🔎 Why this matters

Two thirds of the world’s population are projected to live in cities by 2050, with the fastest urban growth in the least developed countries. Rapid urbanization creates acute governance and service-delivery challenges, making it crucial to understand what drives city-level social disorder and political violence.

📚 What the researchers assembled

A new city-level event dataset on urban social disorder was created to test prominent theories from the conflict literature. Key features of the dataset include:

• Time span: 1960–2009
• Coverage: 55 major cities across Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa
• Types of events recorded: nonviolent actions (demonstrations, strikes) and violent political actions (riots, terrorism, armed conflict)

🧭 What was tested

The analysis uses the event data to evaluate how common explanatory factors relate to urban disorder. The variables examined include:

• Economic growth rates
• Regime type (with attention to hybrid democracies)
• Level of development
• Economic inequality
• Youth bulges (large youth cohorts)
• Economic globalization

📊 Key findings

• Urban social disorder shows a clear association with low economic growth rates.
• Hybrid democratic regimes are linked to higher levels of urban social disorder.
• Level of development, economic inequality, large youth bulges, and economic globalization do not appear to affect levels of urban social disorder in this sample.

📌 Implications

These results suggest that shortfalls in economic performance and political regime characteristics (especially hybrid regimes) matter more for city unrest than commonly cited structural factors such as inequality or youth demographics. This has direct relevance for urban governance and policy priorities in rapidly urbanizing low- and middle-income settings.