Essays on Institutional Analysis and Development in War-torn Countries

Yahya Alshamy

Advisor: Christopher Coyne, PhD, Department of Economics

Committee Members: Peter Boettke, Rosolino Candela

Buchanan Hall, #D180
June 26, 2024, 12:00 PM to 02:00 PM

Abstract:

This dissertation seeks to address the institutional challenges of dealing with heterogeneity. In doing that, I analyze the costs and benefits of polycentric systems in accommodating heterogeneity. I pay special attention to the polycentric provision of public or “national” goods like defense and peacekeeping as a mechanism of accommodating heterogeneity. Existing literature suggests that heterogeneity reduces societies' ability to engage in collective action. My dissertation is intended to challenge these studies or at least add a caveat to them. The first essay is “The Polycentric Production of Peace and Security.” Peace and security are commonly viewed in social theory as a necessary task for the state, by virtue of being public goods. However, this paper challenges the Samuelsonian consensus on public good provision and presents a framework of “polycentric peace.” The promotion of peace through settings as diverse as civic associations, markets, and religious orders will be highlighted.  Polycentric peace underlines the discovery of and learning about peacebuilding processes relevant to circumstances of time, place, and context. The second essay is “Polycentric defense, Ukraine style: explaining Ukrainian resilience against invasion.” Contrary to predictions by many experts, Ukraine’s military has been resilient in the face of the Russian government’s invasion. Drawing on the logic of polycentric defense, this article helps explain how Ukraine has remained resilient against a conventionally more powerful adversary. We argue that polycentric defense in Ukraine has four benefits that aid counteroffensive efforts against invasion, particularly when defense is provided by a highly heterogeneous population. We present evidence of the benefits of polycentric defense in the context of the ongoing war in Ukraine. The third essay is “Monocentric Governance and the Rise of Sectarian Conflict in Yemen.” Yemenis, a religiously diverse people, have experienced civil conflicts and wars legitimized or perpetuated by sectarian beliefs in ways only a few other countries have. This chapter explains how governmental centralization, or monocentricity, played a central role in exacerbating and perpetuating sectarianism in Yemen. Instead of viewing sectarianism as a purely ideological phenomenon or solely a product of foreign interference, this chapter argues that it is severely intensified by monocentric institutions introduced to Yemen after the North Yemen Civil War of 1962-70.