This paper examines whether non-monotonic patterns exist between forest coverage and conflict processes in Myanmar. Specifically, the paper finds that forest coverage and civil conflict follow an inverted U-shaped relationship: conflict decreases at extremely low and high densities of forest coverage but increases at medium and somewhat high forest densities. Following the logic of the variability of rugged terrain, we argue that this pattern reflects the dual mechanisms of refuge and tactical advantages for rebel groups, who intentionally use such terrain to maximize logistical advantage while minimizing the military advantages enjoyed by better equipped government forces.
BaumannMKuemmerleT (2016) The impacts of warfare and armed conflict on land systems. Journal of Land Use Science11(6): 672–688.
2.
BelottiFHughesGMortariAP (2017) Spatial panel-data models using stata. The Stata Journal17(1): 139–180.
3.
BennettMMFaxonHO (2021) Uneven frontiers: Exposing the geopolitics of Myanmar’s borderlands with critical remote sensing. Remote Sensing13(6): 1158.
4.
BhagwatTHessAHorningN, et al. (2017) Losing a jewel—rapid declines in Myanmar’s intact forests from 2002–2014. PLOS ONE12(5): e0176364.
5.
BoormanHLBoormanSA (1966) Chinese communist insurgent warfare, 1935–49. Political Science Quarterly81(2): 171–195.
6.
BuhaugHRødJK (2006) Local determinants of African Civil Wars, 1970–2001. Political Geography25(3): 315–335.
7.
CallahanMP (2005) Making Enemies: War and State Building in Burma. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
8.
CallahanMP (2007) Political Authority in Burma’s Ethnic Minority States: Devolution, Occupation, and Coexistence. Singapore:Institute of Southeast Asian Studies/Washington, DC: East–West Center.
9.
CarterDBShaverACWrightAL (2019) Places to hide: Terrain, ethnicity, and civil conflict. The Journal of Politics81(4): 1446–1465.
10.
CarterTAVealeDJ (2013) Weather, terrain and warfare: Coalition fatalities in Afghanistan. Conflict Management and Peace Science30(3): 220–239.
11.
ChenXNordhausWD (2011) Using luminosity data as a proxy for economic statistics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences108(21): 8589–8594.
12.
ChinK-L (2009) The Golden Triangle: Inside Southeast Asia’s Drug Trade, 1st edn.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
13.
ChoBAung KyawNSapkotaLM, et al. (2017) Stabilizing and Rebuilding Myanmar’s Working Forests: Multiple Stakeholders and Multiple Choices. Bangkok, Thailand: The Nature Conservancy and RECOFTC—the Center for People and Forests.
14.
ChristensenDNguyenMSextonR (2019) Strategic violence during democratization: Evidence from Myanmar. World Politics71(2): 332–366.
15.
CollierPHoefflerA (2004) Greed and grievance in civil war. Oxford Economic Papers56(4): 563–595.
16.
CollierPHoefflerASöderbomM (2004) On the duration of civil war. Journal of Peace Research41(3): 253–273.
17.
CordesmanAHKleiberM (2006) The Asian Conventional Military Balance in 2006: The South Asian Military Balance. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies.
18.
de RouenKRSobekD (2004) The dynamics of civil war duration and outcome. Journal of Peace Research41(3): 303–320.
19.
EckK (2012) In data we trust? A comparison of UCDP GED and ACLED conflict events datasets. Cooperation and Conflict47(1): 124–141.
20.
FearonJD (2004) Why do some civil wars last so much longer than others?Journal of Peace Research41(3): 275–301.
21.
FearonJDLaitinDD (2003) Ethnicity, insurgency, and civil war. American Political Science Review97(1): 75–90.
22.
GlaserS (2017) A Review of Spatial Econometric Models for Count Data. Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences. Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 19-2017. Honenheim, Germany: University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
23.
Global Witness (2003) A Conflict of Interests: The Uncertain Future of Burma’s Forests. London: Global Witness.
24.
GorelickNHancherMDixonM, et al. (2017) Google earth engine: Planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone. Remote Sensing of Environment202: 18–27.
25.
HanE (2019) Asymmetrical Neighbors: Borderland State-building between China and Southeast Asia. New York: Oxford University Press.
26.
HanE (2020) Neighborhood effect of borderland state consolidation: Evidence from Myanmar and its neighbors. The Pacific Review33(2): 305–330.
27.
HanEHuangQ (2021) Global commodity markets, Chinese demand for maize, and deforestation in Northern Myanmar. Land10(11): 1232.
28.
HansenMCPotapovPVMooreR, et al. (2013) High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science (New York)342(6160): 850–853.
29.
HendrixCS (2011) Head for the hills? Rough terrain, state capacity, and civil war onset. Civil Wars13(4): 345–370.
JonssonMBrennanEO’HaraC (2016) Financing war or facilitating peace? The impact of rebel drug trafficking on peace negotiations in Colombia and Myanmar. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism39(6): 542–559.
32.
KocherMAPepinskyTBKalyvasSN (2011) Aerial bombing and counterinsurgency in the Vietnam war. American Journal of Political Science55(2): 201–218.
33.
KorfB (2011) Resources, violence and the telluric geographies of small wars. Progress in Human Geography35(6): 733–756.
34.
LacinaB (2006) Explaining the severity of civil wars. The Journal of Conflict Resolution50(2): 276–289.
35.
LandholmDMPradhanPKroppJP (2019) Diverging forest land use dynamics induced by armed conflict across the tropics. Global Environmental Change56: 86–94.
36.
Le BillonP (2001) The political ecology of war: Natural resources and armed conflicts. Political Geography20(5): 561–584.
LinkeAMWitmerFDWO’LoughlinJ (2012) Space-time granger analysis of the War in Iraq: A study of coalition and insurgent action–reaction. International Interactions38(4): 402–425.
39.
LinkeAMWitmerFDWHollandEC, et al. (2017) Mountainous terrain and civil wars: Geospatial analysis of conflict dynamics in the post-Soviet Caucasus. Annals of the American Association of Geographers107(2): 520–535.
40.
LintnerB (1990) The Rise and Fall of the Communist Party of Burma (CPB). Ithaca, New York: Southeast Asia Program, Department of Asian Studies, Cornell University.
41.
LintnerB (1995) Recent Developments on the Thai–Burma Border. IBRU Boundary and Security Buletin (April).
42.
LintnerB (1999) Burma in Revolt: Opium and Insurgency since 1948, 2nd ed.Chiang Mai, Thailand: Silkworm Books.
43.
McCoyAW (1991) The Politics of Heroin : CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade, 1st ed.Brooklyn, NY: Lawrence Hill Books.
44.
Murillo-SandovalPJGjerdsethECorrea-AyramC, et al. (2021) No peace for the forest: Rapid, widespread land changes in the Andes–Amazon region following the Colombian civil war. Global Environmental Change69: 102283.
PelliMFD (1999) Insurgency, Counterinsurgency, and the Marines in Vietnam. Alexandria, Virginia: GlobalSecurity.org.
47.
PremMSaavedraSVargasJF (2020) End-of-conflict deforestation: Evidence from Colombia’s peace agreement. World Development129: 104852.
48.
RaleighCLinkeAHegreH, et al. (2010) Introducing ACLED: An armed conflict location and event dataset. Journal of Peace Research47(5): 651–660. Sage Publications, Ltd.
49.
ReardonS (2018) FARC and the forest: Peace is destroying Colombia’s jungle—And opening it to science. Nature558(7709): 169–169.
50.
RossML (2004) What do we know about natural resources and civil war?Journal of Peace Research41(3): 337–356.
51.
RustadSCARødJKLarsenW, et al. (2008) Foliage and fighting: Forest resources and the onset, duration, and location of civil war. Political Geography27(7): 761–782.
52.
SadanM (2016) The War and Peace in the Borderlands of Myanmar: The Kachin Ceasefire, 1994–2011. Copenhagen: NIAS Press.
53.
SalehyanI (2007) Transnational rebels: Neighboring states as sanctuary for rebel groups. World Politics59(2): 217–242.
54.
ScottJC (2009) The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
55.
ShaverACarterDBShawaTW (2019) Terrain ruggedness and land cover: Improved data for most research designs. Conflict Management and Peace Science36(2): 191–218. SAGE Publications Ltd.
56.
ShellJ (2019) Giants of the Monsoon Forest: Living and Working with Elephants. New York: W. W. Norton.
57.
SmithM (2007) State of Strife: The Dynamics of Ethnic Conflict in Burma. Washington, DC: East–West Center Press.
58.
SouthA (2008) Ethnic Politics in Burma: States of Conflict. London: Routledge.
59.
StellmanJMStellmanSDChristianR, et al. (2003) The extent and patterns of usage of Agent Orange and other herbicides in Vietnam. Nature422(6933): 681–687.
60.
SundbergRMelanderE (2013) Introducing the UCDP georeferenced event dataset. Journal of Peace Research50(4): 523–532.
61.
SuttonCJBattagliaMJ (2019) Terrain and war: Measuring topographic and land cover heterogeneity in interstate wars, 1816–2003. Conflict Management and Peace Science38(6): 742–761.
62.
TaylorRH (1973) Foreign and Domestic Consequences of the KMT Intervention in Burma. Ithaca, NY: Southeast Asia Program, Dept of Asian Studies, Cornell University.
63.
TollefsenAFBuhaugH (2015) Insurgency and inaccessibility. International Studies Review17(1): 6–25.
64.
TreueTSpringate-BaginskiOHtunK (2016) Legally and Illegally Logged out. Yangon, Myanmar: ALARM and Danish Church Aid.
65.
van SchendelW (2002) Geographies of knowing, geographies of ignorance: Jumping scale in Southeast Asia. Environment and Planning D: Society & Space20(6): 647–668.
66.
WoodsK (2011) Ceasefire capitalism: Military–private partnerships, resource concessions and military–state building in the Burma–China borderlands. The Journal of Peasant Studies38(4): 747–770.
67.
WoodsK (2015) Commercial Agriculture Expansion in Myanmar: Links to Deforestation, Conversion Timber, and Land Conflicts. Washington, DC: Forest Trends.
68.
WoodsKMWangPSextonJO, et al. (2021) Integrating pixels, people, and political economy to understand the role of armed conflict and geopolitics in driving deforestation: The case of Myanmar. Remote Sensing13(22): 4589.
Supplementary Material
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.
