A group of politicial scientists in Norway have revealed that their research indicates a drastic reduction in the amount of ongoing conflicts globally. They claim that the number of wars currently being experienced will be halved by 2050 – with the greatest decrease coming in the Middle East.

In a paper soon to be published in International Studies Quarterly, Håvard Hegre, a professor of political science at the University of Oslo, claims that global conflicts have been on a downward trend for the last half-century. Hegre, along with his colleagues at the Peace Research Institute Oslo, first put together a statistical model that took into account factors such as infant mortality, education, youth population, ethnic make-up and conflict history. They then ran the conflict simulation program 18 000 times before drawing conclusions.

Regionally, all continents should expect to see a decline in the risk of conflict, except for sub-Saharan Africa – a region that will be home to 41% of the world’s youth population in less than three generations’ time. In 1992 every fourth country was involved in an armed conflict; by 2009 that number had fallen to every sixth country.

Hegre further explains that, owing to development factors and conflict histories, some countries will see a greater risk of conflict as time goes by.

Between now and 2017, India, Ethiopia, the Philippines, Uganda and Burma will all be at greatest risk of internal conflict. By 2050 that list will narrow down to India, Nigeria, Sudan, Ethiopia and Tanzania.

According to Hegre, while it is difficult to emphasise one factor over another, education is key.

India is on the list because it is so large and it has a history of conflict in the North, but if they made an effort to expand education, they will reduce their risk of armed conflict,”

Another important factor highlighted is economic development.

Europe, despite its current economic troubles, is nevertheless still at low risk for armed conflict. This is because “developed economies tend to have invested a lot in exchange between different networks. Violence destroys those networks. In other words, the more you have to lose, the less appealing war is.

[Source: Time]