Democracy and Internal Conflict: Brandon Parsons’ Research Challenges Traditional Theories

A recent study led by Pepperdine Graziadio faculty member Brandon Parsons (MBA '13), published in the Eastern Economic Journal, presents new insights into the complex relationship between political regimes and internal conflict. Using quantile analysis on panel data, the study finds that even small democratic reforms can reduce the risk of internal conflict across its various forms.

This research challenges the long-held "inverted U hypothesis," which suggests that semi-democratic regimes are most vulnerable to conflict. Instead, Parsons' study indicates that even partial movements toward democracy can moderate tensions, providing a stabilizing effect within societies.

While the political regime plays a role in mitigating conflict, Parsons also emphasizes the importance of contextual factors. “Government stability, cultural tension, and instances of political instability can often outweigh the influence of regime type,” he notes. These elements, according to the study, serve as stronger indicators of smaller-scale conflicts than the simple classification of a regime as democratic or authoritarian.

The study underscores the nuanced nature of internal conflict, highlighting that government stability can have a more immediate impact on smaller conflicts than political regime changes. However, Parsons' findings suggest that democratization still holds substantial long-term benefits by easing societal tensions and fostering more inclusive governance.

Parsons' research challenges conventional wisdom and offers a fresh lens on the relationship between democracy and conflict, suggesting that even gradual reforms can pave the way for a more peaceful society. Parsons' current research studies whether economic liberalization (e.g., economic freedom), which often coincides with democratic reforms, also moderates internal and external conflict risks.

Read the full research.