How peace, terrorism affect national GDP, personal income ……

By Benneth Joshua K.

Peace has been a fundamental requirement for society’s stability, development and continuity at every stage in history.

It is unarguable that this component is needed if commerce, sports, marriages, bilateral or even unilateral engagements must take place anywhere, or at any time.

This accounts for why governments at any tier hopes, and practically undertakes endeavours to promote peaceful coexistence among community members.

In fact, modern systems for managing communities of people (whether democracy, monarchy or any other system which the people agree to be their modus operandi for social interaction), hinges its successes on the operationalization of this all-important element- Peace.

But it is an everybody’s responsibility, not only to embrace but to ensure that it comes through in its pure, sincere, and fair state.

Peace is indeed an illusion where insincerity, injustice and unfair treatment of component units in the society is allowed to thrive.

A critical look shows that the sense of unfair treatment and injustice is often at the back of most conflicts across the globe.

This sentiment readily becomes the fuel on which detractors, and aggrieved agendas ride to promote certain interests.

Whilst some interests promoted sometimes advance the agitations of blocks, other times the gap in social cohesion created by unfairness and insincerity on the part of leaders is quickly hijacked by persons with ulterior motives.

Human history has of course seen the emergence of various gangs, groups and factions, some political, some religious, and others with peculiar nomenclatures, seeking to correct real or perceived injustices, or taking advantage of gaps in social cohesion to advance untoward interests.

In modern times however, this violent march in social relevance has metamorphosed in terminology and concept to Terrorism (the use of violence in social bargaining).

Whether it is terrorism garpped in religious ideology, or terrorism clothed in economic, political, and social regalia, the bottom line is to use violence in compelling sympathy, followership or capitulation to the terrorists demands.

In today’s world these demands are often targeted at changing political leadership, or altering altogether, the matrix synergy of social configurations.

But for terrorists to achieve these aims, a number of factors have to be in place, including but not limited to a well oiled terrorists economy that covers such fields as:

i. Human Resources:

The creation of a network of terrorists cells
The creation and maintenance of a high level surveillance machinery that monitors state policies, decisions and implementation with a view to maneuvering the system to the benefit of the non-state actors.
Recruitment of direct and indirect hands-on to supply needed logistics

ii. Material Resources:

Easy access to hardwares
Access to facilities for the execution of mandates

iii. Financial Resources

Viable streams of revenue
A network of alternative finances and/or financiers

It is necessary to know that terrorist groups need money to sustain themselves and carry out terrorist acts.

This money can come from legitimate sources, for example from business profits and charitable organizations, or from illegal activities including trafficking in weapons, drugs or people, or kidnapping.

Regardless of the sources of this money, they leave an impact on the national GDP of affected countries, and on the personal income scale of individuals.

For instance, in 2016, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in its report on “Measuring The Economic Impact Of Violent Extremism Leading To Terrorism In Africa “, disclosed that the economic cost of terrorism in Africa was US$15.5 billion, representing an increase of more than ten-fold since 2007, when the economic cost was estimated at US$1.54 billion.

Meaning that the continent’s share of the global economic cost of terrorism increased from 4.2 per cent in 2007, to 20.3 per cent in 2016.

The nearly ten years between 2007 and 2016 saw terrorism cost the African continent at a minimum US$119 billion.

In reality, this figure is much higher once estimates for GDP losses, lost informal economic activity, extra security spending, and refugee/IDP costs are accounted for.

In the years under review, Nigeria topped the list of 18 countries impacted by terrorism as it recorded a disheartening 18,952 fatalities and 3,058 terrorist attacks, this costing it a whopping US $97,966 billion.

In fact, the four countries considered to be the epicentre countries for violent extremism, Nigeria, Mali, Somalia and Libya, have accounted for 94 per cent, or US$103 billion, of the total economic impact of terrorism since 2007.

Spill-over countries have suffered US$3.2 billion (3 per cent), and at-risk countries US$2.7 billion (2.8 per cent) of the total economic impact of terrorism over the ten years between 2007 and 2016.

But beyond the effect on national GDP, terrorism also impacts on individual/ personal income in very significant ways.

Terrorist acts cause ripple effects through the economy that have negative impacts. The most obvious is the direct economic destruction of property and lives.

Terrorism indirectly affects the economy by creating market uncertainty, xenophobia, loss of tourism, increased insurance claims, and human rights violations by impinging on the personal income of victims.

A recent World Bank study explores how terrorism in Somalia between 2016-2018 has impacted household income and poverty levels.

It measured the causal impact of terrorism on consumption and poverty using household-level.

Somalia is one of the poorest countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. In 2017-18, it was estimated that 69% of the population lived below the standard international poverty line of $1.90.

The study focused on the attacks from Al-Shabaab, a recognized terrorist organization, against civilians in Mogadishu by measuring the attack’s immediate impact (within one week) on the surrounding local economy .

The analysis found that consumption of households exposed to terrorist incidents decreased by a third, mainly driven by a decline in food consumption.

Consumption fell because fewer household members could work and earn income in the period immediately after an attack This ultimately led to a decline in consumption and exacerbated poverty and vulnerability.

After a terrorist attack, limited food availability and higher prices also disrupt the economy and affect welfare conditions.

Households in the top 20% of the consumption distribution were not as severely impacted as those closer to the poverty line.

This is because higher income households are more likely to have savings or other sources of income, allowing them to soften the economic shock from a terrorist attack and keep their consumption levels steady.

Within a week of the attack, only part of the city was impacted due to the localized disruption of roads and markets.

For households located within a 4-kilometer radius from the incident–covering 10% of the area of Mogadishu and 25% of the population—the negative impact on consumption was similar.

Conversely, those households located more than 4 kilometers away from the incident seemed to be far enough away for their consumption levels to be directly affected.

Nigeria is not left out in the impact on the personal and household economy that terrorism leaves.

In Maiduguri, Borno State, northeast Nigeria, commercial activities were drastically reduced because of the unprecedented attacks on banks, and markets, as shops refuse to open regularly due to the fear of the coordinated attacks from Boko Haram in 2012.

Against this backdrop, it is essential for government and leaders at all levels, especially in Nigeria, to pursue peace so as to prevent a decay into atmospheres that engender such sentiments that give rooms to disenchantments, a sense of injustice and unfair treatment of any kind.

It is such feelings that gave rise to Boko Haram and its likes, in the first place.

In the case of Boko Haram, persons from the northeast of the country felt marginalized by the larger whole, and took up arms against the state with the slogan, “Boko Haram”, (Western Education Is A Taboo).

Bear in mind that while peace is an essential commodity in the development, stability and continuity of the society, it is nonetheless everybody’s responsibility, especially the leaders to ensure an atmosphere to promote it.

No alternative to this should be contemplated at all.

Benneth Joshua writes from Abuja and be reached through:

+234909 631 7207, +2347030690170
joshuconsul26@gmail.com