How much does violence cost?

This blog, written by Philippa Lysaght with the Institute for Economics and Peace, is about a new report on the international costs of global violence. It is part of the Wikiprogress series on Peace.

The international cost of violence containment has surpassed the combined GDPs of Germany and Japan.

The Economic Cost of Violence Containment, the latest report from the Institute for Economics and Peace, calculates the cost of violence in over 150 countries according to 13 types of violence related spending.

The research shows that violence containment, which is understood as any economic activity related to the prevention or consequences of violence, has a global economic impact of US$9.56 trillion.

To put this in perspective, violence containment is equal to US$1,300 for every person on the planet every year and is almost double the size of the world’s agriculture industry.

Violence containment spending is over 2.4 times the size of the total GDP of Africa. 

 

While some spending on violence containment is necessary, the less a nation spends on violence-related functions, the more resources can be allocated to other more productive areas, such as education and health, which benefit not only the wellbeing of a society, but also the economy.

Reducing violence containment spending and investing in the underlying institutions that encourage peace and wellbeing, creates more peaceful and economically prosperous societies. 

The aim of this research is to help understand the full costs of conflict and to ultimately allow for better targeting of development assistance.

To find out more about violence containment spending, and to see how much each country spends, download the report here (PDF).

- Philippa Lysaght, Institute for Economics and Peace

See Also:

The Global Peace Index
Pillars of Peace
Global Peace Index Report 2012
United Kingdom Peace Index
Mexico Peace Index
United States Peace Index
Peace, Wealth and Human Potential

 

Blue Helmets: Women in peacekeeping

This blog, written by Vision of Humanity's Natalia Beghin, is about women's growing role in UN peacekeeping, peacebuilding and reconciliation in conflict-prone areas as deployed females perform the same roles as their male counterparts. This post is a part of Wikiprogress' series on Gender Equality.

Women are beginning to comprise a larger proportion of UN peacekeepers than ever before, and are changing the landscape of peacebuilding and reconciliation for the better.

Although the greatest proportion of non-professional and civilian positions, such as cooks, administrative officers, and support staff within the United Nations are filled by women, they have traditionally represented less than 2% of all peacekeeping forces. Between 1957 and 1989, this number was even smaller, when a total of only 20 women served as uniformed peacekeepers with the UN. In addition to their service, these female officers acted as a vanguard in advance of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution 1325 made in the year 2000, which called for the increased participation of women in peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction.

Since then, three all-female peacekeeping units have been deployed around the world. The largest and most successful of the assignments has been the United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL) which has seen a deployment of around 100 Indian women rotated each year since 2007. The women are supported by a team of cooks, drivers, and administration staff, and perform all the same armed duties of their male counterparts deployed in other parts of the world.

Not only has the increased participation of female military personnel in UN peacekeeping missions strengthened the universal movement for gender equality, but it has also brought an above average degree of stability to UNMIL and other female led missions that is noteworthy. In Monrovia, where the large majority of the Indian peacekeepers are based, the frequent foot patrols through dangerous neighbourhoods have decreased the crime rate by up to 65%.

"Importantly, the presence of women in peacekeeping also acts to empower female members of host communities to improve their status within their own society."

This is demonstrated by the rising numbers of host-country women seeking employment in the police and armed forces throughout the period of a UN mission, such as in Liberia, where the percentage of women in the police force has risen from 6% in 2007 to approximately 15% in 2012. Additionally, female peace keepers tend to use force less often than their male counterparts, and have been shown in some studies to be more likely to successfully mediate violent situations. These qualities help to make female peacekeepers more approachable than their male counterparts, particularly for women who have been the victims of the sexual and gender based violence that is often systemic in conflict and post-conflict environments.

Although the target set by Secretary-General Ban-Ki Moon in 2009 to increase the amount of female police in UN forces to 20% by 2014 has not been reached, all the ground-breaking work completed by UN women personnel has been indispensable for both the fight for peace, and the struggle for gender equality. The success of the Indian mission in Liberia and others like it have paved the way for the valuable participation of women in peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction, now and into the future. 

- Natalia Beghin

*This post was first published on the Vision of Humanity blog site on 7 January, 2014.

Why use maps to explore peace?

This blog is by Philippa Lysaght from Vision of Humanity  as a part of the Wikiprogress blog series on indicators.

 

Mapping peace allows people from around the world to navigate the complex fabric of peace and to question what makes societies peaceful.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we are thrilled to announce that the Global Peace Index map has been long listed for the 2013 Information is Beautiful awards . 

Visualising the Global Peace Index was a challenging and exciting task. We thought we would share with you a little background on the interactive map and why we think it is important to visualise peace indices using a map. The Global Peace Index interactive map visualises the Global Peace Index (GPI), a composite index that measures peace in 162 countries according to 22 indicators.

The objective is to engage a diverse audience with peace research by encouraging you to explore levels of peacefulness around the world and discover what makes a country peaceful.

The GPI is a very large and complicated index; the challenge is to represent the data in an understandable and meaningful way, while ensuring it remains relevant, engaging and beautiful.

To deal with the complexity of the index the data is visualised in layers, allowing you to choose if and when you are ready to dig deeper and discover more. At the global level, the map gives you an instant understanding of levels of peacefulness around the world; it also allows you to see how peace changes over time. As you navigate the map, the tool tip informs you of the rank and encourages you to discover more. Once a country has been selected, a “scorecard” gives you a snapshot of levels of peace in that country by creating a national peace profile and summarising the index into three categories.

The “related news” section of the scorecard brings relevance to a country’s peace score by linking the research to current news and events. Digging deeper, you can discover the “full stats” of a country, allowing you to breakdown the peace score according to each indicator of the GPI – this will help explain why the country you are looking at is more or less peaceful than you thought, engaging you further with the research and making you really question what makes a society peaceful.

At the global level, you can already compare peacefulness by country according to the colour scale; however there is more to compare. If you want to discover why the United States is less peaceful than northward neighbour Canada, you can simply click on both countries to get an overview of levels of peace according to three key categories.  To explore the data further you can select a “full stats comparison,” which gives you a detailed comparison by indicator.

Peace is a complex concept; there are many different factors that contribute to levels of peacefulness. The GPI’s 22 indicators give a pretty comprehensive view of peace. As a composite index, scoring poorly or well on one indicator will affect your overall score and ranking, so it is important that you can see how different countries fare according to each indicator of peace. At the global level, you can “select an indicator” and view the world according to that element of peace. For example, seeing the world according to the indicator “Number of Deaths from Internal Conflict” immediately highlights countries affected by the Arab Spring, as well as the drug war in Mexico.

What makes this method of visualisation so powerful is its ability to engage a wide audience with the very complex concept of peace in a way that encourages a deeper understanding.  

The Structures of Peace: translating measurement to progress

Today's Prog Blog post is from guest blogger Camilla Schippa, Director of the Institute for Economics and Peace.

Why are some countries more peaceful than others? How can readily available empirical data inform us of the key economic, social, political and cultural factors which underpin peace? Can the identification of social, political, economic, governance and cultural ‘structures’ inform policymakers in government, business and civil society on how to build a more peaceful society?

Using data from the Global Peace Index (GPI), an index that ranks the nations of the world by their peacefulness, the team at Institute for Economics and Peace has developed a fact-based approach to determining key factors which foster the creation of a more peaceful society. The outcome of this approach is the identification of a new conceptual framework for understanding peace that revolves around eight ‘Structures of Peace’ which relate to economic circumstances, to standards of governance, and to social and cultural attitudes.

Based on statistical analysis between the Global Peace Index and other indexes, data sets and attitudinal surveys, the eight ’Structures of Peace’ that we have identified are: well-functioning government, sound business environment, equitable sharing of resources, acceptance of the rights of others, good relations with neighboring states, free flow of information, high levels of education, and low levels of corruption.

These ‘Structures of Peace’ are interdependent and positively reinforce each other – in other words, the absence of any one imperils the creation of a more peaceful society.

The study reveals the virtuous nature of peace – showing that greater peace fosters greater societal resilience to external shocks, whether they be economic, cultural, environmental or political.

Yemen – A Country in the News

Let’s have a look at how the Structures of Peace come into play in Yemen, the site of much recent political turmoil and instability.

Yemen ranked 129^th out of 149 countries on the 2010 GPI.

Well-functioning government: Yemen ranked between the 11^th and 29^th percentile on each of the five Worldwide Governance Indicators provided by the World Bank. These rankings indicate high levels of political instability and corruption that make it difficult to provide essential government services or regulate an economy effectively. In the news: The Atlantic discusses the government reforms that Yemeni protesters are demanding.

Sound business environment: With a GDP per capita of US$2,500 in 2009, Yemen is the 169^th poorest country in the world. The Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) found that for each 10 places a country rises on the GPI, income increases by US$3,100 per capita. In the news: The LA Times reports that “Yemenis are angry at the state of their country, where 35% unemployment, high prices and a nearly stagnant economy make life extremely difficult.”

Equitable Sharing of Resources: Yemen is the 76^th most unequal country in the world on the Gini income coefficient, and in general, violence has been shown to be greater in societies with greater income inequality.

Acceptance of the rights of others: In 2009, Yemen was listed as one of the “worst offenders” on the Political Terror Scale an index measuring respect for human rights. Peaceful countries tend not to use violence to achieve political goals, thus reinforcing peaceful behavior. In the news: Amnesty International reports two people were reported to be killed by security forces during anti-government protests on February 23.

Good relations with neighboring states: IEP research notes that violent countries tend to spread these effects onto their neighbors, decreasing overall peacefulness as well as economic integration in the area. Yemen has a score of 3 out of 5, (1 = most peaceful), on the “relations with neighboring countries” GPI indicator.

Free flow of information: Yemen is ranked a low 170^th out of 178 countries in the World Press Freedom Index. Countries tighten their control of information in order to maintain power, but better flows of information can help citizens respond to crises and grow economically. In the news: The Committee to Protect Journalists says that “In Yemen, photographers and camera operators were targeted… by pro-government supporters at anti-government protests. At least four photojournalists were attacked, beaten, and had their cameras confiscated.”

High levels of education: Cycles of violence and crime become significantly less attractive for a society’s youth the more educated they become. However, Yemeni citizens only have an average of 8.65 years of school, placing the country in the bottom 30 on the school life expectancy listing of UNESCO. In the news: The head of the Qatar Foundation says a lack of education, leading to high unemployment, is one of the main reasons for the Middle East protests.

Low levels of corruption: Corruption is intuitively linked to an unpeaceful environment and statistical correlations between the GPI and corruption indices prove it empirically: -0.72 for the World Bank’s Control on Corruption Index and 0.70 for Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index. Yemen is ranked 146^th on the latter, and is an example of how resulting inequalities from corruption can lead to civil unrest, as well as how interrelated these eight structures are. In the news: CNN cites corruption as one of the key complaints of Yemeni protesters.

The “Structures of Peace” help pinpoint specific areas that countries can target to improve peacefulness. Rather than just measuring peace, the GPI research shows that a fact-based approach can also help us come closer to building peace and achieving societal progress.

Camilla Schippa
Director
Institute for Economics & Peace

Measuring Peace in the Media

The Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) and Media Tenor released a fact-based report today on ‘Measuring Peace in the Media’. The first study of its kind, the report brings into question the accuracy of how international television networks have been covering peace and conflict over the last four years.

The report is based on 37 TV news and current affairs programmes from 23 networks in 15 countries being cross-referenced with the Global Peace Index.

An overall theme of the report shows that the breadth of the subject matter covered by international media has a significant impact on how well audiences understand the culture of the country being covered. This is particularly interesting in the case of Afghanistan.

The report goes into significant detail on Afghanistan and finds that there is a disproportionate amount of coverage focusing on crime and defence, while crucial factors such as the functioning of government, distribution of resources and the business environment are neglected. Such factors are crucial to help build sustainable peace.

Over-reporting on violence is impeding peace in Afghanistan, as Roland Schatz, CEO of Media Tenor states ‘Informing the public on what will build long term peace and sustainability is vital to the war on terrorism’.

The report goes beyond the case study of Afghanistan and gives a detailed account of who’s reporting on who, focusing on different patterns of coverage from European, Middle Eastern and US broadcasters. The most interesting finding of this section shows that Middle Eastern broadcasters are more positive than European and US outlets.

Here is a snapshot of some other interesting facts that might surprise you…

- US TV networks broadcast more violence than other countries

- The 10 TV programmes reporting the most violence dedicate an average of 48% of their total coverage to violence

- The 10 TV programmes reporting the least violence dedicate an average of 24% of their coverage to violence

- Positive peace stories are just 1.6% of the total number of stories examined in this report

- Middle Eastern broadcasters are more positive than European and US outlets

The report beings to light the difference found between media networks, and lets just say the BBC deserves its good reputation. In terms of breadth and coverage, the BBC reports on almost twice as many countries as the average level of coverage.

You can find the full report here along with interviews on the subject with Amre Moussa, the Secretary General of the League of Arab States and the World Bank’s Nick van Praag. I strongly suggest taking time out and having a read. I look forward to many discussions to come on measuring peace in the media.

Philippa

- See wikiprogress article on the Global Peace Index and find the data on Wikiprogress.Stat