When do agricultural transformations impact social stability? Cash crops are typically associated with economic prosperity and social peace. I argue agricultural booms may spur violent conflict over resource allocation by pitting would-be producers against incumbent landowners when the gains from production are concentrated and the negative externalities are diffuse. I study the rapid expansion of oil palm in Indonesia, a growingly important crop in the global economy. I find when oil palm grows more valuable and expands within producing districts, violent resource conflicts increase. The positive relationship does not exist for other cash crops, nor other types of conflict, and is moderated by the presence of sustainability certified processing mills. The results connect commodity shocks to non-state violence over resources, and suggest land use change is an important mechanism connecting agricultural booms to social conflict.
AbramNicola KMeijaardErikWilsonKerrie ADavisJacqueline TWellsJessie AAncrenazMarcBudihartaSugengDurrantAlexandraFakhruzziAfifRuntingRebecca KGaveauDavidMengersenKerrie. 2017. “Oil Palm-Community Conflict Mapping in Indonesia: A Case For Better Community Liaison in Planning for Development Initiatives.” Applied Geography78:33–44.
2.
AcebesCésar MuñozWilkinsonDanielTéllez-ChávezLuciana. 2019. Rainforest Mafias: How Violence and Impunity Fuel Deforestation in Brazil’s Amazon. New York, NY: Human Rights Watch.
3.
AlbertusMichaelBramborThomasCenevivaRicardo. 2018. “Land inequality and rural unrest: theory and evidence from Brazil.” Journal of Conflict Resolution62(3):557–596.
4.
AngristJoshua DKuglerAdriana D. 2008. “Rural Windfall or a New Resource Curse? Coca, Income, and Civil Conflict in Colombia.” Review of Economics and Statistics90(2):191–215.
5.
BarronPatricJaffreySanaVarshneyAshutosh. 2014. How large Conflict Subside: Evidence from Indonesia. Indonesian Social Development Papers. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
6.
BlairGraemeChristensenDarinRudkinAaron. 2020. “Do Commodity Price Shocks Cause Armed Conflict? A Meta-Analysis of Natural Experiments.” American Political Science Review115(2):709–716.
7.
BooneCatherine. 2014. Property and political order in Africa: Land rights and the structure of politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8.
BorusyakKirillHullPeter. 2020. Non-Random Exposure to Exogenous Shocks: Theory and Applications. Cambridge, MA: Technical Report National Bureau of Economic Research.
9.
BurgessRobinMatthewHansenOlkenBenjamin APotapovPeterSieberStefanie. 2012. “The Political Economy of Deforestation in the Tropics.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics127(4):1707–1754.
10.
ByerleeDerekFalconWalter PNaylorRosamond. 2017. The Tropical Oil Crop Revolu- Tion: Food, Feed, Fuel, and Forests. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
11.
CalìMassimiliano. 2014. Trading Away From Conflict: Using Trade to Increase Resilience in Fragile States. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
12.
CarlsonKimberly MHeilmayrRobertGibbsHolly KNoojipadyPraveenBurnsDavid NMortonDouglas CWalkerNathalie FPaoliGary DKremenClaire. 2018. “Effect of oil palm sustainability certification on deforestation and fire in Indonesia.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences115(1):121–126.
13.
ChristensenDarin. 2019. “Concession Stands: How Mining Investments Incite Protest in Africa.” International Organization73(1):65–101.
14.
CookeMajid Fadzilah. 2002. “Vulnerability, control and oil palm in Sarawak: globalization and a new era?” Development and Change33(2):189–211.
15.
CrostBenjaminFelterJoseph H. 2016. “Export crops and civil conflict.”Journal of the European Economic Association.
16.
Dal BóErnestoDal BóPedro. 2011. “Workers, Warriors, and Criminals: Social Conflict in General Equilibrium.” Journal of the European Economic Association9(4):646–677.
17.
DubeOeindrilaVargasJuan F. 2013. “Commodity Price Shocks and Civil conflict: Evidence from Colombia.” The Review of Economic Studies80(4):1384–1421.
18.
DudwickNoraSrinivasanRadhika. 2013. Creating Jobs in Africa’s Fragile States: Are Value Chains an Answer?Washington, DC: The World Bank.
19.
EasterlyWilliam. 2007. “Inequality does cause underdevelopment: Insights from a new instrument.” Journal of Development Economics84(2):755–776.
20.
EdwardsRyan B. 2019. Export Agriculture and Rural Poverty: Evidence from Indonesian Palm Oil. Hanover, Germany: Dartmouth College.
21.
FitzherbertEmily BStruebigMatthew JMorelAlexandraDanielsenFinnBrühlCarsten ADonaldPaul FPhalanBen. 2008. “How Will Oil Palm Expansion Affect Biodi- Versity?” Trends in Ecology & Evolution23(10):538–545.
22.
Global Forest Watch. 2019. “The RSPO-Certified Oil Palm Supply Bases in Indonesia.” Maryland: Global Forest Watch. http://data.globalforestwatch.org/
23.
GrossmanHerschel IKimMinseong. 1995. “Swords or Plowshares? A Theory of the Security of Claims to Property.” Journal of Political Economy103(6):1275–1288.
24.
GrossmannHelmut. 2009. Sustainable Economic Development in Conflict-Affected Envi- ronments: A Guidebook. Eschborn, Germany: GTZ.
25.
HafizahDian. 2011. “Indonesian Government Policy Review in Indonesian CPO Trade Using Market Integration Analysis Approach.” Journal of AGRISEP Study of Agricultural and Agribusiness Socio-Economic Problems10(2):154–170.
26.
HidalgoF DanielNaiduSureshNichterSimeonRichardsonNeal. 2010. “Economic Determinants of Land Invasions.” The Review of Economics and Statistics92(3):505–523.
27.
HirshleiferJack. 1995. “Anarchy and its Breakdown.” Journal of Political Economy103(1):26–52.
28.
IIASA, FAO. 2012. Global Agro-ecological Zones (GAEZ v3. 0). Rome, Italy: IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria and FAO.
INDO-DAPOER.2014. Indonesia Database for Policy and Economic Research (INDO- DAPOER). Washington, DC: The World Bank. https://datacatalog.worldbank.org
KronickDorothy. 2020. “Profits and Violence in Illegal Markets: Evidence from Venezuela.” Journal of Conflict Resolution64(7–8):1499–1523.
33.
LevangPatriceRivaWahyu FOrthMeri G. 2016. “Oil Palm Plantations and Conflict in Indonesia: Evidence from West Kalimantan.” In The Oil Palm Complex: Smallholders, Agribusiness and the State in Indonesia and Malaysia. 283–300. New York: JSTOR.
34.
LiTania Murray. 2018. “After the land grab: Infrastructural violence and the ?Mafia System? in Indonesia’s Oil Palm Plantation zones.” Geoforum96:328–337.
35.
LucasAntonWarrenCarol. 2013. Land for the People: The state and Agrarian Conflict in Indonesia. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.
36.
MacdonaldJamesTothRussell. 2017. Where there is Fire There is Haze: The Economic and Political Causes of Indonesia’s Forest Fires. Sydney, Australia: Technical report University of Sydney Work- ing Paper.
37.
MartiSerge. 2008. Losing Ground: The Human Rights Impacts of Oil Palm Plantation Expan-Sion in Indonesia. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Friends of the Earth.
38.
McCullochNeil. 2011. The Indonesian Sub-National Growth and Governance Dataset-Documentation. Indonesia: IDS.
39.
ObidzinskiKrystofAndrianiRubetaKomarudinHeruAndriantoAgus. 2012. “En-Vironmental and Social Impacts of Oil Palm Plantations and Their Implications for Biofuel Production in Indonesia.” Ecology and Society17(1):25.
40.
Persch-OrthMeriMwangiEsther. 2016. Company-Community Conflict in Indonesia‘s Industrial Plantation Sector. Vol. 143. Bogor Regency, Indonesia: CIFOR.
RugglesSteven, KingMiriam LLevisonDeborahMcCaaRobertSobekMatthew. 2003. “IPUMS-international.” Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History36(2):60–65.
43.
RulliMaria CristinaStefanoCasiratiAngeloJampel Dell’DavisKyle FPasseraCorradoD’OdoricoPaolo. 2019. “Interdependencies and telecoupling of oil palm expansion at the expense of Indonesian rainforest.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews105:499–512.
44.
SantikaTrulyWilsonKerrie ABudihartaSugengLawElizabeth APohTun MinAncrenazMarcStruebigMatthew JMeijaardErik. 2019. “Does oil palm agriculture help alleviate poverty? A multidimensional counterfactual assessment of oil palm development in Indonesia.” World Development120:105–117.
45.
SayerJeffreyGhazoulJabouryNelsonPaulBoedhihartonoAgni Klintuni. 2012. “Oil palm expansion transforms tropical landscapes and livelihoods.” Global Food Security1(2):114–119.
46.
ScottJames C. 1977. The Moral Economy of the Peasant: Rebellion and Subsistence in Southeast Asia. Vol. 315. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
47.
SextonRenard. 2020. “Unpacking the Local Resource Curse: How Externalities and Gov- ernance Shape Social Conflict.” Journal of Conflict Resolution64(4):640–673.
48.
ShaverAndrewCarterDavid BShawaTsering Wangyal. 2019. “Terrain ruggedness and land cover: Improved data for most research designs.” Conflict Management and Peace Science36(2):191–218.
49.
SheilDouglasCassonAnneMeijaardErikVan NoordwijkMeineGaskellJoanneSunderland-GrovesJacquiWertzKarahKanninenMarkku. 2009. The Impacts and Oppor-Tunities of Oil Palm in Southeast Asia: What Do We Know and What Do We Need to Know? Vol. 51Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research Bogor, Indonesia.
50.
SkaperdasStergios. 1992. “Cooperation, conflict, and power in the absence of property rights.” The American Economic Review82(2):720–739.
51.
SusanNovri. 2013. “Scenario building on Law No. 7 of 2012 about social conflict intervention: The possible future of land conflict management in Indonesia.” Procedia Environmental Sciences17:870–879.
52.
TellezJuan Fernando. 2021. “Land, Opportunism, and Displacement in Civil Wars: Evidence from Colombia.” American Political Science Review112(4):996–1015.
53.
VijayVarshaStuartL PimmJenkinsClinton NSmithSharon J. 2016“The Impacts of Oil Palm on Recent Deforestation and Biodiversity Loss.” PloS One11(7):e0159668.
54.
WilcoveDavid SKohLian Pin. 2010. “Addressing the Threats to Biodiversity From Oil-Palm Agriculture.” Biodiversity and Conservation19(4):999–1007.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
