Ceasefires play a role in almost all civil war peace processes. Yet existing studies undertheorize the ways in which different logics drive the design of ceasefire agreements, and the effect this has on violence suspension. Building on bargaining theory and existing ceasefire literature, we identify different bargaining problems conflict parties face over the course of a conflict, and three classes of ceasefire design they use to address these problems. We argue that the effect of ceasefires is driven both by these underlying logics and by the provisions they contain. Building on the PA-X data to capture the provisions included within all written civil war ceasefires between 1990 and 2019, and using Uppsala Conflict Data Program georeferenced event data, we estimate models of ceasefire survival, with conflict deaths as the main measure of whether a ceasefire remains in place. We find that definitive ceasefires (i.e., agreements with demobilization and incompatibility provisions), followed by preliminary ceasefires (i.e., agreements with compliance mechanisms), are associated with longer periods of violence suspension than cessation of hostilities agreements that lack such provisions. We discuss the implications of our results for conflict parties and third parties seeking to facilitate the transition from war to peace.

中文翻译：

---

内战停火的逻辑

停火几乎在所有内战和平进程中发挥作用。然而，现有研究对不同逻辑驱动停火协议设计的方式及其对停止暴力的影响缺乏理论。基于讨价还价理论和现有的停火文献，我们确定了冲突各方在冲突过程中面临的不同讨价还价问题，以及他们用来解决这些问题的三类停火设计。我们认为，停火的效果是由这些基本逻辑及其所包含的规定所驱动的。基于 PA-X 数据以捕捉 1990 年至 2019 年间所有书面内战停火中包含的规定，并使用乌普萨拉冲突数据计划地理参考事件数据，我们估计停火生存模型，以冲突死亡人数作为停火是否仍然存在的主要衡量标准。我们发现，与缺乏此类条款的停止敌对行动协议相比，最终停火（即复员和不相容条款的协议），随后是初步停火（即遵守机制的协议），与暂停暴力的时间更长。我们讨论了我们的结果对寻求促进从战争过渡到和平的冲突各方和第三方的影响。与缺乏此类规定的停止敌对行动协议相比，暴力暂停的时间更长。我们讨论了我们的结果对寻求促进从战争过渡到和平的冲突各方和第三方的影响。与缺乏此类规定的停止敌对行动协议相比，暴力暂停的时间更长。我们讨论了我们的结果对寻求促进从战争过渡到和平的冲突各方和第三方的影响。