Data Sheet 1_The limits of resource scarcity and poverty as drivers of support for violence: evidence from rural Tanzania and Kenya.pdf

Introduction

Environmental change is frequently argued to increase violent conflict through resource scarcity and poverty, yet there is limited clarity on which dimensions of poverty shape individual support for violence. This study examines whether gradual resource decline and household poverty are associated with pro-violence attitudes in rural Sub-Saharan Africa. We analyse survey data from 994 households across 25 villages in the Greater Serengeti–Mara ecosystem in Tanzania and Kenya, a setting characterised by high dependence on natural resources, recurring inter-ethnic tensions, and conflicts with conservation authorities, but no recent armed conflict. This context allows us to isolate individual-level mechanisms without contamination from ongoing large-scale violence.

Methods

We test two hypotheses derived from environmental scarcity, opportunity cost, and relative deprivation frameworks: (H1) that perceived declines in key renewable resources increase support for violence, and (H2) that poorer households are more supportive of violence. Resource dynamics are captured through self-reported medium-term changes in pasture, water, firewood, and crop productivity, while poverty is measured using detailed household income data and asset indicators. The dependent variables capture attitudinal support for violence rather than participation.

Results

We find no evidence that absolute income is associated with support for violence. Similarly, perceived declines in key renewable resources show no consistent relationship with pro-violence attitudes, even when accounting for resource salience. Asset-based measures of wealth are only weakly associated with support for violence, and where associations are observed, they are positive.

Discussion

These findings challenge simple opportunity-cost and environmental-scarcity explanations and suggest that commonly used economic indicators have limited explanatory power at the individual level. By focusing on attitudinal support rather than participation, the study refines micro-level theories of environment–conflict linkages and highlights the need to reconsider how poverty and resource scarcity are conceptualised as mechanisms linking environmental change to support for violence.