•  
  •  
 

Publication Date

Spring 2026

Abstract

This study investigates how the form of conflict termination can shape the scale, timing, and selectivity of refugee return. While civil war literature is exhaustive on how the form of conflict termination may influence post-war stability, there is little to no research on how it can impact refugee return. Using a dataset of thirty post-conflict cases and spatial analysis of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Sri Lanka, and Liberia, the paper tests whether government victories, rebel victories, or negotiated settlements predict return patterns. Ordinary least squares and Cox hazard models reveal that termination type alone reveals little variation once the models are accounted for post-conflict violence and economic conditions. Subnational analysis reveals that negotiated settlements, as seen in the case of Bosnia, result in more selective returns. Government victories, although sometimes yielding faster returns, can be coercive, as observed in the case of Sri Lanka. Conversely, rebel victories yield more proportional outcomes when paired with pragmatic leadership and inclusive institutions. However, this should be taken cautiously because of the limited cases tested, where one case corresponds to a termination type. Nonetheless, the findings challenge deterministic claims that view peace agreements or military victories as shaping aspects of post-war stability, emphasizing that the post-war order, coercive, partitionist, or inclusive, determines better whether repatriation is sustainable.

Download

Share

COinS