In the course of civil war, it is not unusual for armed rebels, who are fighting to either take control of a state or create a new one, to create state-like governing institutions. For example, nearly 64% of rebels between 1945 and 2012 created at least one governing institution. One challenge to moving the literature on rebel governance forward is getting data on the many possible institutions that comprise rebel governance. I introduce new data, the Rebel Quasi-State Institutions dataset, which covers 235 rebel groups and codes annually for 25 institutions during the entire existence of the group. I demonstrate the usefulness of this new dataset by exploring a relationship important to scholars: that of rebel strength and rebel governance institutions (Stewart, 2020). These analyses show two things. First, there is value in disaggregating rebel governance and looking at institutions separately because not all governance institutions are correlated with strength in the same direction. Second, taking into account the time dimension is important. Since rebel conventional capability increased as a result of the end of the Cold War (Kalyvas & Balcells, 2010) and rebel institutions became more prevalent, there is an important time component to rebel governance that correlates with events in the international system.

中文翻译：

---

什么是叛乱治理？引入关于反叛机构的新数据集，1945-2012

在内战过程中，武装叛乱分子为控制一个国家或建立一个新国家而战，建立类似国家的治理机构并不罕见。例如，在 1945 年至 2012 年间，近 64% 的叛乱分子创建了至少一个管理机构。推动反叛治理文献向前发展的一个挑战是获取有关构成反叛治理的许多可能机构的数据。我介绍了新数据，即 Rebel Quasi-State Institutions 数据集，该数据集涵盖了 235 个叛乱团体，并在该团体存在期间每年为 25 个机构编码。我通过探索对学者来说很重要的关系来展示这个新数据集的有用性：反叛力量和反叛治理机构之间的关系（Stewart，2020）。这些分析表明了两件事。第一的，将叛军治理分解并单独看待机构是有价值的，因为并非所有治理机构都与同一方向的力量相关。其次，考虑时间维度很重要。由于冷战结束后叛军的常规能力增强（Kalyvas & Balcells，2010 年）并且叛军机构变得更加普遍，因此叛军治理有一个重要的时间组成部分与国际体系中的事件相关联。