This study aims to analyze the impact of terrorism on the educational sector of Sri Lanka. We focus our attention on Eelam War IV, the final phase of the 26-yearlong Sri Lankan conflict and the period of peace (period under the Norwegian government mediated ceasefire agreement) prior to it. We use data from the 2012 National Population and Housing Census and war related fatality counts from the South Asia Terrorism Portal to divide the island’s 9 provinces into high and low war intensity provinces in order to analyze the impact of terrorism on the educational attainment of individuals residing in each of these provinces during the two periods; peace and war. We use an Ordinary Least Squares Model to estimate the average years of schooling and a Logit Model to estimate the levels of individual grade completion. Our results find that the conflict did not have a diminishing impact on education, in fact educational outcomes for individual grade completion increased during the conflict period in areas deemed highly intense.

This thesis examines the effects of war on a state's economy. The Liberal Theory of international relations maintains that there are costs to war in terms of trade; in line with this argument, many researchers have suggested that trading partners are less likely to war with each other out of a fear of disrupting their trade, which would in turn disrupt their economies. Due to issues of elasticity and substitution, however, overall trade may not significantly decline during war. Additionally, there are known economic costs of war, such as debt. If war truly does have costs, then, it must be more in terms of costs to the national economy, rather than trade. This work examines the theory that war has costs to the economies of war initiators, and samples the economies of war initiators from the mid-nineteenth century to the late twentieth century. This paper uses a time series analysis and tests for anterior, concurrent, and posterior effects of war initiation on national economies, and uses a time period of up to twenty years before and after each war event. The results indicate that there are, in general, no negative effects of war on a state's economy: only one case had a significant negative result, while two had significant positive results; these two positive cases, however, also had strong evidence of autocorrelation. These results pose a challenge to the Liberal Theories of International Relations.

<p>“Armaments and Economic Performance”. The literature on military expenditure (milex) is scrutinized with respect to five areas. <i>Investment</i> is reduced when milex increases. Most studies have found <i>economic growth </i>hindered by higher milex. No clear association between milex and <i>employment</i> is found. However, the same amount of other public expenditure creates more jobs. There is some evidence for milex as <i>counter-cyclical instrument</i> in the US. The result for studies if milex is used in <i>electoral cycles</i> in the US is contradictory. Disaggregated data are emphasized as a possible solution to get more definite results.</p><p>“The Economic Costs of Civil Wars”. The empirical studies of the economic costs of internal armed conflicts are divided into <i>accounting</i> and <i>modelling</i> methods. Cost is seen as the difference between the counterfactual production without conflict and the actual production. The average economic cost of internal armed conflict is a 3.7% yearly reduction of GDP. There are large differences between the estimates. One of the reasons for pursuing such studies is to give improved basis for more cost-effective post-conflict reconstruction, which is better achieved with an accounting method.</p><p>“War and Economic Performance – Different Data, Different Conclusions?” This article studies the importance of armed conflict for economic growth by replicating an earlier analysis with new data on conflicts. The basic model investigates how conflicts in 1960-1974 affect economic growth in 1975-1989. Koubi finds that “wars are conducive to higher growth”. Koubi’s finding is confirmed when different conflict data is used in a similar research design.</p><p>“The Role of External Factors in Economic Growth: A Comparative Analysis of Thailand and the Philippines 1950-1990”. Can differences in economic performance be explained by external factors? Both historical and regression analyses are utilised to answer the question. Three external factors are analysed: <i>International trade, foreign direct investment</i>, and <i>external debt</i>. In the regression analysis none of the external factors qualify as statistically significant. The historical analysis finds two external factors discriminating between the two countries. Thus, they might explain the differing growth rates of Thailand and the Philippines: Manufactured exports and external debt.</p>

“Armaments and Economic Performance”. The literature on military expenditure (milex) is scrutinized with respect to five areas. Investment is reduced when milex increases. Most studies have found economic growth hindered by higher milex. No clear association between milex and employment is found. However, the same amount of other public expenditure creates more jobs. There is some evidence for milex as counter-cyclical instrument in the US. The result for studies if milex is used in electoral cycles in the US is contradictory. Disaggregated data are emphasized as a possible solution to get more definite results. “The Economic Costs of Civil Wars”. The empirical studies of the economic costs of internal armed conflicts are divided into accounting and modelling methods. Cost is seen as the difference between the counterfactual production without conflict and the actual production. The average economic cost of internal armed conflict is a 3.7% yearly reduction of GDP. There are large differences between the estimates. One of the reasons for pursuing such studies is to give improved basis for more cost-effective post-conflict reconstruction, which is better achieved with an accounting method. “War and Economic Performance – Different Data, Different Conclusions?” This article studies the importance of armed conflict for economic growth by replicating an earlier analysis with new data on conflicts. The basic model investigates how conflicts in 1960-1974 affect economic growth in 1975-1989. Koubi finds that “wars are conducive to higher growth”. Koubi’s finding is confirmed when different conflict data is used in a similar research design. “The Role of External Factors in Economic Growth: A Comparative Analysis of Thailand and the Philippines 1950-1990”. Can differences in economic performance be explained by external factors? Both historical and regression analyses are utilised to answer the question. Three external factors are analysed: International trade, foreign direct investment, and external debt. In the regression analysis none of the external factors qualify as statistically significant. The historical analysis finds two external factors discriminating between the two countries. Thus, they might explain the differing growth rates of Thailand and the Philippines: Manufactured exports and external debt.