Peer Reviewed Publications

Kreutzer, Willow, Carly Millerd, and Nathan Timbs. 2023. “Disasters and the diminishing of women’s economic empowerment.” Disasters 47(4): 891-912. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12582

Abstract: This paper examines, both theoretically and empirically, the relationship between rapid-onset disasters and women’s economic freedom. Rapid-onset disasters create difficulties for all involved, but without proper discussion of and changes to women’s economic status in society, they will continue to suffer disproportionately. The study answers the following question: ‘how do disasters impact women’s economic empowerment?’. It argues that there are underlying factors contributing to unequal economic opportunities that are exacerbated by disasters. Current literature discusses how disasters affect women’s economic and political rights, but often it does not account for variables that may not have been captured in contemporary indices. The paper assesses women’s burden of care, restrictions on mobility, formal economic employment, and access to recovery resources with respect to their economic empowerment. And it analyses 180 countries and territories that experienced disasters between 1981 and 2019 to uncover their effects on women’s economic freedom. This research could facilitate and help to alter the overall narrative on women’s empowerment.

Manuscripts Under Review

Timbs, Nathan, and Sara Mitchell. “How Climate Volatility Impacts Human Rights in the Civil War Context.” Revise and Resubmit at Journal of Human Rights

Abstract: We explore how climate volatility influences human rights practices. We argue that climate volatility intensifies competition for material resources, increases citizens’ grievances against the state, and leads to more frequent repression as governments seek to respond to environmentally induced protests and local conflicts. We situate this argument in the existing literature’s emphasis on three mechanisms linking climate shocks and repression: resource shocks, mobilization shocks, and migration shocks. We assert that the climate volatility-human rights relationship is strongest in the context of civil conflict as rebel groups and governments place a higher priority on survival and material well-being rather than governance and public goods provision. Using a pooled time series dataset of 194 countries from 1946-2017, we estimate a panel vector autoregression (PVAR) model to test the hypothesis that states with greater precipitation volatility experience worsened human rights protections. Our analyses show that increased weather volatility significantly reduces human rights protections and that climate volatility shocks have persistent negative effects for multiple years. As expected, the result is statistically significant only for countries experiencing civil wars, such that the resource competition mechanism we identify is activated most frequently in conflict zones.

Timbs, Nathan. “A Multidimensional Measure of Rebel Governance.”

Abstract: Rebel governance has recently been a focus in the literature as scholars seek to understand its consequences as it relates to a variety of topics including rebel strength, human rights, and conflict termination. Fundamental to these studies, however, is the question of what is and how do we measure rebel governance. Importantly, I complicate the existing definitions and measures of rebel governance by providing a multidimensional, latent measure of rebel governance that provides greater nuance. This is important because constructing a theory of rebel governance, or any theory for that matter, requires that our concepts match our measurement. If the concept of rebel governance is not measured accurately and precisely, then quantitative empirical tests of rebel governance theories are unreliable. Furthermore, acknowledging and empirically capturing the multidimensionality of rebel governance across four dimensions (social, formal, institutional, and local) allows for theoretical advancement as more specific and precise questions can be asked.

Working Papers

Timbs, Nathan. “Rebel Governance: A Catalyst for International Support and Intervention”

Timbs, Nathan. “Do Stronger Rebels Make Stronger Governors?: The Relationship Between Rebel Capacity and Governance Provision”

Abstract: How does the strength of rebel groups influence their style of governance?" My curiosity was sparked by the idea that a stronger rebel group might lead to increased governance efforts. Building on existing research, the notion is that strong rebel groups not only gain legitimacy and recruits through governance but also find it easier to access local resources crucial for their military activities (Kalyvas, 2006). However, other research suggests that governance has either no relationship with military strength or negatively influences it (Stewart, 2019). This creates a puzzle concerning the relationship between rebel capacity and rebel governance. Do rebels need high military capacity to govern or do the costs of governing outweigh the potential military benefits from a pool of limited resources? I argue that rebel governance varies in style and in strength. Rebel groups choose what styles to implement and actively decide how invested they are in them. Rebel groups with a higher capacity are able to invest deeply across many styles, however, rebel groups with a lower capacity must be more selective in the governance they employ. This narrative uncovers how governance becomes the bridge connecting these seemingly different goals for rebel groups. Despite being armed entities with military objectives, rebel groups strategically step into the realm of governance to navigate the complexities of both military and political ambitions. The decision of rebel groups to invest in governance becomes a revealing lens through which we can understand their underlying objectives, goals, and values. Rebel governance is a strategic choice that is both a product of limited resources and a means to an end for certain conflict objectives.

Timbs, Nathan. “Rebel Governance and Ethnically Motivated Civilian Killings in Civil War”

Abstract: Ethnically motivated civilian killings by rebel groups are a major side effect of civil wars, and scholars have devoted years of research to studying why they occur. Explanations range from long-term ethnic animosity/discrimination, retribution for ethnic discrimination by power players in the government, and the segregation of ethnic groups within a country. However, I argue that existing explanations of ethnically motivated civilian killings ignore the governance activities of rebel groups. Rebel governance is diverse in its type and strength which is why I created a measure of rebel governance along four dimensions. These four dimensions help explain why some rebel groups commit ethnic violence while others treat all civilians with respect. I argue that rebel groups who rely upon international support and care about their image internationally are less likely to commit ethnically motivated civilian killings. Further, rebel groups that provide social services are less likely to commit ethnically motivated civilian killings. By disaggregating rebel governance, we are better able to understand why some rebel groups refrain from ethnic violence during civil war.

Timbs, Nathan, and Willow Kreutzer. “Why Rebels Comply: Humanitarian Rights Commitment Design and Implementation.”

Abstract: Civilian experiences are a prevalent topic worldwide, especially in the context of civil conflict. States and rebel groups must consider the repercussions of their actions if they have been found to violate intrinsic rights of civilians. However, does the type of commitment rebels have to international and domestic audiences influence their behavior? We argue that making commitments that influence civilian treatment allows rebels to establish a relatively cheap form of legitimacy. We test this by examining the effectiveness of three types of rebel commitments: 1) bilateral commitments, 2) unilateral statements, and 3) internal rules and regulations. We find that internal rules and regulations implemented by rebels produce the best outcomes in terms of reducing civilian deaths and sexual violence. We argue this finding is due to internal rules and regulations commitments being specifically applied to rebel soldiers' battlefield behavior.

Timbs, Nathan. “Masculine Leadership and the Use of Child Soldiers During Civil Conflict.”

Abstract: This papers seeks to explain the recruitment of child soldiers by rebel groups through a gendered lens. Specifically, I emphasize the importance of militarized masculinity, the idea that masculinity must be achieved through military service or combat. Groups that are conditioned into militarized masculinity are more likely to view fighting in combat as the ideal way to achieve manhood which they then use to justify their recruitment of child soldiers. I find that groups with former rebel experience are more likely to use child soldiers and forcibly recruit them. These findings have implications for the civil war literature as well as the larger issue of human rights in conflict zones.

Timbs, Nathan. “Democratic Backsliding as a Spillover Effect of Civil War.”

Abstract: Civil war has been observed to have spillover effects such as increased military spending, a higher likelihood for interstate war, etc., but has never been studied as having an effect on democratic-backsliding in neighboring states which is considered to be the state-led deconstruction of democratic institutions and norms. This study examines the regional effects of civil war on democratic-backsliding. This study develops a theory explaining how a civil war’s close proximity drives democratic backsliding. If a state neighbors a civil war, then we would expect that state to have a higher likelihood of democratic backsliding. In essence, this is another spillover effect of civil war, but it is not a material spillover like transnational rebel groups or refugees. The spillover effect examined is the perception of fear by the leader of a state causing the state to backslide. I find support for hypothesis 1 which states that distance between a civil war state capital and other states’ capitals positively affect the likelihood of democratic-backsliding. However, the results of this study suggest that civil wars are a determining factor for democratic-backsliding within a region warranting further study to how and why democracies erode.