Disentangling Strategic and Opportunistic Looting: The Relationship between Antiquities Looting and Armed Conflict in Egypt
Yüklə 1,14 Mb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
|
4. Discussion
This study makes several important contributions to our understanding of the relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict. First, this study demonstrates the utility of using quantitative data to look at this relationship. Using quantitative data provides the ability to look at the scope of antiquities looting incidents. Egypt, despite its long history of attempting to stop the looting and trafficking of antiquities, has been unable to evaluate the effectiveness of their actions as they do not have any baseline numbers to work from. As these data show, the number of reported instances of antiquities looting in Egypt has increased since 2011 (see Figures 1 and
2 ). Though the data generated for this study are certainly an undercount of the true scope of antiquities looting, they are able to provide an initial look at the frequency of looting over time in more detail than previously established in the literature. Prior evidence of any relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict has been journalistic or based on case studies tracing the path of looted objects to the market (e.g., Baker and Anjar 2012 ; Mackenzie and Davis 2014 ). Quantitative methods like multiple time series complement these qualitative methods in two ways. First, they make it possible to look at whether a relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict can be supported with empirical evidence. Second, they make it possible to see if the relationship is true over time. The results of the above provide both evidence for an empirical relationship over time and a start towards understanding more of the nuances to this 8 Local criminals (including organized groups and gangs) are discussed as both targeting sites and looking to make a quick buck and so may engage in both opportunistic and strategic looting, complicating the ability of these analyses to accurately disentangle these two temporal orderings. Arts 2018, 7, 22 18 of 26
relationship. While the results should be viewed cautiously given the exploratory nature of this study, they demonstrate the type of information that can be gained from quantitative data. Relatedly, the results above speak to the quality of data that can be extracted from open source news stories on antiquities looting. Of the over 180,000 new stories reviewed, only 732 could be coded for antiquities looting incidents (see Appendix A for details). In total, only 91 incidents of antiquities looting were coded from 1997 to 2014. A 2013 survey of archaeologists found that archaeologists reported that over 50% of archaeological sites had experienced looting to some degree ( Proulx 2013 ). Journalistic evidence (existing media portrayals, qualitative case studies) and satellite imagery confirm that antiquities looting is not a rare event ( Manacorda and Chappell 2011 ; Parcak 2009 ). As such, a total of 91 instances of looting over a 17-year period (most concentrated from 2010 to 2014) is unlikely to be an accurate representation of the frequency or scope of looting. Open source reports of looting in news stories are useful as a first step in looking at the scope of antiquities looting; however, they are not as reliable a source of information as they are for other types of crime, like terrorism ( Dugan and Chenoweth 2013 ; Schrodt and Gerner 1994 ). The lack of support for opportunistic looting (Hypothesis 3) may be in part due to this underrepresentation. The lack of variation that results introduces measurement error into the analyses, which affects the stability of the model and our ability to trust the results when antiquities looting is the dependent variable (as an independent variable, this is less of an issue). A third contribution of this study is its attempt to disentangle strategic antiquities looting from opportunistic antiquities looting. While this study is not able to establish causality, the hypotheses address two of the three necessary components to establish causation: (1) a statistically significant relationship; (2) temporal ordering; and (3) alternative explanations ( Mill 1882 ). While this study cannot address alternative explanations, the first hypothesis directly tests whether a positive relationship exists between antiquities looting and the remaining two hypotheses look at two different temporal orderings of events. The results indicate moderate support for the first hypothesis, moderate support for one temporal ordering (antiquities looting preceding armed conflict), and weak support for the other temporal ordering. While the results do not provide sufficient detail on the direction of the relationship (positive or negative), they do provide strong support for a statistically significant relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict through the presence of cointegration. This is an important finding as it is the first such empirical evidence in the literature and provides a baseline for future research. However, by itself, this finding does not tell us anything about the temporal ordering of the relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict. The second and third hypotheses focus on the temporal ordering of events, which is the second criteria for causality. Evidence for antiquities looting preceding armed conflict could suggest that the looting was strategic and could be associated with an armed conflict financing argument. By contrast, evidence for armed conflict preceding antiquities looting could suggest that the looting was opportunistic and a result of the breakdown in social order. These temporal orderings are not necessarily mutually exclusive as both could potentially occur during an armed conflict by different groups. This study found some evidence for both temporal orderings; however, the results for the strategic angle were stronger than for the opportunistic angle. These are important findings for several reasons. First, this is the first study to be able to look at temporal ordering, and while these data have limitations, the results suggest that it is important to distinguish between strategic and opportunistic looting. Second, when combined with the empirical evidence of a relationship, this study can partially look at causality, which has not been attempted before. Third, these results provide an important direction for future research. 4.1. Limitations Despite the importance of the findings from this study thus far, several important limitations must be discussed. First, this study looks at armed conflict incidents within Egypt’s borders and that related Arts 2018, 7, 22 19 of 26
only to Egypt. Egypt’s geo-political context from 1997 to 2014 may share some characteristics with other nearby countries (e.g., being influenced by the Arab Spring); however, the intra-country conflict in Egypt developed according to its unique geographical, political, economic, and cultural pressures. As such, any findings from this study cannot and should not be generalized to other countries. Second, as mentioned above, this study is not able to get at causality as it cannot rule out several alternative explanations (see below). As an exploratory study, this is not a significant limitation. However, it does mean that the results should be interpreted with caution and should not be taken as evidence of a causal relationship. That is, the results of this study do not conclusively prove that increases in antiquities looting will lead to an increase in armed conflict as a funding mechanism. Third, one of the main limitations with open source data is that it is not possible to differentiate between changes in reporting trends and patterns in the underlying antiquities looting behaviors. The current data can only speak to reporting behaviors. Without another source of data on antiquities looting to corroborate the timing of the looting incidents reported by the news, it is not possible to know for certain whether reporting behaviors align with underlying looting behaviors. Fourth, this analysis is not able to distinguish between different types of strategic or opportunistic looting. For example, it cannot distinguish between looting that leads to the onset of a conflict from looting that prolongs an existing conflict. As the focus of this study is on attempting to disentangle temporal ordering more broadly, this limitation does not affect the conclusions presented above. Rather, the findings here speak to any looting that precedes any incidents of armed conflict and vice versa, regardless of whether they are part of a broader prolonged conflict. However, not accounting for the variations in each non-mutually exclusive category of looting does limit what can be learned about the relationship between these two phenomena and may be masking the true relationship. Finally, the findings of this analysis may not be unique to antiquities looting. It was not possible to account for the influence of crime in general on this relationship as no country-level crime rate statistics were available for Egypt from 1997 to 2014. This is a significant limitation. The findings could reflect a unique relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict, but they could also reflect the broader relationship between crime in general and armed conflict. Armed conflict creates opportunities for crime to occur and transforms existing criminal opportunities. For example, looting behaviors (of electronics, destruction of property, etc.) often occur in violent conflicts ( Mac Ginty 2004 ). Existing criminal opportunities and markets are also affected by armed conflict. Drug cultivation and distribution is both fostered and transformed by armed conflict ( Cornell 2007 ). The lack of social order allows such markets to continue to operate; however, their methods of sales and distribution have to adapt as the market shapes and adapts to the conditions of conflict ( Cornell 2007 ). Crime also affects and shapes armed conflict through a crime-rebellion nexus ( Galeotti 1998 ). Organized crime can affect rebellions by pitting sides of conflicts against each other, particularly in countries where criminal markets are entrenched in their social and political history ( Galeotti 1998 ; Makarenko 2004 ). Controlling for crime in general, including organized crime and street crime is important to understanding the relationship between armed conflict and antiquities looting. Without the ability to control for crime in general, this study cannot rule out the possibility that the relationship between armed conflict and antiquities looting is spurious. 4.2. Future Directions The findings, particularly with regard to opportunistic looting, suggest that open source news articles may not be able to capture accurate enough information on looting incidents to provide a comprehensive picture of the situation. As such, alternative sources of data should be considered and utilized in empirical analysis. Satellite images of archaeological sites may be a useful source of data. Research has shown that it is possible to calculate the number of looter tunnels within a single image and to estimate the probability that an object was taken based on the depth of the hole (see
Cunliffe 2014 ; Parcak 2009 ). If images were taken frequently enough, it would be possible to estimate the changes in antiquities looting over time with more precision than news stories allow. Arts 2018, 7, 22 20 of 26
Additionally, the current study is only able to look at armed conflict as a general category; however, the relationship between antiquities looting and armed conflict may vary according to the type of conflict. For example, it may be more likely that antiquities are looted to support terrorism than they are to support a riot or a protest. Terrorist attacks typically require planning and the resources to put the plan in motion. Looting antiquities to sell could provide the funds necessary for the attack. Riots and protests may be more spontaneous with less planning involved and so would not need or have time to loot antiquities to sell for funds. As such, future research should look at the relationship between antiquities looting and different types of armed conflict. Relatedly, the current study cannot differentiate between whether antiquities looting affects the start of an armed conflict or sustains an ongoing armed conflict. Yet, it is possible that antiquities could be strategically looted to start a conflict, as well as to provide additional resources for an ongoing conflict. These two types of strategic looting may be associated with different types of conflict or it may be that different actors in the conflict would engage in looting to initiate versus sustain a conflict. Future research should try to differentiate between these two effects. Finally, future research should address the alternative explanations that could not be accounted for in this study. For example, economic stress in a country may make it more likely that it will experience armed conflict and that people will engage in opportunistic looting. Economic stress is one factor that, when combined with other factors like a vacuum of governance, can lead to a failed state ( Cohen and Felson 1979 ). In Egypt, such stress could result from a draught affecting the portion of the gross domestic product associated with agriculture. In turn, failed states are more likely to experience armed conflict. Similarly, economic stress in a country may be the result of a lack of economic opportunity. If people are unable to make a living wage in a legitimate business (e.g., farming), they may then turn to looting antiquities to obtain a steadier supply of income. Such alternative explanations should be explored in future research. Yüklə 1,14 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|