12 Scarcity and Surfeit" ... it is 'modified' since it incorporates subjective expected utilities,
recognising the potential diversity of conflict goals which may range from
the economic to the ideological, and of subjective probabilities influ-
enced by misperceptions, information distortion and ideological biases... Such factors as misunderstood signals, perceived changes in the bal-
ance of advantage between the protagonists, prior relationships, and the
input of allies and interested others could, either singly or in combina-
tion, influence the course of a conflict and behaviour therein.""
A 'cognitive rationality' approach would seem to be more adequate to the
analysis of violent conflicts in that it incorporates "the nature of preferences
that parties in conflict express, the dynamic processes involved in changes of
preference orderings and the interactive nature of the life cycle of a conflict"
taking the complexity of conflict situations into account.62 Michael Nicholson
provides an extensive discussion of the concept of rationality as applied in
conflict situation^.^^ The following quote adequately describes the 'paradox-
es of rationality',
"... in much of the analysis of international conflict, particularly that
which looks at it as the rational pursuit of goals, violence is viewed as
a means to achieve particular ends: it is regarded purely instrumental-
ly ... the use of violence is considered a cost, but one which might rea-
sonably be borne in order to attain particular ends ... the cool
Clausewitzian view of human motivation is a useful first approximation
for the analysis of international behaviour, somewhat akin to the econ-
omists' assumption of profit maximisation as a device for explaining
business behaviour. However, as a more general approach to human
motivation, in particular when violence is relevant, it is seriously flawed
[my emphasis]. People's attitudes to the use of violence are often
ambiguous, ambivalent and complex, and one cannot treat violence
simply as an unambiguousCollective action theory is explained in the work of Charles Tilly, in particu-
lar as regards the onset of revolution^.^^ Political elements are central to
Tilly's approach: it is the continuous power struggle between those who have
decision-making power, and those who have not, that is at the base of polit-
ical action. Tilly considers that "the passage from individual interests to col-
lective decisions" involves a confluence of shared interests that must be
organised and mobilised, in possession and use of adequate resources.
Collective political action, including collective violence, will occur if there is
sufficient opportunity for it - yet, not solely economic opportunity.
A further criticism of the 'greed theory' is of a methodological nature.
Nicholson terms this "sin number 2", part of "six of the commonest objec-
tions to the social-scientific approach to the analysis of conflict".6G This sin