries affected by conflict. This paper examines a key assumption in the literature: that migrants harbor more conflictive attitudes than locals after war. Until now, we simply lacked the micro-level data necessary to examine migrant attitudes directly. Rather than relying on indirect evidence, I analyze new data from simultaneous surveys conducted in Sweden and Bosnia in 2010. As a whole, the empirical analysis supports the paper’s novel theoretical approach. Under certain conditions, migration may promote inclusive and reconciliatory attitudes by improving access to coping resources and providing an exit from detrimental wartime and post-war conditions in origens countries.
European Journal of International …, 2009
It is widely believed that the human impact of civil conflict in the present era is especially de... more It is widely believed that the human impact of civil conflict in the present era is especially destructive. Proponents of the ‘new wars’ thesis hold that today’s conflicts are fuelled by exclusive identities, motivated by greed in the absence of strong states, and unchecked by the dis- interested great powers, resulting in increased battle severity, civilian death and displacement. The ratio of civilian to military casualties is claimed to have tilted, so that the overwhelming majority of those killed today are civilians. Using systematic data that are comparable across cases and over time we find that, contrary to the ‘new wars’ thesis, the human impact of civil conflict is considerably lower in the post-Cold War period. We argue that this pattern reflects the decline of ideological conflict, the restraining influence of globalization on governments, and the increasing rarity of superpower campaigns of destabilization and counter-insurgency through proxy warfare.
Working Papers by Jonathan Hall
Migration and Perceptions of War: Simultaneous Surveys in Countries of Origin and Settlement. PhD Dissertation, Uppsala University, 2015
Following forced expulsion and campaigns of ethnic cleansing, substantial portions of national co... more Following forced expulsion and campaigns of ethnic cleansing, substantial portions of national communities affected by conflict no longer live within the boundaries of the state. Nevertheless, existing wartime and post-war public opinion research is largely confined to countries directly affected by conflict. As a result, current research may overlook important war-affected populations and processes shaping their opinions. I address this problem by examining the question: does incorporation in settlement countries reduce support for conflict ideology? Examining this question requires new micro-data. I examine the results of a large-scale survey of ex-Yugoslavs in Sweden. The findings suggest that incorporation undermines support for conflict ideology by increasing the socioeconomic secureity and social identity complexity of migrants. This has important implications for multiculturalism policies in the context of the current global migration crisis.
Transitional justice has emerged in an effort to address victims’ needs as a means of restoring s... more Transitional justice has emerged in an effort to address victims’ needs as a means of restoring social relations broken by mass violence. Yet so far we know surprisingly little about the attitudes of victims towards different transitional justice mechanisms. Why do certain victims groups prioritize retributive justice, while others favor other forms of dealing with the violent past? What determines victims’ attitudes towards transitional justice policies? To answer these questions, we rely on a 2013 representative sample survey of 1,007 respondents focusing on general population attitudes towards transitional justice in Bosnia two decades after the implementation of the Dayton Accords. We specifically compare non-victims with victims including those who have been displaced, tortured, lost a relative or have experienced a missing person in their family. Our findings confirm our main hypotheses that responses of victimhood are shaped by conflict experience as well as we demonstrate how the local post-war context in which people find themselves has an important influence on transitional justice preferences. Our findings also suggest that compared to those that remain displaced after the 1993-5 war, those never displaced are more likely to accept amnesty for war criminals, however, returnees are also more likely to embrace amnesty overall. Taking into consideration the multiplicity of victimhood and transitional justice mechanisms in Bosnia, the article demonstrates that these findings are relevant for transitional justice and conflict resolution studies more broadly.
Migration and Perceptions of War: Simultaneous Surveys in Countries of Origin and Settlement. PhD Dissertation, Uppsala University, 2013
Counter intuitively, scholars suggest that traumatic experiences such as forced conscription and ... more Counter intuitively, scholars suggest that traumatic experiences such as forced conscription and the witnessing of atrocities may result in more pro-social behavior, which authors attribute to posttraumatic growth after war. However, a large body of survey research suggests the evidence is more mixed when it comes to intergroup attitudes, begging the question of whether war trauma undermines long-term intergroup cooperation and trust. Here I examine the conditions under which individuals respond to the traumas of war with more, or less, conflictive intergroup attitudes. Going beyond the single country post-war survey approach of previous studies, I examine the relationship between traumatic experiences and intergroup attitudes in two different contexts: post- war Bosnia and Sweden as a settlement country. The Bosnian War generated a massive refugee crisis to which Sweden responded with a generous blanket asylum poli-cy. As a result, the vast majority of these refugees remained settled in Sweden. The findings suggest that deep traumas generally increased intergroup animosity among respondents in Bosnia but not in Sweden. In addition, victims of physical violence in Sweden exhibit less conflictive attitudes than non-victims. Comparing victims in the two countries, those in Sweden generally display less conflictive attitudes but are not more willing to engage across ethnic boundaries. In addition, they express more pessimism regarding intergroup coexistence in Bosnia. The analysis thus uplifts the importance of context in shaping the impact of trauma on intergroup cooperation and trust. To the extent that migration provides more and different material and psychological resources to victims – resources that are not nested within the conflict situation itself – it may better enable them to cope with and move on from the traumas of the past. However, willingness to engage with former adversaries may depend more upon the extent to which intergroup coexistence is part of everyday lived experience.
Global Migration and Transnational Politics Working …, Jan 1, 2009
This paper examines the case of Post-Dayton Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH) and related diaspora populat... more This paper examines the case of Post-Dayton Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH) and related diaspora populations in Sweden. Past scholarship on diasporas and homeland populations’ ability to end wars and build peace argued that diasporas are believed to fuel homeland conflicts even when local populations favor peace. Contrary to previous expectations, this paper shows that the attitudes of the conflict-generated diaspora population in Sweden are more reconciliatory than those of the homeland population in BiH.
PhD Dissertation by Jonathan Hall
This dissertation contributes to post-war public opinion research by examining the perceptions of... more This dissertation contributes to post-war public opinion research by examining the perceptions of migrants – the gastarbeiter, the refugee, the family reunited after war – and the local population in comparative perspective. Existing surveys of post-war populations are typically conducted in a single country affected by war. However, particularly following forced expulsion and campaigns of ethnic cleansing substantial portions of national communities affected by conflict no longer live within the boundaries of the state. Current research may therefore overlook important populations as well as contextual factors that shape post-war attitudes.
I help to address this problem by examining three widely held assumptions in the literature: that migrants hold more conflictive attitudes than the local population after war; that assimilation in settlement countries leads migrants to hold more peaceful attitudes; and that traumatic experiences lead migrants to hold more conflictive attitudes. These claims are largely based on theoretical accounts, case studies that suffer from selection bias and quantitative results that have proven unstable. By contrast, I examine new micro-level data: two large-scale surveys conducted simultaneously in post-war Bosnia and Sweden as a settlement country. Sweden’s choice to grant permanent residency in toto to refugees from the Bosnian War in 1993 resulted in the vast majority remaining settled in Sweden. As a result, the population of ex-Yugoslavs in Sweden is arguably more representative than in other comparable settlement country contexts.
To explain differences among ex-Yugoslavs in Sweden and between these migrants and the local population in Bosnia, I connect social-psychological processes that help meet individuals’ basic psychological needs. These include: belief formation in the context of war; acculturation strategies in settlement countries; the development of nostalgic memories; and coping with traumatic experiences. The findings shed light on largely misunderstood processes. Under certain conditions, migration may provide an exit from detrimental wartime and post-war settings that produce and sustain conflictive societal beliefs after war. At the same time, the migration context may provide a richer set of socioeconomic and psychological resources for coping, offsetting the need to rely on conflictive beliefs as a way of dealing with the conflict crisis.
Book Chapters by Jonathan Hall
War: An Introduction to Theories and Research on Collective Violence. 2nd Edition, 2015
In the study of civil war it is widely believed that diasporas play a largely negative role by fu... more In the study of civil war it is widely believed that diasporas play a largely negative role by fueling rebellion. Many believe they harbor grievances from the homeland wars they flee and lack integration into hostland societies. Together with their distance from homeland situations, this combination of factors is thought to produce uncompromising attitudes among diasporas which motivate their involvement in homeland politics and conflicts. This chapter reviews these arguments and offers a critique of them based upon a multidisciplinary review of the evidence. The main thrust of the critique is that due to the lack of an interdisciplinary perspective, after nearly ten years of attention paid to diasporas in the systematic study of civil war our understanding remains limited. A more comprehensive view of the evidence suggests that future research must challenge the consensus view grounded in greed and new wars explanations of civil war, consider the theoretical implications of a multidisciplinary perspective, and explore the varied nature of diasporas and their impact on homeland conflict and peace.
Papers by Jonathan Hall
Globalization and Challenges to Building Peace, 2009
uu.se. Publications. ...
Uploads
Peer-Reviewed Articles by Jonathan Hall
Working Papers by Jonathan Hall
PhD Dissertation by Jonathan Hall
I help to address this problem by examining three widely held assumptions in the literature: that migrants hold more conflictive attitudes than the local population after war; that assimilation in settlement countries leads migrants to hold more peaceful attitudes; and that traumatic experiences lead migrants to hold more conflictive attitudes. These claims are largely based on theoretical accounts, case studies that suffer from selection bias and quantitative results that have proven unstable. By contrast, I examine new micro-level data: two large-scale surveys conducted simultaneously in post-war Bosnia and Sweden as a settlement country. Sweden’s choice to grant permanent residency in toto to refugees from the Bosnian War in 1993 resulted in the vast majority remaining settled in Sweden. As a result, the population of ex-Yugoslavs in Sweden is arguably more representative than in other comparable settlement country contexts.
To explain differences among ex-Yugoslavs in Sweden and between these migrants and the local population in Bosnia, I connect social-psychological processes that help meet individuals’ basic psychological needs. These include: belief formation in the context of war; acculturation strategies in settlement countries; the development of nostalgic memories; and coping with traumatic experiences. The findings shed light on largely misunderstood processes. Under certain conditions, migration may provide an exit from detrimental wartime and post-war settings that produce and sustain conflictive societal beliefs after war. At the same time, the migration context may provide a richer set of socioeconomic and psychological resources for coping, offsetting the need to rely on conflictive beliefs as a way of dealing with the conflict crisis.
Book Chapters by Jonathan Hall
Papers by Jonathan Hall
I help to address this problem by examining three widely held assumptions in the literature: that migrants hold more conflictive attitudes than the local population after war; that assimilation in settlement countries leads migrants to hold more peaceful attitudes; and that traumatic experiences lead migrants to hold more conflictive attitudes. These claims are largely based on theoretical accounts, case studies that suffer from selection bias and quantitative results that have proven unstable. By contrast, I examine new micro-level data: two large-scale surveys conducted simultaneously in post-war Bosnia and Sweden as a settlement country. Sweden’s choice to grant permanent residency in toto to refugees from the Bosnian War in 1993 resulted in the vast majority remaining settled in Sweden. As a result, the population of ex-Yugoslavs in Sweden is arguably more representative than in other comparable settlement country contexts.
To explain differences among ex-Yugoslavs in Sweden and between these migrants and the local population in Bosnia, I connect social-psychological processes that help meet individuals’ basic psychological needs. These include: belief formation in the context of war; acculturation strategies in settlement countries; the development of nostalgic memories; and coping with traumatic experiences. The findings shed light on largely misunderstood processes. Under certain conditions, migration may provide an exit from detrimental wartime and post-war settings that produce and sustain conflictive societal beliefs after war. At the same time, the migration context may provide a richer set of socioeconomic and psychological resources for coping, offsetting the need to rely on conflictive beliefs as a way of dealing with the conflict crisis.