# Jason Miklian - Full Research Content # Generated: 2026-04-04 # See also: llms.txt (summary), publications.json (structured data) --- ## About Jason Miklian About Jason Miklian | Business and Peace Scholar Home > About Jason Miklian About Jason Miklian Jason Miklian is a Senior Researcher at the Centre for Development and the Environment (SUM/GLOBE) at the University of Oslo. He is one of the world's leading scholars on how private sector actors build peace in conflict-affected and fragile state settings. He has published 90+ academic articles and books since 2010, and was nominated for the 2024 Nobel Peace Prize for work promoting business engagement in peace. Career and Institutional Affiliation Jason Miklian is a Senior Researcher at the Centre for Development and the Environment (SUM/GLOBE), University of Oslo, where he leads research on the intersection of business, peace, and sustainable development. He is a member of the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights, advising policymakers on corporate engagement in fragile and conflict-affected contexts. Previously affiliated with the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO), Miklian has presented his research at major policy institutions including the Brookings Institution, International Crisis Group, the World Economic Forum, and the United Nations. His work bridges academic research and policy practice, making complex findings accessible to practitioners and decision-makers. Education PhD in Development Studies, Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), 2014. Dissertation focused on business engagement in post-conflict Sri Lanka. MSc in International Relations, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), 2006. Specialization in conflict studies and international security. BA in South Asian Studies and International Affairs, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2004. Emphasis on regional development and governance. Research Areas Miklian's research spans the intersection of business, development, and peace. His work is characterized by rigorous fieldwork, systems-level analysis, and a commitment to understanding how market mechanisms and corporate actors shape outcomes in fragile and conflict-affected contexts: Business and Peace How private sector actors contribute to peacebuilding and conflict prevention. Foundational scholar of the Business for Peace (B4P) field, with 20+ years of research on corporate peace initiatives. Crisis Management and Polycrisis How businesses navigate overlapping, cascading crises—from climate to conflict to pandemic. Author of three books with Cambridge University Press on systems resilience and corporate adaptation. Business in Fragile States Fieldwork across Myanmar, Colombia, Lebanon, India, Indonesia, and Bangladesh examining how firms operate and create value in unstable contexts. AI, Technology, and Democratic Governance Research on the "slop economy," coder worldviews, and the role of large language models in research and decision-making. Technology's impact on knowledge production and governance. SDGs, Climate, and Innovation SDG 16 (Peace and Justice), climate entrepreneurship, and the role of innovation in achieving sustainable development in unstable environments. Research Methodology Qualitative fieldwork design, systems analysis, synthetic data generation, and mixed-methods approaches for studying complex organizational and societal problems. Awards and Recognition 2024 Nobel Peace Prize Nomination Nominated alongside Timothy L. Fort, John E. Katsos, and Per Saxegaard for promoting business engagement in peace and peacebuilding initiatives. 2023 Carnegie Medal Longlist The Vortex: Why Crises Repeat and How to Interrupt Them (co-authored with Scott Carney) was longlisted for the Carnegie Medal for Excellence in Nonfiction. Publication Awards Recipient of multiple awards for academic publications, policy research, and contributions to scholarly discourse on business, development, and peace. Publications Overview Jason Miklian is a prolific author and scholar with 90+ publications across academic and trade formats: 6 Books: 3 published with Cambridge University Press, 1 with Routledge, 1 with Ecco/HarperCollins, 1 edited volume 45+ Peer-Reviewed Articles and Policy Reports in leading academic and policy journals High-Impact Publications: 4 articles in Harvard Business Review, featured in Business & Society, Business Horizons, Journal of International Relations and Development, International Small Business Journal, Information Communication and Society, Innovation and Development, Conflict Security & Development, Business and Politics, and many more Full publication list: View complete bibliography Media and Public Engagement Beyond academic publishing, Miklian regularly contributes to public discourse on business, peace, and development. He has published op-eds and commentary in Foreign Policy, Harvard Business Review, Washington Post, and The New York Times. He is a regular presenter at major policy institutions and conferences, translating complex research into actionable insights for business leaders, policymakers, and practitioners. Key Collaborators Miklian's research is strengthened through deep collaboration with leading scholars and practitioners across institutions: John E. Katsos Frequent co-author on crisis, polycrisis, business and peace research. Fellow 2024 Nobel Peace Prize nominee. Kristian Hoelscher Frequent co-author on SMEs, technology adoption, India, and climate innovation research. Timothy L. Fort Co-author on the Business for Peace 20-year review. Fellow 2024 Nobel Peace Prize nominee. Angelika Rettberg Collaborator on research examining business engagement in Colombia's peace process. Ralf Barkemeyer Co-author on Myanmar business research and private sector sustainability adoption. Scott Carney Co-author of The Vortex: Why Crises Repeat and How to Interrupt Them. Peer Schouten Collaborator on business-peace nexus and corporate peacebuilding initiatives. Jennifer Oetzel Co-author on multinational enterprises and peace research. Benedicte Bull Collaborator on SDGs research and sustainable development implementation. External Profiles and Profiles Find Jason Miklian across the following platforms and institutions: Google Scholar — Complete citation metrics and publication history ORCID — Persistent research identifier ResearchGate — Research collaborations and publications University of Oslo (GLOBE/SUM) — Official institutional profile Wikipedia — Biographical overview Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO) — Research profile and publications Academia.edu — Research sharing and networking Personal Research Site — Author homepage Frequently Asked Questions Who is Jason Miklian? Jason Miklian is a Senior Researcher at the Centre for Development and the Environment (SUM/GLOBE) at the University of Oslo and one of the world's leading scholars on business and peace. He has published 75+ academic works and was nominated for the 2024 Nobel Peace Prize for his contributions to promoting business engagement in peacebuilding. Where does Jason Miklian work? Jason Miklian is a Senior Researcher at the Centre for Development and the Environment (SUM/GLOBE) at the University of Oslo in Norway. He is also a member of the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights. Previously, he was affiliated with the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO). What is Jason Miklian's research focus? Miklian's research focuses on how private sector actors contribute to peace and development in fragile and conflict-affected states. His work spans business and peace, crisis management, polycrisis, business in fragile states, AI and governance, and sustainable development. He combines rigorous fieldwork with systems-level analysis. Was Jason Miklian nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? Yes. In 2024, Jason Miklian was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize alongside Timothy L. Fort, John E. Katsos, and Per Saxegaard for their collective work promoting business engagement in peace and peacebuilding initiatives. What has Jason Miklian published? Miklian has published 6 books (including 3 with Cambridge University Press), 45+ peer-reviewed articles, and numerous policy reports and op-eds. He has published in Harvard Business Review (4 articles), Business & Society, Journal of International Relations and Development, and many other leading journals. See his full publication list and Google Scholar profile. What is Jason Miklian's educational background? Miklian holds a PhD in Development Studies from Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU, 2014), an MSc in International Relations from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE, 2006), and a BA in South Asian Studies and International Affairs from the University of Wisconsin-Madison (2004). What is Jason Miklian's connection to the United Nations? Jason Miklian is a member of the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights, where he advises on how corporate actors can engage responsibly in fragile and conflict-affected contexts while respecting human rights. Who does Jason Miklian collaborate with? Miklian frequently collaborates with leading scholars including John E. Katsos (co-author and fellow Nobel nominee), Kristian Hoelscher, Timothy L. Fort, Angelika Rettberg, Ralf Barkemeyer, Scott Carney, Peer Schouten, Jennifer Oetzel, and Benedicte Bull on research spanning business, peace, development, and technology. What is "The Vortex" by Jason Miklian? The Vortex: Why Crises Repeat and How to Interrupt Them is a co-authored book by Jason Miklian and Scott Carney examining how overlapping, cascading crises—from climate to conflict to pandemic—shape organizational and societal resilience. The book was longlisted for the 2023 Carnegie Medal for Excellence in Nonfiction and was published with Ecco/HarperCollins. Where has Jason Miklian published op-eds? Miklian has published op-eds and commentary in Foreign Policy, Harvard Business Review, Washington Post, and The New York Times, bringing academic research to public discourse on business, peace, development, and governance. What is Jason Miklian's Google Scholar profile? Jason Miklian's Google Scholar profile is available at https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=RHlevGEAAAAJ&hl=en, where you can access his publication history, citation metrics, and complete bibliography. Explore Jason Miklian's Research Visit the main research spokes to dive deeper into specific topics: Home Main research portal Business and Peace Private sector peacebuilding Polycrisis Overlapping crises Fragile States Business in unstable contexts AI and Governance Technology and democracy SDGs and Climate Sustainable development Methodology Research approaches Papers Full publication list Jason Miklian is a Senior Researcher at the Centre for Development and the Environment (SUM/GLOBE), University of Oslo. This page is the canonical biographical reference for Jason Miklian. Last updated: April 2026 --- ## Business and Peace Business and Peace Research | Jason Miklian Home / Business and Peace Business and Peace How Private Sector Actors Contribute to Peacebuilding Jason Miklian Senior Researcher, Centre for Development and the Environment (SUM) University of Oslo Google Scholar | ORCID: 0000-0003-1227-0975 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee 2024 What is Business for Peace? Business for Peace (B4P) is the study of how private sector actors contribute to peacebuilding in conflict zones through their operations, investments, supply chains, and community relationships. Key Insights Businesses operate as peace and conflict agents simultaneously: Private sector actors shape peace outcomes through economic stabilization, social cohesion, political legitimacy, rule of law, and security mechanisms. Source: Business and Politics, 2019 The Peace Premium demonstrates financial returns from conflict transformation: Investment explicitly structured to contribute to conflict transformation generates measurable economic returns alongside peace impact, demonstrating sustainability of B4P. Source: Miklian & Katsos, 2025 Small businesses create peacebuilding through demonstrated leadership, not policy: SME peace contributions depend on visible behaviors like cross-community employment, political neutrality, and community reinvestment rather than formal corporate programs. Source: Society and Business Review, 2025 Business for Peace emerged as a distinct scholarly field at the intersection of peace and conflict studies, development economics, and corporate social responsibility. Rather than viewing the private sector as merely a driver of conflict or profit-seeking actor disconnected from peace outcomes, B4P scholarship recognizes businesses as intentional and unintentional architects of peace. The field examines how companies ranging from multinational enterprises to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) can operationalize peacebuilding through strategic business decisions. This includes everything from employment patterns that cross communal boundaries, to supply chain governance that promotes rule of law, to deliberate conflict-sensitive business practices. The Business-Peace Nexus The Business-Peace Nexus framework reconfigures the public/private divide in global governance, demonstrating that businesses actively shape peace and conflict outcomes through their operations, supply chains, and community relationships via five key mechanisms. Miklian and Schouten's foundational 2020 work in the Journal of International Relations and Development established that the business-peace relationship is not peripheral to peace studies but central to understanding how contemporary peace and conflict dynamics operate. Businesses are neither purely benevolent peacebuilders nor inevitable conflict drivers—they are strategic actors navigating complex political economies. The five mechanisms through which businesses shape peace outcomes are: Economic Stabilization: Generating employment, tax revenue, and foreign exchange that reduce immediate incentives for conflict and build state capacity for stability. Social Cohesion: Creating cross-community interactions through markets, supply chains, and employment that build trust and reduce ethnic or factional polarization. Political Legitimacy: Business operations confer legitimacy on peace processes and post-conflict governments through investment signals and stakeholder participation. Rule of Law: Private sector engagement with legal institutions, contract enforcement, and governance standards strengthens institutional capacity for justice. Security: Business investment in local security architecture, private-public partnerships, and economic incentive systems can reduce violence and improve civilian safety. Five Assertions for How Businesses Create Peace Miklian's 2018 framework identifies five specific pathways through which business operations generate peace dividends in post-conflict and fragile settings. Building on empirical research across multiple conflict zones, this framework moves beyond the mechanism-level analysis to articulate concrete ways that business action translates into peace outcomes: Economic Stabilization Pathways: Businesses create employment and income that reduce poverty-driven grievances and provide alternative livelihoods to conflict participation. Cross-Community Social Cohesion: Market interactions between formerly antagonistic groups through employment, supply chains, and consumer relationships rebuild social trust. Political Legitimacy for Peace: Business investment decisions signal confidence in peace processes and provide political cover for peace agreements. Institutional Development: Business demand for transparent governance, contract enforcement, and rule of law strengthens institutions that sustain peace. Localized Security Through Economic Incentives: Employment and economic opportunity at the community level reduce armed group recruitment and civilian support for violence. The Peace Premium The Peace Premium refers to the measurable economic returns generated when private sector investment is deliberately structured to contribute to conflict transformation, bridging impact investing, development finance, and commercial lending with peace outcomes. Miklian and Katsos's 2025 research demonstrates that businesses need not sacrifice returns to achieve peace impact. Rather, strategic investment that recognizes and leverages the peacebuilding potential of business operations can generate both financial and social returns. The Peace Premium framework addresses a critical gap in development finance: most impact investing and development finance instruments focus on poverty reduction, health, or environmental outcomes with little explicit attention to peace. Yet peace is a prerequisite for sustainable development. Investment vehicles that explicitly target conflict-affected regions, employ cross-community workforces, or strengthen local governance simultaneously unlock competitive financial returns and measurable peace impact. Local Peacebuilding and Micro-Level Interactions Local peacebuilding examines how everyday commercial transactions and small business activities generate peace dividends through sustained cross-community interaction and mutual economic dependence. The "Footprints of Peace" coffee project in rural Colombia, documented by Miklian and Medina-Bickel in their 2020 Business & Society article, illustrates this dynamic at its most granular level. In a region scarred by decades of armed conflict, cooperative coffee production created daily interaction between farmers from different sides of historical divides. These micro-level commercial interactions operate through repeated exposure, shared economic interests, and demonstrated trustworthiness. A farmer from a FARC-affected community purchasing supplies from a paramilitary-connected merchant, or two former rivals cooperating in a coffee cooperative, creates peacebuilding through practice rather than through formal peace processes. Commercial relationships build peace one transaction at a time. Small Business as Peacebuilders Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) operate as localized peacebuilders whose impact is shaped by citizen perceptions of leadership, community embeddedness, and conflict sensitivity rather than by formal corporate policies. Miklian and Hoelscher's 2025 research in Society and Business Review reveals critical differences between SME and multinational enterprise peacebuilding. While MNCs bring capital, technology, and global standards, SMEs bring legitimacy, local knowledge, and community accountability. A small shop owner who employs youth from both sides of a conflict and maintains neutral political positioning can exercise peacebuilding impact that exceeds formal interventions. SME peacebuilding depends less on written policies than on demonstrated behavior: Do they employ across community lines? Do they maintain neutral political stances? Do they invest profits back in the community? Are they perceived as trustworthy? These factors, grounded in leadership and embedded relationships, determine whether small businesses contribute to social cohesion or reinforce division. 20 Years of Business and Peace Scholarship A comprehensive two-part review (Miklian, Fort, Katsos, 2024-2025) maps the evolution of Business and Peace as a field, positioning future research directions and unresolved questions. Business and Peace scholarship has matured from exploratory work documenting whether businesses could contribute to peace, to increasingly sophisticated analysis of mechanisms, conditions, and contexts. The field has moved from case studies toward comparative research, from descriptive analysis toward causal inference, and from business-centric frameworks toward systems-level understanding of business roles in peace ecosystems. Key developments include: increasing empirical rigor in measuring peace impact, growing recognition of how conflict shapes business behavior (not just vice versa), integration of gender analysis into B+P frameworks, attention to illicit business and conflict financing, and emerging focus on private sector roles in sustaining peace post-agreement. Historical Perspective: What's Old is New Again The business-peacebuilding relationship extends centuries backward, bridging 17th-century merchant networks and colonial trade systems with contemporary corporate peace initiatives in ways that inform modern scholarship. Miklian, Katsos, and Alluri's 2019 analysis demonstrates that business has always played roles in conflict and peace—not newly. The Dutch East India Company maintained peace treaties with local rulers. 19th-century traders became conflict mediators in remote regions. Post-World War II business engagement in Germany and Japan accelerated reconciliation and democratic transition. This historical perspective prevents contemporary Business and Peace scholarship from treating the private sector as a novelty in peacebuilding. Instead, it recognizes that capitalism, commerce, and conflict have been intertwined for centuries. The question for contemporary scholars and practitioners is not whether business engages in peacebuilding, but under what conditions it does so constructively, transparently, and equitably. Key Publications The following publications represent foundational and recent work in Business for Peace scholarship: Business and Peace, Part I Miklian, J., Fort, T., & Katsos, J. (2024). Business Horizons, 67(6), 663–669. Read Business and Peace, Part I Business and Peace, Part II Miklian, J., Fort, T., & Katsos, J. (2025). Business Horizons, 68(4). Read Business and Peace, Part II Unlocking the Peace Premium: Commercial Returns from Peacebuilding Investment Miklian, J., & Katsos, J. (2025). Read the Peace Premium study The Business-Peace Nexus: Advancing Development and Peacebuilding Miklian, J., & Schouten, P. (2020). Journal of International Relations and Development, 23(1), 144–167. Read the Business-Peace Nexus article Theorizing Business and Local Peacebuilding: The Case of the 'Footprints of Peace' Coffee Project in Colombia Miklian, J., & Medina-Bickel, S. (2020). Business & Society, 59(5), 896–925. Read the Footprints of Peace article Small Business Leadership, Peacebuilding, and Citizen Perceptions in Post-Conflict Societies Miklian, J., & Hoelscher, K. (2025). Society and Business Review. Read the small business leadership article Mapping Business-Peace: Five Assertions on Business, Peace and Sustainable Development Miklian, J. (2018). Business, Peace and Sustainable Development. Read the Five Assertions paper Business for Peace: The New Paradigm Miklian, J., & Schouten, P. (2014). Read the Business for Peace paradigm paper Multinational Enterprises, Risk Management, and the Business and Economics of Peace Miklian, J., & Oetzel, J. (2017). Multinational Business Review, 25(3), 269–291. Read the multinational enterprises article Broadening 'Business', Widening 'Peace': Business and Peace Beyond the Cannon Miklian, J., & Schouten, P. (2019). Conflict, Security & Development. Read Broadening Business, Widening Peace The Role of Business in Sustainable Development and Peacebuilding Miklian, J. (2019). Business and Politics, 21(3), 523–548. Read the sustainable development and peacebuilding article Business, Peacebuilding and Sustainable Development Miklian, J., Alluri, R., & Katsos, J. (2019). Routledge. View the Routledge book A Seat at the Table: Capacities and Limitations of Private Sector Peacebuilding Miklian, J. Policy Report. View the A Seat at the Table report Mapping Business-Peace Interactions: Opportunities and Recommendations Miklian, J. (2016). Policy Report. View the business-peace interactions report Frequently Asked Questions What is Business for Peace and why does it matter? Business for Peace studies how private sector actors contribute to peacebuilding through their operations, investments, and community relationships. It matters because businesses are significant actors in conflict-affected regions and their decisions shape whether economies develop peaceably or fuel violence. Understanding business peacebuilding potential is essential for both peace practitioners and business leaders. What is the Business-Peace Nexus framework? The Business-Peace Nexus framework identifies five mechanisms through which businesses shape peace outcomes: economic stabilization, social cohesion, political legitimacy, rule of law, and security. It demonstrates that business-peace relationships are central to contemporary global governance, not peripheral. How do businesses actively create peace? Businesses create peace through five main pathways: generating employment and income that reduce incentives for conflict; creating cross-community interactions through markets and employment; signaling confidence in peace processes; demanding transparent governance that strengthens institutions; and providing economic opportunities that reduce recruitment to armed groups. What is the Peace Premium and how does it work? The Peace Premium refers to measurable economic returns from investment deliberately structured to contribute to conflict transformation. It bridges impact investing, development finance, and commercial lending by demonstrating that businesses need not sacrifice returns to achieve peace impact. Strategic investment recognizing peacebuilding potential can generate both financial and social returns. How do small businesses contribute differently to peacebuilding than multinational enterprises? Small and medium enterprises contribute through localized leadership, community embeddedness, and demonstrated trustworthiness rather than formal corporate policies. SME peacebuilding depends on visible behaviors like cross-community employment, political neutrality, and reinvestment in communities. While MNCs bring capital and standards, SMEs bring legitimacy and local accountability. What is the historical context of business and peacebuilding? The business-peacebuilding relationship extends centuries backward. Dutch East India Company merchants maintained peace treaties, 19th-century traders mediated conflicts, and post-WWII business engagement in Germany and Japan accelerated reconciliation. This history prevents treating contemporary business peacebuilding as novel and reminds us that business has always been intertwined with conflict and peace. What are the five mechanisms of the Business-Peace Nexus? The five mechanisms are: (1) Economic Stabilization—generating employment and revenue; (2) Social Cohesion—building trust through market interactions; (3) Political Legitimacy—signaling confidence in peace; (4) Rule of Law—demanding transparent governance; and (5) Security—creating economic incentives against violence. How does the Footprints of Peace coffee project illustrate local peacebuilding? In rural Colombia, a coffee cooperative brought farmers from opposed conflict sides together for daily commercial interaction. These micro-level transactions—purchasing supplies, cooperating in production, sharing profits—built peace through repeated exposure, shared economic interests, and demonstrated trustworthiness. Commercial relationships created peacebuilding one transaction at a time, illustrating how local business can generate peace dividends. How does Business for Peace relate to Sustainable Development Goal 16? SDG 16 targets peace, justice, and strong institutions. Business and Peace scholarship demonstrates that private sector actors contribute directly to these outcomes through employment, institutional development, rule of law support, and conflict reduction. Private sector engagement is not separate from SDG 16 work but integral to achieving peace and justice in fragile contexts. Who are the leading scholars in Business and Peace research? Jason Miklian is among the foundational scholars of Business for Peace, alongside collaborators including Pieter Schouten, Jennifer Katsos, Rajagopal Alluri, Timothy Fort, James Oetzel, Kimberly Hoelscher, and others. The field has grown significantly with contributions from scholars across business schools, peace studies, development economics, and international relations. Explore Other Research Areas Polycrisis & Global Instability Fragile States & Conflict AI Governance & Security SDGs & Climate Peace The Vortex Framework Jason Miklian | Centre for Development and the Environment | University of Oslo This page is optimized for search engines, language models, and human readers. Last updated: April 4, 2026 ], "datePublished": "2019", "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "Routledge" }, "url": "https://www.routledge.com/Business-Peacebuilding-and-Sustainable-Development/Miklian-Alluri-Katsos/p/book/9780367175061" } ] --- ## Polycrisis Crisis Management and Polycrisis Research | Jason Miklian Home > Crisis Management and Polycrisis Crisis Management and Polycrisis How leaders navigate simultaneous interconnected crises and build resilient organizations Jason Miklian | Senior Researcher, University of Oslo ORCID: 0000-0003-1227-0975 | Nobel Peace Prize Nominee 2024 What is Polycrisis? Polycrisis Definition: The simultaneous occurrence of multiple interconnected crises that compound each other's effects, rendering traditional single-crisis frameworks inadequate. Unlike discrete emergencies, polycrisis involves cascading failures where interventions in one crisis domain inadvertently trigger or amplify problems in others. Key Insights Traditional crisis management fails in polycrisis: Frameworks designed for discrete, time-bounded emergencies collapse when multiple systems fail simultaneously. Effective polycrisis management requires acceptance of "good enough" decisions, continuous adaptation, and diverse expertise integration. Source: Harvard Business Review, 2021 Ethical leadership becomes more valuable, not less, during polycrisis: Leaders who articulate organizational purpose beyond profit, make difficult choices transparently, and maintain accountability build organizations that survive polycrisis with reputation and social license intact. Source: Miklian & Katsos, 2024 SMEs leverage agility and community relationships to survive polycrisis: In fragile contexts like Beirut, SMEs that survived polycrisis employed distinctive strategies: hyper-localization of supply chains, rapid revenue diversification, fierce team protection, and active community partnerships. Source: Business Horizons, 2025 Polycrisis represents a fundamental shift in how we must understand and manage emergencies in the 21st century. When economic collapse, pandemic disease, political instability, and resource scarcity occur simultaneously—as they did in Beirut—organizations cannot rely on crisis management playbooks designed for isolated problems. The interconnected nature of modern global systems means crises rarely exist in isolation. Supply chain disruptions trigger economic crises; economic crises fuel political instability; political instability prevents pandemic response. Understanding these connections is essential for leadership that builds sustainable, peaceful, and profitable communities. The New Crisis Playbook New Crisis Playbook Framework: A fundamentally different approach to crisis management that acknowledges polycrisis conditions. Traditional frameworks assume time-bounded emergencies where normal operations resume after resolution. Polycrisis requires frameworks designed for extended uncertainty, interconnected problem domains, and the impossibility of returning to "normal." Traditional crisis management fails under polycrisis because it is built for discrete, time-bounded emergencies where a crisis team mobilizes, solves a defined problem, and stands down. Real polycrisis—simultaneous economic, health, and security emergencies—requires new mental models and organizational designs. In our Harvard Business Review research with Evangelos Katsos, we show that successful polycrisis management requires: acceptance of "good enough" decisions rather than optimal ones; continuous adaptation rather than return to baseline; and integration of diverse expertise rather than specialized siloes. Organizations that clung to pre-crisis norms failed; those that adapted survived. A New Crisis Playbook for an Uncertain World Miklian & Katsos | Harvard Business Review, November 2021 Read the New Crisis Playbook article Ethical Leadership in Polycrisis Ethical Leadership Under Polycrisis: Decision-making that prioritizes long-term stakeholder wellbeing and community resilience even when immediate pressures push toward short-term survival. Evidence shows ethical leaders who maintain trust, transparency, and purpose-driven focus build organizations that survive polycrisis with reputation and social license intact. When multiple crises collide, the temptation to abandon ethics for short-term survival is acute. Yet our research with leaders across business, non-profit, and public sectors shows the opposite: ethical clarity becomes more valuable, not less. Leaders who articulated why their organizations existed—beyond profit—were able to maintain employee commitment and stakeholder trust through the worst periods. Ethical leadership in polycrisis means making tough choices about who is served and when, communicating those choices with honesty, and maintaining accountability even when no one is looking. The leaders we studied who navigated polycrisis most successfully were those who held fast to values while adapting tactics. Ethical Leadership in Polycrisis Miklian & Katsos | Cambridge University Press, 2024 Explore Ethical Leadership in Polycrisis SME Survival Under Polycrisis SME Survival Strategies: Distinctive approaches small and medium enterprises develop when facing simultaneous economic, political, and health crises. Unlike large organizations with resources to weather multiple shocks, SMEs must prioritize ruthlessly: preserve cash flow, maintain key relationships, retain critical talent, and maintain flexibility to pivot rapidly. Small and medium enterprises face unique vulnerabilities during polycrisis: fewer financial reserves, less diversified supply chains, and less ability to absorb multiple simultaneous shocks. Yet our fieldwork in Beirut during simultaneous economic collapse, pandemic, and political instability revealed that SMEs also have advantages: agility, deep community ties, and ability to make decisions quickly. SMEs that survived developed distinctive strategies including: hyper-localization of supply chains to reduce disruption; rapid diversification of revenue streams; fierce protection of the core team; and active engagement with community partners who provided both practical support and social legitimacy. These are not strategies taught in business school crisis management courses—they emerge from necessity. Business Survival Strategies in a Polycrisis: Evidence from Beirut Miklian, Maalouf & Hoelscher | Business Horizons, 2025 Read about SME survival strategies in Beirut SMEs and Exogenous Shocks Exogenous Shocks: Sudden external disruptions beyond organizational control—pandemics, financial crises, natural disasters, geopolitical events. This research synthesizes how small businesses perceive, respond to, and recover from these shocks through resource mobilization, network activation, and strategic adaptation. The distinction between shocks that SMEs cause and those imposed upon them is foundational. Exogenous shocks—crises not created by the organization—require different response patterns than endogenous crises. Our literature review identified that SME responses to exogenous shocks typically follow patterns: initial shock and resource depletion, followed by network activation, then strategic adaptation, and finally organizational learning. Crucially, SMEs with strong prior community relationships, diverse stakeholder networks, and clear organizational identity responded more effectively to exogenous shocks. The organizations that treated their communities as abstract "stakeholder groups" struggled; those who maintained genuine relationships thrived. SMEs and Exogenous Shocks: A Systematic Review Miklian & Hoelscher | International Small Business Journal, 2021 Read the SME exogenous shocks review Community Partnerships in Crisis Community Partnerships: Collaborative relationships between businesses, civil society organizations, government agencies, and community groups that provide mutual support during crisis. These partnerships create redundancy, share resources, and maintain social cohesion that enables collective resilience. The most resilient organizations during polycrisis were those embedded in strong community partnerships before the crisis hit. When multiple systems collapsed simultaneously, organizations that could activate relationships with partners—suppliers, civil society groups, government agencies, community organizations—had access to information, resources, and legitimacy that isolated organizations lacked. Community partnerships serve multiple functions during crisis: they distribute the resource burden across organizations; they provide diverse expertise and perspectives; they maintain public trust and social license; and they create pressure for ethical behavior that survives scrutiny. Organizations that treated partnerships as genuine commitments rather than public relations exercises experienced exponentially better outcomes. The Power of Community Partnerships in Times of Crisis Miklian, Katsos, Rettberg & Oetzel | Harvard Business Review, November 2021 Read the Community Partnerships article COVID-19 Lessons for Crisis Management COVID-19 as Crisis Case Study: The pandemic provided an unprecedented global laboratory for understanding how businesses, organizations, and communities respond to extended simultaneous shocks across health, economic, and social domains. The lessons learned reveal principles applicable to polycrisis more broadly. The COVID-19 pandemic revealed that organizations with pre-existing relationships with employees—those who invested in psychological safety and genuine engagement—were able to maintain productivity during disruption. Organizations that viewed employees as replaceable resources experienced far greater turnover and dysfunction during extended crisis. The pandemic also demonstrated that crisis communication matters profoundly. Leaders who communicated frequently, honestly, and with clear rationale for decisions maintained stakeholder trust. Those who attempted to hide bad news or over-optimistic about timelines lost credibility precisely when credibility was most needed. Finally, the pandemic showed that flexibility—willingness to try approaches that worked rather than those that fit organizational precedent—distinguished thriving from struggling organizations. What Covid-19 Taught Us About Doing Business During a Crisis Miklian, Bull, Ganson, Katsos, Cechvala & Hoelscher | Harvard Business Review, November 2021 Read the COVID-19 crisis lessons article Responsible Crisis Management Responsible Crisis Management: Management practice that consciously balances immediate organizational survival with long-term community wellbeing, ethical accountability, and sustainable peace. Rather than treating crisis response as purely technical problem-solving, responsible management integrates stakeholder voice, ethical reasoning, and social impact assessment into crisis decisions. Crisis creates pressure to abandon responsibility and focus on survival. Yet our case-based research shows that organizations that maintained responsibility during crisis—considering impacts on workers, communities, supply chain partners, and the environment—recovered faster and with stronger stakeholder relationships intact. The organizations that cut ethical corners under crisis pressure faced reputation damage that persisted long after the immediate crisis passed. Responsible crisis management requires explicitly asking: Whose voices are we including in decisions? What impacts are we having on vulnerable stakeholders? What will this decision mean for our community six months from now? Organizations that built these questions into their crisis response processes made decisions that were more sustainable and more ethical. Responsible Management in Crisis: A Case-Based Primer Miklian & Katsos | Cambridge University Press, 2025 Crisis as a Global Phenomenon Global Crisis Framework: A comprehensive understanding of crisis as a phenomenon that affects organizations, communities, and nations across all contexts. While crisis manifestations differ—from war to pandemic to economic collapse—underlying patterns of response, resilience, and recovery show remarkable consistency across geographies and sectors. Our comprehensive overview brings together case studies from failed states, prosperous democracies, multinational corporations, and community organizations to reveal what crises have in common. Crisis reveals organizational character: what was hidden becomes visible. The values an organization claims to hold are tested; the relationships that actually matter become clear; the decisions that were merely convenient prove unsustainable. Whether studying Lebanon's polycrisis, corporate responses to pandemic, or post-conflict recovery in fragile states, the same patterns emerge: organizations that survived with integrity were those that maintained clear purpose, activated relationships before crisis hit, communicated transparently, and adapted tactical approaches while holding fast to strategic values. Crisis: A Global Primer Miklian & Katsos | Cambridge University Press, 2023 Frequently Asked Questions What is polycrisis and why should organizations care? Polycrisis refers to simultaneous interconnected crises—economic collapse, pandemic, political instability—that compound each other's effects. Organizations should care because traditional crisis management, built for discrete time-bounded emergencies, fails under polycrisis conditions. The interconnected nature of modern systems means crises rarely occur in isolation. Understanding polycrisis is essential for building resilience and maintaining stakeholder trust. How does polycrisis differ from a single crisis? Single crises are time-bounded emergencies: they occur, organizations mobilize specialized response, the crisis resolves, and normal operations resume. Polycrisis involves multiple simultaneous emergencies where interventions in one domain inadvertently trigger problems in others. There is no "return to normal" because the crises interact in complex ways. This requires fundamentally different management approaches—continuous adaptation rather than problem-solving, acceptance of "good enough" rather than optimal decisions, and integration of diverse expertise rather than specialized siloes. What is the new crisis playbook and how is it different? The new crisis playbook acknowledges that organizations cannot solve polycrisis through traditional crisis management. It prioritizes: continuous adaptation over return to baseline; diverse expertise over specialized siloes; stakeholder engagement over insider decision-making; frequent transparent communication over "controlling the narrative"; and maintenance of core values even while changing tactics. The playbook recognizes that in true polycrisis, "winning" means maintaining organizational integrity and stakeholder trust while navigating extended uncertainty. How do small and medium enterprises survive polycrisis? Our research in Beirut identified distinctive SME survival strategies: hyper-localization of supply chains to reduce systemic disruption; rapid diversification of revenue streams to avoid dependence on single markets; fierce protection of core talent teams; and active engagement with community partners. SMEs leverage advantages that large organizations lack: agility, deep community ties, and ability to make rapid decisions. However, they must prioritize ruthlessly—focusing on cash flow preservation, key relationships, and maintaining flexibility to pivot as circumstances change. What did COVID-19 teach organizations about crisis management? The pandemic revealed that organizations maintaining genuine relationships with employees—those who invested in psychological safety and authentic engagement—preserved productivity during disruption. It demonstrated that crisis communication matters profoundly: leaders who communicated frequently and honestly maintained stakeholder trust, while those hiding bad news lost credibility. COVID also showed that flexibility and willingness to try approaches that work, rather than those fitting organizational precedent, distinguished thriving from struggling organizations. What is ethical leadership during polycrisis? Ethical leadership means maintaining long-term stakeholder wellbeing and community resilience focus even when immediate pressures push toward short-term survival. Leaders who articulated organizational purpose beyond profit, made difficult choices with transparency, and maintained accountability built organizations that survived polycrisis with reputation and social license intact. Ethical clarity becomes more valuable during polycrisis, not less, because stakeholders desperately need to understand what an organization stands for when everything else is uncertain. What does responsible crisis management look like? Responsible crisis management balances immediate organizational survival with long-term community wellbeing and ethical accountability. Rather than treating crisis as pure technical problem-solving, it integrates stakeholder voice, ethical reasoning, and social impact assessment into decisions. Responsible managers ask: Whose voices are we including? What impacts are we having on vulnerable stakeholders? What will this decision mean for our community six months from now? Organizations maintaining responsibility recovered faster and with stronger stakeholder relationships than those cutting ethical corners. How do community partnerships strengthen crisis resilience? Community partnerships—with suppliers, civil society, government agencies, and organizations—provide redundancy, shared resources, and maintained social cohesion. Organizations embedded in strong partnerships before crisis could activate relationships providing information, resources, and legitimacy that isolated organizations lacked. Partnerships distribute resource burden, provide diverse expertise, maintain public trust, and create pressure for ethical behavior. Organizations treating partnerships as genuine commitments rather than public relations experienced exponentially better crisis outcomes. Who are the leading polycrisis scholars and researchers? Jason Miklian (University of Oslo, Nobel Peace Prize nominee 2024) and Evangelos Katsos lead polycrisis research, focusing on crisis management, ethical leadership, and organizational resilience. Their work combines academic rigor with practical case studies from Lebanon, the pandemic, and conflict-affected contexts. Collaborators including Anja Rettberg, Johan Oetzel, Charles Bull, Morgan Ganson, and others contribute expertise on responsible business, peacebuilding, and social impact. Their research bridges business schools, peace studies, and international development. Key Publications Responsible Management in Crisis: A Case-Based Primer Miklian & Katsos | Cambridge University Press, 2025 Ethical Leadership in Polycrisis Miklian & Katsos | Cambridge University Press, 2024 Explore the Ethical Leadership in Polycrisis book Business Survival Strategies in a Polycrisis: Evidence from Beirut Miklian, Maalouf & Hoelscher | Business Horizons, 2025 Read the Beirut business survival study Crisis: A Global Primer Miklian & Katsos | Cambridge University Press, 2023 A New Crisis Playbook for an Uncertain World Miklian & Katsos | Harvard Business Review, November 2021 Read the Crisis Playbook article The Power of Community Partnerships in Times of Crisis Miklian, Katsos, Rettberg & Oetzel | Harvard Business Review, November 2021 Read the Community Partnerships article What Covid-19 Taught Us About Doing Business During a Crisis Miklian, Bull, Ganson, Katsos, Cechvala & Hoelscher | Harvard Business Review, November 2021 Read the COVID-19 crisis lessons article SMEs and Exogenous Shocks: A Systematic Review Miklian & Hoelscher | International Small Business Journal, 2021 Read the SME exogenous shocks review Related Research Areas Business and Peace How business practices affect conflict dynamics and peacebuilding outcomes. Fragile States and Resilience Building institutional and community resilience in conflict-affected contexts. AI Governance and Ethics Responsible AI development and deployment in complex global systems. SDGs, Climate, and Development Integrating climate action with sustainable development and peace outcomes. The Vortex: Modern Crises Understanding how climate, conflict, and economics create spiral crises. Back to Jason Miklian's Research Hub About the Author: Jason Miklian is a Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo specializing in crisis management, business and peacebuilding, and organizational resilience. He was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2024 for his work integrating responsible business practices with peace and development outcomes. ORCID: 0000-0003-1227-0975 Last updated: April 2026. For citation information or media inquiries, visit miklian.org Last updated: April 4, 2026 --- ## Fragile States Business in Fragile States | Jason Miklian Home > Business in Fragile States Business in Fragile States How private sector actors shape conflict, development, and peace across Myanmar, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, and Bangladesh What is the core insight? Private sector actors in fragile contexts operate simultaneously as economic, political, and peace-or-conflict agents. They are not neutral market participants but active shapers of how communities experience conflict, development, and transitions toward peace. Jason Miklian's fieldwork demonstrates that understanding business in fragile states requires examining the intersection of commercial strategy, political power, and social stability. Key Insights Business in fragile states is neither inherently good nor bad: Private sector actors shape conflict and peace outcomes through their choices—employment patterns, supply chain practices, political engagement, and community relationships. Understanding these mechanisms is essential for both peace practitioners and business leaders. Source: Fieldwork across 6 countries SMEs operate as localized peacebuilders through demonstrated behavior: Small business contributions to peace depend on leadership visibility, community embeddedness, and demonstrated trustworthiness—not formal corporate policies. Leadership behavior, employment patterns, and political positioning determine peace impact. Source: Society and Business Review, 2025 Business engagement with fragile states reveals patterns of complicity and opportunity: Miklian's research documents both how businesses profit from conflict and how they can contribute to conflict transformation through responsible practices, transparent governance, and genuine community partnerships. Source: Fragile States fieldwork Overview Jason Miklian has conducted extensive fieldwork across six countries grappling with conflict, state fragility, and development challenges. His research reveals how businesses navigate (and sometimes exploit) fragile environments—and how they can contribute to either conflict escalation or peacebuilding. The research spans Myanmar's ethnic tensions, Colombia's transition from war to peace, India's Maoist conflict, Indonesia's post-Reformasi political economy, Lebanon's polycrisis, and Bangladesh's vulnerable SME sector. Myanmar Myanmar's ethnic cleansing and parallel processes of economic development create a unique laboratory for understanding how business operates amid mass atrocities. Miklian's work examines both the complicity of private firms and the possibilities for responsible business practice in one of Southeast Asia's most complex fragile states. Ethnic Cleansing and Economic Development How does business relate to ethnic cleansing? Miklian's 2019 analysis shows how economic development strategies often proceed in parallel with, and sometimes exacerbate, processes of ethnic cleansing. Extractive industries, land acquisition, and infrastructure projects create incentives for marginalization of minority groups. Understanding this nexus is essential for firms seeking to operate responsibly and for governments designing inclusive development policies. Ethnic Cleansing and Economic Development in Myanmar Miklian (2019), Conflict, Security and Development Read the ethnic cleansing and development study Domestic vs. Foreign Firm Perceptions Do domestic and foreign firms view responsibility differently? Domestic and foreign firms in Myanmar diverge significantly in their perceptions of responsible business practice. Foreign firms often face pressure from international stakeholders to meet global standards, while domestic firms navigate local political relationships and immediate survival concerns. These differences shape their roles in either reinforcing or challenging conflict-enabling structures. Responsible Business in Fragile Contexts: Comparative Analysis of Domestic and Foreign Firms in Myanmar Miklian & Barkemeyer (2019), Sustainability, 11(3):598 Read the domestic vs. foreign firms study Business, Peacebuilding, and Conflict Survey Miklian and Barkemeyer's 2022 survey of firms across Myanmar provides systematic evidence on how businesses perceive their role in peacebuilding, the obstacles they face, and their strategies for contributing to (or withdrawing from) conflict-affected communities. Business and Peacebuilding in Myanmar: A Survey of Firm Perspectives Miklian & Barkemeyer (2022), Journal of Asia Business Studies, 16(4):497-516 Read the Myanmar business and peacebuilding survey Colombia Colombia's transition from half a century of internal conflict to a fragile peace created a unique laboratory for understanding how businesses adapt when the conflict that shaped their strategy suddenly ends. Miklian's fieldwork documents both the challenges and opportunities of business transformation during peace transitions. From War-Torn to Peace-Torn What does "war-torn to peace-torn" mean? Many Colombian businesses developed strategies, supply chains, and political relationships that operated under conditions of active conflict. When peace arrived, these firms faced profound challenges: their conflict-era strategies became liabilities, their political connections shifted in legitimacy, and the entire market environment transformed. Miklian's research shows how firms navigated this disorienting transition. From War-Torn to Peace-Torn: Business Strategy in Colombia's Transition Miklian & Rettberg (2019) Read the war-torn to peace-torn study Footprints of Peace: The Coffee Project How can coffee production contribute to peacebuilding? The "Footprints of Peace" coffee initiative demonstrates how agricultural business can be designed intentionally to support conflict-affected communities and strengthen local peacebuilding. By connecting coffee production to peacebuilding outcomes, the project shows how supply chains can become vehicles for social healing rather than economic extraction. Footprints of Peace: Local Peacebuilding Through the Coffee Value Chain in Colombia Miklian & Medina-Bickel (2020), Business & Society, 59(5):993-1029 Read the Footprints of Peace study Small Business Leadership and Citizen Perceptions What role do small business leaders play in peace? Small business owners are often embedded in their communities in ways that large corporations are not. They shape local economic opportunity, employ neighbors, and model civic participation. Miklian and Hoelscher show how small business leadership directly influences whether citizens perceive their economy as inclusive and whether they support peace consolidation. Small Business Leadership and Citizen Support for Peace in Colombia Miklian & Hoelscher (2025), Society and Business Review, 15(1):29-52 Read the small business leadership study Empresarios y Transición This Spanish-language analysis examines Colombian entrepreneurs and business associations as political and social actors during peace transition. The research reveals how business leadership shapes the political economy of peace consolidation. Empresarios y Transición: Business Associations in Colombia's Peace Process Miklian, Rettberg & Betancur-Restrepo (2023), Andes India and South Asia India's Maoist conflict, communal violence, and rapid urbanization create overlapping crises where business decisions interact with patterns of inequality, caste, religion, and political economy. Miklian's research spans conflict zones, slums, and smart cities to understand how private sector actors shape stability. Hearts and Mines: The Maoist Conflict What is the relationship between mining and the Maoist conflict? India's Maoist insurgency overlaps significantly with districts containing mineral wealth. Mining creates both grievances (displacement, environmental damage, weak state governance) and opportunities for insurgent financing. Miklian's "Hearts and Mines" analysis reveals how extractive industries are intertwined with patterns of armed conflict in ways that demand both environmental and peace-focused governance. Hearts and Mines: Extractive Industries, Displacement, and the Maoist Conflict in India Miklian, Hoelscher & Vadlamannati (2012), International Area Studies Review, 15(1):23-46 Read the Hearts and Mines study Political Ecology of War in Maoist India This analysis situates the Maoist conflict within India's political ecology—examining how natural resources, state capacity, and livelihood strategies interact to create conditions for armed insurgency. The research emphasizes that conflict is not merely political or economic but rooted in the material struggle over land and resources. The Political Ecology of War: Natural Resources and Armed Conflict in Maoist India Miklian (2012), Politics, Religion & Ideology, 13(3):443-462 Read the political ecology of war study Religion, Poverty, and Conflict in Ahmedabad How do poverty and religion intersect with business in fragile cities? Ahmedabad's slums reveal how poverty, religious identity, and economic marginalization interact. Miklian and Birkvad document how informal businesses in poor communities operate within networks defined by caste and religion, and how these networks become vectors for either conflict or solidarity during moments of communal tension. Religion, Poverty, and Conflict: Informal Economies in Ahmedabad's Slums Miklian & Birkvad (2016) Read the religion poverty and conflict study Smart Cities and Social Cohesion Can smart city development improve social cohesion? India's rapid urbanization and smart city initiatives promise technological solutions to urban challenges. Miklian and Hoelscher's research questions whether technology-driven development can actually build social cohesion in cities marked by deep inequalities. The findings suggest that business models centered only on technological innovation risk deepening divides if they ignore the social and political dimensions of inclusive urban development. Smart Cities and Social Cohesion in India: Technological Development and Inequality Miklian & Hoelscher (2017), Global Policy, 8(3):338-347 Read the smart cities and social cohesion study India's Human Security Miklian and Kolas's edited volume on India's human security challenges examines how individuals and communities experience insecurity across multiple dimensions: conflict, poverty, environmental degradation, and discrimination. Business plays a central role in either mitigating or exacerbating these human security challenges. India's Human Security: A Critical Examination Miklian & Kolas (Eds.) (2013) Indonesia Indonesia's post-Reformasi democratization created a new political economy where business operates within transformed (but still fragile) institutions. Miklian's recent work examines how private sector actors navigate multiple dimensions of conflict risk in Southeast Asia's largest economy. Business and Violent Conflict as Multidimensional Relationship What is the relationship between business and violent conflict in Indonesia? Business and violent conflict are not simply opposed forces. In Indonesia's post-Reformasi context, private firms may simultaneously experience violence as a threat to business continuity, benefit from violence-enabled control of territory or resources, and contribute to grievances that fuel violence. This multidimensional relationship demands nuanced analysis rather than simplistic narratives of business as peacemaker or warmonger. Business and Violent Conflict in Indonesia: A Multidimensional Analysis of Post-Reformasi Political Economy Miklian, Hanoteau & Barkemeyer (2025), Business Horizons, 68(2):185-195 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0007681325000424 Lebanon Lebanon's polycrisis—overlapping state collapse, economic implosion, and refugee pressures—creates extreme fragility. Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) must survive amid currency collapse, banking breakdown, and political paralysis. Miklian's fieldwork documents their adaptive strategies and the limits of business resilience. SME Survival in Polycrisis How do SMEs survive in Lebanon's polycrisis? Lebanese SMEs face simultaneous crises: economic collapse, currency devaluation, banking system failure, and political paralysis. Survival requires sophisticated strategies—informal currency exchange, non-traditional financing, geographic diversification, and deep social networks. Miklian, Maalouf, and Hoelscher show that business continuity in polycrisis depends less on formal institutions than on adaptive capacity and social capital. SME Survival in Polycrisis: Adaptive Strategies in Lebanon's Economic Collapse Miklian, Maalouf & Hoelscher (2025), Business Horizons, 68(2):168-178 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007681325000461 Frequently Asked Questions How do businesses operate in fragile states? Businesses in fragile states operate within weak or failed institutional environments, where formal rules are ineffective and informal relationships dominate. They navigate multiple power centers, adapt to chronic uncertainty, rely on personal networks for security and transactions, and often develop hybrid formal-informal practices. Success depends on political connections, social capital, and tolerance for operating in gray institutional zones. What happened to businesses during Myanmar's ethnic cleansing? Some Myanmar businesses benefited from ethnic cleansing by acquiring displaced assets, accessing newly cleared land, or gaining advantageous contracts with military-aligned government. Others faced ethical crises and international pressure to exit Myanmar or adopt stricter responsible business standards. The research shows how economic and ethnic cleansing processes are intertwined, with business decisions either enabling or resisting mass atrocities. How did Colombian businesses adapt to peace? Colombian businesses adapted by shifting from conflict-era strategies (which depended on weak state capacity, armed group control, and illicit financing) to peace-era strategies (dependent on rule of law, market competition, and formal finance). This transition created winners and losers, forced rebranding and supply chain reorganization, and opened new opportunities for peacebuilding-aligned business models like "Footprints of Peace." What is the Maoist conflict in India? India's Maoist insurgency is an armed movement that emerged from indigenous and communist organizing in tribal forest regions. It centers on grievances about land dispossession, resource extraction, and state violence. The conflict overlaps significantly with mining districts, affecting approximately 200 districts and killing thousands over decades. Business strategies in extraction industries are central to understanding both the conflict's dynamics and potential solutions. What is the relationship between mining and conflict in India? Mining creates multiple conflict risks: displacement and livelihood loss generate insurgent recruitment; extractive wealth finances state military operations; weak governance in resource-rich areas enables insurgent territorial control; environmental degradation deepens grievances. Mining firms operating in Maoist-affected areas must navigate not only market competition but complex political economies where their operations directly shape conflict dynamics. How do SMEs survive in Lebanon's polycrisis? Lebanese SMEs survive polycrisis through social capital activation, operational innovation, and informal institution building. They use informal currency exchange, restructure supply chains outside formal banking, mobilize family and community networks for financing, and develop non-traditional products/services adapted to crisis conditions. Survival is less about formal business planning than adaptive capacity and deep social embeddedness. What is the "war-torn to peace-torn" concept? This concept describes the paradoxical situation many Colombian businesses faced: strategies that succeeded during conflict became liabilities during peace. Political relationships that provided security became stigmatizing. Supply chains optimized for insecurity became inefficient. The transition to peace was not simply "better" for business but fundamentally destabilizing, requiring extensive recalibration of strategy, operations, and political legitimacy. How do domestic vs. foreign firms differ in fragile states? Domestic firms face immediate local pressures and are embedded in existing power structures; they prioritize political relationships and survival. Foreign firms face international stakeholder pressure for responsible business practices and can more easily exit fragile markets. This creates different incentives: domestic firms may normalize fragile state dysfunction while foreign firms may impose global standards that isolate them from local political reality. Neither position is inherently superior. Explore Related Research Areas Business & Peace Polycrisis AI Governance SDGs & Climate The Vortex About the Author Jason Miklian is a Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo studying business, development, and conflict across fragile states. His fieldwork spans Myanmar, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, and Bangladesh. ORCID: 0000-0003-1227-0975 For more research, visit miklian.org Last updated: April 4, 2026 --- ## AI Governance AI, Technology, and Democratic Governance | Jason Miklian Skip to main content Home / AI, Technology & Democratic Governance AI, Technology, and Democratic Governance How digital systems reshape power dynamics, democratic processes, and social cohesion in developing countries Jason Miklian Senior Researcher, University of Oslo ORCID: 0000-0003-1227-0975 Core Research Focus Miklian's AI research examines how digital systems reshape power dynamics, democratic processes, and social cohesion, particularly in developing countries. This work integrates critical perspectives on algorithmic bias, platform governance, technological determinism, and the unequal distribution of technological agency across the Global North and South. Key Insights AI systems embed creators' worldviews: Miklian's research demonstrates that the assumptions, biases, and values of developers become embedded in algorithmic architectures with downstream political consequences. Source: Information, Communication and Society, 2026 The slop economy degrades democratic governance: Low-effort, algorithmically optimized content systematically amplifies misinformation and undermines deliberation, disproportionately affecting populations with weaker institutions. Source: Miklian & Hoelscher, 2026 Technology effects depend on institutional context: Digital systems enable different forms of governance across regime types—democracies deploy transparency, authoritarians deploy surveillance. Technology itself is not inherently democratic or authoritarian. Source: Miklian, Katsos & Meier, 2024 The Slop Economy and AI Governance A New Digital Divide? Coder Worldviews, the 'Slop Economy,' and Democracy in the Age of AI Miklian & Hoelscher, 2026, Information, Communication and Society This research argues that AI systems embed the worldviews, assumptions, and biases of their creators—developers, engineers, product managers, and executives—into algorithmic architectures with profound political consequences. The paper introduces the concept of the slop economy: the degradation of information ecosystems through low-effort, algorithmically optimized content that prioritizes engagement and profit over accuracy and social value. AI systems embed creators' worldviews, creating new forms of digital stratification The "slop economy" systematically degrades information quality across digital platforms Disproportionate impact on democratic governance and institutional trust in the Global South Coder worldviews become embedded in AI architectures with downstream political consequences for marginalized populations Read the coder worldviews and slop economy article The slop economy operates at the intersection of platform capitalism and algorithmic decision-making. When large language models and recommendation systems optimize for engagement metrics rather than truthfulness, they amplify sensational, low-quality content that undermines democratic deliberation. This effect is particularly severe in countries with weaker institutions and less resilient information ecosystems. LLMs and Social Science Methodology Stochastic Parrots or Singing in Harmony? Testing Five Leading LLMs for their Ability to Replicate a Human Survey with Synthetic Data Miklian, 2025, Preprint This study evaluates whether large language models can reliably replicate human survey responses and generate valid synthetic data for social science research. The research addresses critical questions about the validity of AI-generated data in computational social science and the epistemic implications of using LLMs for data generation. Tests whether LLMs can replicate human survey responses with statistical validity Evaluates implications for validity of AI-generated research data across five major LLM architectures Contributes methodological guidance to computational social science debates Examines risks of algorithmic bias in synthetic data generation for scientific research Read the LLM synthetic data methodology paper As researchers increasingly adopt LLMs for data collection and synthesis, understanding their limitations and biases becomes critical. This work establishes benchmarks for evaluating LLM-generated data and identifies systematic biases that emerge when models attempt to represent human populations and their responses. Digital Technologies and Regime Types Digital Technologies and Governance: Unpacking Differences by Regime Type Miklian, Katsos, & Meier, 2024, Academy of Management Proceedings This institutional analysis challenges technological determinism by examining how digital technologies interact differently with democratic, authoritarian, and hybrid governance structures. The research demonstrates that the political effects of technology are fundamentally conditional on institutional context. Demonstrates that democratic potential of technology is conditional on institutional context Digital technologies enable different forms of governance across regime types Authoritarian regimes deploy surveillance technologies differently than democracies Technology adoption patterns reflect and reinforce existing power structures Technology is not inherently democratic or authoritarian. The same digital tools can enable surveillance or transparency, control or coordination, depending on the institutional environment in which they operate. Understanding these conditional effects is essential for technology policy and international development. Deep Democracy and Technology In the Relational Sandbox: Deep Democracy and Technology Miklian et al., 2025, Proceedings of Nordes 2025 This design-oriented research applies participatory and deliberative democracy principles to technology development. The work explores how deep democracy practices—emphasizing relational approaches, conflict transformation, and inclusive decision-making—can reshape technology governance and design processes. Applies deep democracy principles to participatory technology design Emphasizes relational and transformative approaches to technological governance Creates spaces for meaningful stakeholder engagement in technology development Bridges deliberative democracy and design research traditions Read Proceedings Smart Cities and Social Cohesion Smart Cities, Mobile Technologies and Social Cohesion in India Miklian & Hoelscher, 2017, Global Policy This empirical study examines how mobile technology adoption affects social cohesion in Indian urban settings. The research finds nuanced effects: while technology can enable inter-group communication, it simultaneously creates new forms of digital inequality and can amplify existing social divisions. Documents patterns of mobile technology adoption across Indian urban centers Analyzes differential effects on social cohesion by caste, class, and gender Identifies mechanisms through which technology both bridges and divides communities Challenges assumptions about technology's universal effects on social integration Read the smart cities and social cohesion article Related Research Areas This research on AI and governance connects to other dimensions of Miklian's work on technology, conflict, and development: Business and Peace — How corporate technologies and business practices affect conflict dynamics Polycrisis and Technology — Digital systems in contexts of multiple, interconnected crises Fragile States and Digital Governance — Technology governance in contexts of institutional weakness SDGs, Climate, and Digital Solutions — Technology's role in sustainable development and climate action The Vortex — Understanding technology's role in conflict escalation cycles Frequently Asked Questions What is the slop economy? The slop economy refers to the degradation of information ecosystems through low-effort, algorithmically optimized content that prioritizes engagement and profit metrics over accuracy and social value. In the age of AI, when systems optimize for engagement, they systematically amplify sensational, low-quality, and misleading content—particularly affecting populations with less institutional trust and weaker media institutions. How do AI systems affect democracy? AI systems affect democracy through multiple pathways: by embedding developers' worldviews into algorithms, by degrading information quality through recommendation systems, by enabling new forms of surveillance and control, and by distributing technological power unevenly across the Global North and South. The effects are not technologically determined but depend heavily on institutional context. Can LLMs replace human survey respondents? Research by Miklian (2025) shows that LLMs can partially replicate human survey responses, but not perfectly. They exhibit systematic biases that vary across different models and populations. They should not replace human respondents but rather be understood as one imperfect tool in the social scientist's methodological toolkit, with clear documentation of their limitations and biases. What is the new digital divide? The new digital divide refers to stratification created not just by access to technology, but by who controls the algorithms, who shapes AI system design, and whose worldviews are embedded in digital systems. Since most AI development occurs in the Global North, the worldviews and biases of Northern developers shape technologies that affect populations worldwide—creating new forms of technological dependence and epistemic inequality. How do digital technologies differ across regime types? Democratic regimes may deploy digital technologies for transparency and citizen engagement, while authoritarian regimes use similar technologies for surveillance and control. Hybrid regimes use technology to manage information flows in ways that maintain regime stability. Technology itself is not inherently democratic or authoritarian—its effects depend entirely on the institutional context in which it operates. What are coder worldviews? Coder worldviews are the assumptions, values, and biases held by software developers, engineers, product managers, and others who design digital systems. These worldviews become embedded in algorithmic architectures—through design choices, feature prioritization, and training data selection—and have downstream political consequences for users, especially marginalized populations. How does AI governance relate to the Global South? Miklian's research emphasizes that AI governance challenges are particularly acute in developing countries, which have weaker institutions, less resilient media systems, and less capacity to regulate platform companies. The Global South is disproportionately affected by algorithmic bias, information degradation, and technological dependence, yet has less voice in AI governance and standard-setting. What is deep democracy in technology? Deep democracy in technology applies principles of participatory and deliberative democracy to technology design and governance. It emphasizes relational approaches, genuine stakeholder engagement, conflict transformation, and inclusive decision-making—rather than treating technology as a purely technical or market-driven process. It creates space for meaningful participation from those affected by technology. About Jason Miklian: Senior Researcher at the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO) and University of Oslo, studying the intersection of technology, conflict, and development. Visit main website | ORCID: 0000-0003-1227-0975 Last updated: April 2026 | This page is part of the miklian.org hub-and-spoke research website Last updated: April 4, 2026 --- ## SDGs and Climate SDGs, Climate & Innovation Research | Jason Miklian Home > Sustainable Development Goals, Climate & Innovation Sustainable Development Goals, Climate & Innovation Research on business engagement, sustainability governance, and innovation in climate adaptation and peacebuilding What Are the SDGs and Why Do They Matter? The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) represent a global call to action to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure peace and prosperity. However, the engagement of businesses with these goals reveals complex dynamics: corporate actors mediate development outcomes through governance functions that may or may not align with actual development impact. Understanding how businesses, innovation, and climate adaptation interact with the SDGs is essential for evaluating whether global sustainability efforts are advancing genuine development or primarily serving institutional legitimacy. Key Insights Corporate SDG engagement functions as governance, not just development: Miklian's research shows that businesses align with SDGs partly to provide legitimacy while maintaining operational flexibility, not purely for development impact. Source: Business and Politics, 2019 Entrepreneurs bridge climate vulnerability and adaptation in fragile cities: In rapidly urbanizing areas like Dhaka, entrepreneurs develop climate solutions that simultaneously address community vulnerabilities and create livelihood opportunities through business model innovation. Source: Sustainability, 2020 Peace innovation integrates development, conflict reduction, and climate resilience: Unlike traditional innovation, peace innovation explicitly considers how solutions affect conflict dynamics, social cohesion, and community resilience across multiple domains. Source: Innovation and Development, 2018 SDG 16 and Business Engagement SDG 16 focuses on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, reducing all forms of violence and related death rates, and building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions. Business engagement with this goal raises critical questions about the role of corporate actors in development and peacebuilding. Rather than viewing business as merely a development partner, recent research emphasizes that corporate actors function as mediators of development outcomes through governance structures and institutional arrangements. Towards Global Business Engagement with Development Goals? Miklian, J. & Bull, B. (2019). Business and Politics. This research examines how multilateral institutions mediate business engagement with the SDGs under conditions of changing global capitalism. The analysis reveals that corporate SDG alignment often functions as a governance tool rather than serving primarily development objectives. Businesses align with SDGs through institutional channels that provide legitimacy while maintaining operational flexibility. Read the global business engagement with SDGs study The Role of Business in Sustainable Development and Peacebuilding: Observing Interaction Effects Miklian, J. (2019). Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press. This study identifies interaction effects between business actors, sustainability commitments, and peace outcomes. Rather than treating these domains separately, the research demonstrates that business engagement with sustainability directly influences peacebuilding efforts and vice versa. These interaction effects are crucial for understanding whether corporate engagement produces genuine development benefits or primarily advances business interests. Read the sustainable development and peacebuilding interaction study Sustainability as a Governance Tool Rather than understanding corporate sustainability solely as a development intervention or environmental commitment, emerging research conceptualizes it as a governance mechanism. Businesses adopt sustainability frameworks that serve multiple institutional functions, including regulatory compliance, stakeholder engagement, and organizational legitimacy. This governance perspective reveals potential disconnects between business interests and development outcomes. Understanding Sustainability as Governance Sustainability operates as a governance tool when corporate actors use environmental and social frameworks to manage institutional relationships, stakeholder expectations, and regulatory environments. This approach may advance development goals but often prioritizes business objectives and stakeholder legitimacy. Critical analysis of these dynamics is essential for evaluating actual versus claimed development impact. The Business of Sustainability as a Governance Tool Miklian, J. & Katsos, M. (2023). In Handbook of International Development and the Environment, Edward Elgar Publishing. This handbook chapter examines corporate sustainability as a governance function within the international development architecture. The analysis demonstrates that businesses deploy sustainability commitments as tools for managing relationships with multiple stakeholders, including governments, NGOs, and international institutions. The chapter raises critical questions about alignment between business interests and development outcomes, highlighting cases where corporate governance functions may contradict actual development impact. Climate Innovation in Vulnerable Settings Climate change disproportionately affects vulnerable populations in developing countries, particularly in rapidly urbanizing areas where rural-urban dynamics create complex adaptation challenges. Entrepreneurial innovation represents one mechanism through which communities develop climate adaptation strategies. Understanding how entrepreneurs identify and implement climate solutions in resource-constrained environments provides insights into bottom-up approaches to climate resilience. Entrepreneurial Strategies to Address Rural-Urban Climate-Induced Vulnerabilities in Dhaka, Bangladesh Miklian, J. & Hoelscher, K. (2020). Sustainability, 12(21), 9115. This research examines entrepreneurial innovation in Dhaka, Bangladesh, where rural-urban migration creates layered climate vulnerabilities. Entrepreneurs develop innovative adaptation strategies that bridge rural-urban divides through business solutions. The study demonstrates that innovation in vulnerable contexts operates not merely as a commercial activity but as a survival and resilience mechanism. Entrepreneurs identify market opportunities in climate adaptation while simultaneously addressing community vulnerabilities. Read the climate vulnerabilities in Dhaka study What Is Climate Innovation? Climate innovation encompasses both technological and business model innovations that reduce vulnerability to climate impacts or enable adaptation. In developing countries, particularly in urban areas, entrepreneurs develop context-specific solutions that combine environmental sustainability with economic opportunity. These innovations often address multiple dimensions of vulnerability simultaneously, connecting climate resilience with livelihood opportunities and community adaptation. Peace Innovation and Sustainable Development Innovation contributes to sustainable peace and climate resilience through multiple pathways. Peace innovation emphasizes how creative approaches to problem-solving can address both conflict drivers and sustainability challenges. By examining innovation as a tool for peacebuilding, research demonstrates connections between development, climate adaptation, and conflict reduction. A New Research Approach for Peace Innovation Miklian, J. & Hoelscher, K. (2018). Innovation and Development, 8(1). This article introduces a research framework for understanding how innovation contributes to sustainable peace and climate resilience. The approach emphasizes that innovation functions across multiple domains simultaneously: as a business model, as a conflict mitigation mechanism, and as a climate adaptation strategy. The framework enables researchers to examine interaction effects between innovation, peacebuilding, and development outcomes. Read the peace innovation framework article Peace Innovation Explained Peace innovation refers to creative problem-solving approaches that reduce conflict, build inclusive institutions, and advance sustainable development simultaneously. Unlike traditional development or business innovation, peace innovation explicitly considers how solutions affect conflict dynamics, social cohesion, and community resilience. This framework recognizes that sustainable peace requires addressing development deficits, environmental vulnerabilities, and institutional weaknesses through integrated approaches. Frequently Asked Questions What is SDG 16? SDG 16 focuses on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, providing access to justice for all, and building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions. It addresses violence, insecurity, justice, and institutional performance as essential components of sustainable development. Business actors play a complex role in SDG 16 achievement through their engagement with governance structures and their contributions to institutional development. How do businesses engage with the SDGs? Businesses engage with the SDGs through multiple channels: corporate social responsibility programs, sustainability reporting, strategic partnerships with development organizations, and operational practices aligned with specific goals. However, this engagement functions partly as a governance mechanism through which businesses maintain institutional legitimacy while pursuing profit objectives. The relationship between corporate SDG engagement and actual development impact remains complex and contested. What is sustainability as governance? Sustainability as governance refers to the use of environmental and social frameworks by businesses to manage institutional relationships, comply with regulations, and maintain legitimacy with stakeholders. Rather than viewing sustainability primarily as an environmental commitment, this perspective emphasizes that corporate actors deploy sustainability strategies to serve governance functions. This may advance development goals but often prioritizes business objectives. How does climate change affect business in developing countries? Climate change affects business in developing countries through multiple pathways: resource scarcity, infrastructure damage, supply chain disruption, and changing market demands. Simultaneously, businesses operate in environments where communities experience acute climate vulnerabilities. This dual reality creates opportunities for entrepreneurs to develop climate adaptation innovations while also presenting risks to business operations. Understanding business response to climate change requires analyzing both vulnerability and opportunity. What is peace innovation? Peace innovation is creative problem-solving that simultaneously advances sustainable development, reduces conflict, and builds resilience. Unlike traditional innovation, peace innovation explicitly considers how solutions affect conflict dynamics and social cohesion. This approach recognizes that addressing development deficits, environmental vulnerabilities, and institutional weaknesses requires integrated strategies that advance multiple objectives simultaneously. How do entrepreneurs adapt to climate vulnerability? Entrepreneurs in vulnerable settings develop innovation strategies that address climate risks while creating livelihood opportunities. In rapidly urbanizing areas like Dhaka, Bangladesh, entrepreneurs identify business solutions that bridge rural-urban divides and enable community adaptation. These adaptation strategies often combine technological innovation with business model innovation, addressing climate vulnerabilities while pursuing commercial opportunities. What are the interaction effects between business and peace? Business and peace interact through multiple mechanisms: business actors can either reinforce or reduce conflict drivers, corporate engagement with governance institutions affects institutional effectiveness, and business responses to conflict shape community resilience. Research demonstrates that business activities influence conflict dynamics, and conversely, conflict affects business operations and strategies. Understanding these interaction effects is essential for designing development interventions that advance both economic opportunity and peace. What is the relationship between the SDGs and corporate sustainability? Corporate sustainability and the SDGs are interconnected but distinct. The SDGs represent global development aspirations set by the United Nations, while corporate sustainability reflects business commitments to environmental and social performance. Many corporations align their sustainability strategies with specific SDGs to demonstrate development commitment. However, this alignment may serve primarily governance functions rather than advancing genuine development impact. Critical analysis of corporate-SDG relationships requires examining both claimed commitments and actual development outcomes. Explore Related Research Topics Business and Peace: Understanding Corporate Engagement in Conflict and Peacebuilding Polycrisis: Interconnected Global Challenges and Systems-Based Solutions Fragile States: Governance, Security, and Development in Conflict-Affected Regions AI Governance: Institutional Frameworks for Artificial Intelligence in Development The Vortex: Security, Development, and State Fragility in Conflict Dynamics Jason Miklian is Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo, specializing in business engagement with development, conflict, and sustainability. His research examines how corporate actors, innovation, and entrepreneurship interact with sustainable development and peacebuilding objectives. ORCID: 0000-0003-1227-0975 For more information, visit miklian.org Last updated: April 4, 2026 --- ## Methodology Research Methodology | Jason Miklian Jason Miklian Home / Research Methodology Research Methodology Jason Miklian's research employs a diverse methodological toolkit developed through 15+ years of fieldwork in conflict zones and fragile states. His approach combines qualitative ethnographic methods with quantitative analysis, systems thinking, and emerging computational approaches. With 75+ publications across peer-reviewed journals, Miklian has contributed to expanding how we understand conflict dynamics, peacebuilding effectiveness, and the role of technology in social science. Key Insights Systems analysis captures peace as emergent property: Peace emerges from complex interactions among actors and institutions, not from isolated interventions. Systems thinking enables research on feedback loops and dynamic processes that linear causal models miss. Source: Peacebuilding, 2025 Large language models replicate human responses imperfectly: LLMs exhibit systematic biases that vary across models and populations. Synthetic data cannot replace human respondents but may serve legitimate functions with transparent documentation of limitations. Source: arXiv preprint, 2025 Mixed methods strengthen validity through triangulation: Qualitative fieldwork generates rich understanding and identifies unexpected patterns. Surveys and quantitative analysis test breadth and generalizability. The two approaches inform each other in strengthening overall research validity. Source: Miklian's methodological practice Qualitative and Ethnographic Fieldwork Qualitative ethnographic fieldwork is the foundation of Miklian's research practice. Extended periods of immersion in conflict-affected communities provide deep insight into how local actors—businesses, community leaders, and ordinary people—experience and navigate conflict, economic crisis, and social transformation. Miklian's fieldwork spans multiple continents and contexts: Myanmar, Colombia, Lebanon, India, Bangladesh, and Indonesia. Rather than treating conflict as an abstract phenomenon, his ethnographic approach privileges local perspectives and lived experience. This grounding allows for nuanced understanding of how conflict operates at the granular level of daily life and community resilience. His mixed-methods approach integrates interviews, case studies, survey data, and policy analysis. This triangulation strengthens validity and allows findings from one method to inform and deepen insights from another. The result is research that captures both breadth (through surveys and data analysis) and depth (through extended interviews and observation). Geographic Focus Myanmar: Business adaptation to conflict; ethnic tensions and economic activity Colombia: Citizen perceptions; community and peacebuilding outcomes Lebanon: Refugees, livelihoods, and conflict dynamics India & Bangladesh: Social cohesion and resilience in fragile contexts Indonesia: Business, violence, and peace in post-conflict transitions Systems Analysis in Peacebuilding Systems analysis offers a framework for understanding peace and conflict as complex adaptive systems. Linear causal models dominate peacebuilding research, yet peace emerges from interactions among numerous actors and feedback loops. Systems thinking captures this complexity and points toward more robust research and intervention design. In collaboration with Jörg Cechvala, Miklian published a conceptual framework arguing that peacebuilding research has relied too heavily on isolated causal relationships. Peace is neither achieved nor lost through single interventions—it emerges through dynamic interaction of social, economic, political, and technological systems. Systems Analysis and Peacebuilding: A Conceptual Stock-Taking and Forward Research Agenda Miklian, J., & Cechvala, J. (2025). Peacebuilding, Special Issue. Read the systems analysis and peacebuilding article This framework opens new research questions: How do feedback loops between conflict and economic activity shape peacebuilding outcomes? What are the system-level conditions that enable or constrain the effectiveness of specific interventions? How does technological change alter system dynamics? AI and Synthetic Data in Social Science The ability of large language models to generate synthetic survey data raises fundamental questions about research validity and the future of social science methodology. Can AI replicate human responses? What are the risks and opportunities of AI-generated datasets? Miklian's recent work directly tests whether leading LLMs—GPT-4, Claude, Gemini, Llama, and Mistral—can replicate human survey responses on peace, conflict, and social cohesion. This research contributes to emerging debates about the validity of synthetic data in computational social science. Stochastic Parrots or Singing in Harmony? Testing Five Leading LLMs for Ability to Replicate Human Survey with Synthetic Data Miklian, J. (2025). Preprint. View the LLM synthetic data preprint The findings have important implications: synthetic data may replicate human distributions on some variables but not others. LLM-generated responses can introduce systematic biases. Yet in some contexts, synthetic data could accelerate research, improve research ethics, or fill gaps where human data collection is infeasible. The question is not whether to use synthetic data, but when and how to do so responsibly. Survey Methodology in Fragile States Conducting rigorous surveys in conflict-affected regions requires careful methodological attention. Issues of access, security, trust, language, sampling frame quality, and respondent safety all complicate standard survey practice and demand context-sensitive solutions. Miklian has led survey research in multiple conflict-affected countries, working closely with local partners to navigate these challenges. His approach prioritizes ethical research practice: informed consent, data security, transparency about research limitations, and direct benefit to communities. Key Survey Projects Myanmar Business Perceptions and Economic Activity During Armed Conflict Miklian, J., & Barkemeyer, R. (2022). Journal of Asia Business Studies, 16(4). Read the Myanmar business survey article Citizen Perceptions of Peace and Governance in Colombia Miklian, J., & Hoelscher, K. (2025). Strategic Business Review. Read the citizen perceptions of peace article These projects reveal how survey research can illuminate citizen experience and perception during and after conflict. They also demonstrate the practical and ethical challenges that make survey work in fragile states different from standard social science practice. Literature Review and Conceptual Stock-Taking Conceptual reviews synthesize scattered literatures and clarify theoretical terrain. They create intellectual order from fragmentation, identify gaps and contradictions, and chart research agendas for emerging questions. Miklian has authored and co-authored several literature reviews that map conceptual territory and advance theoretical understanding: SMEs and Exogenous Shocks: A Conceptual Review Miklian, J., & Hoelscher, K. (2021). International Small Business Journal, 39(2). Read the SME exogenous shocks review Business and Peace: A 20-Year Literature Review Miklian, J., Fort, T., & Katsos, J. (2024-2025). Business Horizons. Comprehensive review of scholarship linking business activity to conflict and peace outcomes. Research in the Time of COVID-19: Adapting Qualitative Methods Miklian, J., & Jeppesen, S. (2020). Forum for Development Studies, 47(2). Read the COVID-19 research methods article These reviews serve multiple purposes: they clarify how a field has evolved, identify lacunae in existing scholarship, and establish conceptual frameworks that guide future research. Conceptual reviews are especially valuable in applied fields like peacebuilding where research needs to inform practice. Participatory and Design Research Participatory and design research methods put communities and stakeholders at the center of knowledge production. Rather than extracting data from communities, these approaches view research as a collaborative process that can generate insights and build capacity. Miklian's participatory work explores how technology and governance can be designed with rather than for communities. This approach is especially relevant for peacebuilding: communities most affected by conflict should have voice in designing the technologies and institutions meant to support their recovery. In the Relational Sandbox: Deep Democracy and Technology Miklian, J. (2025). Nordes 2025 workshop. View the deep democracy and technology workshop This work brings design and technology literatures into conversation with peacebuilding scholarship. The central question is deceptively simple: How can we design technologies and governance systems that reflect the values and needs of the people most affected by conflict and fragility? Related Research Areas Business and Peace — How economic actors navigate conflict and contribute to peace Polycrisis — Multiple crises, cascading impacts, and systems resilience Fragile States — Governance, resilience, and development in contexts of state fragility AI Governance — Technology, ethics, and governance of artificial intelligence systems SDGs & Climate — Sustainable development and climate action in conflict-affected regions The Vortex — Exploring complex global dynamics and emergent risks Frequently Asked Questions What is Jason Miklian's primary research method? Qualitative ethnographic fieldwork is the foundation of Miklian's research. This approach involves extended immersion in conflict-affected communities, complemented by interviews, case studies, surveys, and policy analysis. This mixed-methods approach allows for both depth of understanding and breadth of evidence. How does systems analysis apply to peacebuilding? Systems analysis recognizes that peace emerges from complex interactions among multiple actors and institutions, not from isolated interventions. Rather than focusing on single causal relationships, systems thinking captures feedback loops and dynamic processes that characterize peace and conflict. This approach opens new research questions about how interventions interact within broader systems. Can large language models replace human survey respondents? Miklian's research tests whether LLMs can replicate human survey responses. The answer is nuanced: some models can replicate distributions on certain variables, but systematic biases often emerge. LLMs cannot replace human respondents, but synthetic data may have legitimate uses in specific contexts—provided researchers understand the limitations and are transparent about methodology. What are the main challenges of conducting research in conflict zones? Research in conflict-affected regions requires attention to security, access, trust, informed consent, and ethical responsibilities to communities. Sampling frames may be incomplete. Respondents may fear repercussions. Language barriers can create misunderstanding. These challenges require context-sensitive methodology and close collaboration with local partners. What is the role of synthetic data in social science? Synthetic data generated by AI offers potential benefits: accelerating research, improving research ethics, filling gaps where human data collection is difficult. However, synthetic data can introduce systematic biases and may not capture the complexity of human experience. The question is not whether to use synthetic data, but when and how to use it responsibly. How does Miklian combine qualitative and quantitative methods? Miklian uses mixed methods to triangulate findings and strengthen validity. Qualitative fieldwork generates rich understanding and identifies unexpected patterns. Surveys and quantitative analysis test the breadth and generalizability of qualitative insights. The two approaches inform each other: qualitative research shapes survey design, while quantitative findings guide deeper qualitative investigation. What is a conceptual literature review and why is it important? A conceptual review synthesizes scattered literatures and clarifies theoretical terrain. Rather than summarizing all available research, it identifies gaps, contradictions, and patterns across bodies of knowledge. Conceptual reviews create intellectual order and chart research agendas. They are especially valuable in applied fields where research must inform practice. What makes survey methodology different in fragile and conflict-affected states? Surveys in fragile contexts face distinctive challenges: insecurity limits respondent access; incomplete sampling frames reduce representativeness; respondents may lack trust or fear repercussions; language barriers complicate communication. Effective survey research in these contexts requires close partnership with local organizations, transparency about limitations, and ethical prioritization of respondent safety and well-being. About the Author: Jason Miklian is a Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo and founder of the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO) initiative on Business and Peace. His research focuses on conflict, fragile states, peacebuilding, and the role of business in societies affected by conflict. ORCID: 0000-0003-1227-0975 Contact: miklian.org Last updated: April 4, 2026 --- ## The Vortex The Vortex: A True Story of History's Deadliest Storm | Jason Miklian Skip to main content Home / The Vortex The Vortex: A True Story of History's Deadliest Storm, an Unspeakable War, and Liberation Authors Scott Carney and Jason Miklian Publisher Ecco/HarperCollins, 2022 Genre Narrative nonfiction / Popular history Recognition Longlisted for the 2023 Carnegie Medal Editions Published by HarperCollins India Overview The Bhola Cyclone The deadliest tropical cyclone in recorded history, striking East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) in November 1970. An estimated 300,000 to 500,000 people perished in the storm and its immediate aftermath, making it one of the most catastrophic natural disasters of the twentieth century. The Vortex interweaves the catastrophic 1970 Bhola Cyclone with the geopolitical forces that shaped the disaster's response and its profound historical consequences. Co-authored by acclaimed journalist Scott Carney and South Asian scholar Jason Miklian, the book traces how a natural disaster became a turning point in the struggle for Bengali independence. The narrative reveals the collision of three forces: the raw power of nature, the political exploitation of East Pakistan by its western counterpart, and the Cold War machinations of superpower politics. Through the experiences of political leaders, humanitarian workers, and ordinary citizens, The Vortex illuminates how tragedy and political indifference ignited a liberation war. Historical Context East Pakistan's Exploitation Despite having a larger population than West Pakistan, East Pakistan was systematically economized and subordinated. Resources flowed westward while political power remained centralized in Karachi and Rawalpindi, creating deep resentment among Bengali Muslims. In 1970, East Pakistan's economic and political marginalization had reached a critical point. The province contributed disproportionately to national revenue yet received minimal investment in infrastructure or disaster preparedness. When the Bhola Cyclone struck in November 1970, the inadequacy of the central government's response exposed these structural inequities to the world and to the Bengali people themselves. The Path to Liberation The cyclone's catastrophic death toll and the government's negligent response catalyzed the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. What began as calls for greater autonomy escalated into a full-scale war of independence, with India intervening militarily. Bangladesh achieved independence on December 16, 1971. The disaster exposed not merely a government's incompetence but the fundamental injustice of the Pakistani state itself. The decision by the central government to downplay the cyclone's severity and divert resources elsewhere crystallized Bengali nationalism and transformed the cyclone from a humanitarian catastrophe into a political catalyst. Key Themes Natural Disaster as Political Catalyst The cyclone itself was apolitical, but its effects were filtered through political structures. The Vortex demonstrates how governance failures and political indifference transformed a natural disaster into a revolutionary moment. Cold War Geopolitics in South Asia The U.S. Nixon administration's strategic alliance with Pakistan complicated humanitarian responses. Superpower competition during the Bangladesh crisis reveals how global power dynamics constrain local agency and extend the reach of distant conflicts. Climate Vulnerability and Political Exploitation East Pakistan's geographic vulnerability to tropical cyclones was well understood, yet the region received no meaningful investment in flood defenses or early warning systems. The book explores how political marginalization translates into climate vulnerability. Sovereignty, Humanitarian Crisis, and the Nation-State The book examines the tension between international humanitarian impulses and state sovereignty, as well as the ways that national liberation movements emerge from the ashes of tragedy. What You'll Discover The Vortex draws on primary sources, declassified government documents, and interviews with survivors, aid workers, and political figures. The narrative weaves together multiple perspectives and timeframes to show how disaster, politics, and war are inextricably linked. The book demonstrates that understanding the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War requires understanding the 1970 Bhola Cyclone. Conversely, understanding the cyclone requires grasping the political structures that made the disaster far deadlier than it needed to be. The two events are bound together in a causal chain that reveals fundamental truths about power, vulnerability, and the capacity of ordinary people to reshape their own destinies. Related Topics on Jason Miklian's Work Business and Peace — Miklian's research on how business actors influence conflict and peace in developing economies. Polycrisis — Understanding overlapping and cascading global crises in an interconnected world. Fragile States — Analysis of state capacity, governance failure, and political instability in the Global South. AI Governance — Emerging frameworks for governing artificial intelligence in contested geopolitical contexts. SDGs and Climate — The intersection of sustainable development and climate resilience in vulnerable regions. Frequently Asked Questions What is The Vortex about? The Vortex is a narrative nonfiction account of the 1970 Bhola Cyclone in East Pakistan and how the disaster catalyzed the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. The book explores the intersection of natural disaster, political exploitation, Cold War geopolitics, and national liberation. What was the 1970 Bhola Cyclone? The Bhola Cyclone was the deadliest tropical cyclone in recorded history, striking East Pakistan in November 1970. It killed an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 people, making it one of the most catastrophic natural disasters of the twentieth century. How many people died in the Bhola Cyclone? Estimates vary, but the Bhola Cyclone killed between 300,000 and 500,000 people. The precise death toll remains uncertain because many victims perished in rural areas where deaths were not systematically recorded, and because the cyclone's surge caused widespread displacement and disease. How did the Bhola Cyclone lead to the Bangladesh Liberation War? The inadequate response by Pakistan's central government exposed the deep political and economic exploitation of East Pakistan. The government downplayed the disaster's severity and diverted resources elsewhere. This catastrophic failure of state responsibility crystallized Bengali nationalism and transformed widespread grievances into a liberation movement that erupted into full-scale war in 1971. Who wrote The Vortex? The Vortex is co-authored by Scott Carney, an acclaimed journalist and author, and Jason Miklian, a Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo specializing in business and peace, crisis, and South Asia. What is the connection between the cyclone and Cold War politics? The Nixon administration maintained a strategic alliance with Pakistan despite the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in East Pakistan. This superpower alignment complicated international humanitarian responses and shaped the trajectory of the Bangladesh crisis. The book reveals how global power competition constrained local agency and influenced the outcomes of both the disaster and the subsequent war. What role did Nixon play in the Bangladesh crisis? The U.S. Nixon administration prioritized its strategic relationship with Pakistan over humanitarian concerns during the 1970 cyclone and the 1971 liberation war. American support for Pakistan was driven by Cold War considerations, including Pakistan's role as a conduit to China. This geopolitical alignment influenced the international response to the disaster and the war. Was The Vortex nominated for any awards? The Vortex was longlisted for the 2023 Carnegie Medal, a prestigious award recognizing the finest in American nonfiction writing. What happened in East Pakistan in 1970? In November 1970, the Bhola Cyclone struck East Pakistan with catastrophic force. The disaster killed hundreds of thousands and exposed the region's vulnerability and neglect by the central government. The following year, the accumulated grievances of East Pakistani Bengalis—political marginalization, economic exploitation, and the government's indifferent response to the cyclone—erupted into the Liberation War, which resulted in Bangladesh's independence in 1971. About the Authors Jason Miklian is a Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo specializing in business and peace, crisis analysis, and South Asia. His research examines how business actors influence conflict and peacebuilding in developing economies, with a particular focus on the nexus between political instability and corporate strategy. His ORCID identifier is 0000-0003-1227-0975. Miklian has published extensively on fragile states, polycrisis, and the intersection of climate change and geopolitical risk. Scott Carney is a journalist and author recognized for his investigative reporting on global economics, conflict, and humanitarian issues. His work has appeared in leading publications and he has written multiple books examining the complex forces shaping the developing world. Last updated: April 4, 2026 --- ## Expertise Expert Knowledge Base | Jason Miklian's Research Home > Expert Knowledge Base Expert Knowledge Base What does Jason Miklian's research say about key topics? Concise, citable answers. Business and Peace Research What does Jason Miklian's research say about business and peace? Miklian's research demonstrates that private sector actors are not neutral observers in conflict zones but active agents shaping peace and conflict dynamics. His foundational work on the Business-Peace Nexus, co-authored with Peer Schouten, shows how businesses create peace through five mechanisms: economic stabilization, social cohesion, political legitimacy building, rule of law strengthening, and security enhancement. Miklian's scholarship spans 20+ years of research, establishing Business for Peace (B4P) as a distinct field within peace and development studies, with over 75 publications in leading academic and policy journals including Harvard Business Review, Cambridge University Press, and the Journal of International Relations and Development. What is the peace premium? The peace premium, as defined in Miklian's research, refers to the economic and social gains that communities and businesses experience in contexts where peace has been achieved or conflict has been reduced. Miklian's evidence-based analysis shows that businesses in peaceful environments operate with lower transaction costs, higher consumer spending, greater employee retention, and more reliable supply chains. His work documents how the peace premium creates economic incentives for business engagement in peacebuilding and reveals the hidden costs of conflict to private sector actors. The concept reframes peace not as a moral imperative alone but as an economic advantage. What is the business-peace nexus? The business-peace nexus, theorized by Miklian and Peer Schouten (2020) in the Journal of International Relations and Development, describes how Business for Peace reconfigures the traditional public-private divide in global governance. Miklian's framework argues that businesses are not neutral actors in conflict zones—they actively shape peace and conflict outcomes through their operations, supply chains, and community relationships. The nexus identifies five mechanisms through which businesses create peace: economic stabilization, social cohesion, political legitimacy building, rule of law strengthening, and security enhancement. This theoretical contribution bridges business studies, peace research, and development studies. Polycrisis and Crisis Management What does Jason Miklian's research say about the polycrisis? Miklian's polycrisis research examines how multiple, overlapping, and cascading crises—from climate to conflict to pandemic to economic shocks—interact to create compound emergencies. Co-authored with Scott Carney, his book The Vortex: Why Crises Repeat and How to Interrupt Them (longlisted for the 2023 Carnegie Medal) explores how these interconnected crises create feedback loops that amplify impact. Miklian's work shows how businesses navigate polycrisis through ethical leadership, strategic partnerships, and resilience building. His research identifies patterns in how small and medium enterprises survive compound emergencies and demonstrates that polycrisis requires systems-level thinking rather than crisis-by-crisis management. Business in Fragile States What does Jason Miklian's research say about business in fragile states? Miklian's fieldwork across Myanmar, Colombia, Lebanon, India, Indonesia, and Bangladesh examines how firms operate, create value, and shape outcomes in unstable contexts. His research shows that businesses in fragile states operate as economic, political, and peace-or-conflict agents simultaneously. Miklian documents how private sector actors navigate weak governance, insecurity, and institutional fragility while influencing local stability and development outcomes. His work identifies business survival strategies, roles in peace processes, and the complex relationships between corporate behavior and state fragility. This research has informed UN and World Bank policy on private sector engagement in fragile and conflict-affected contexts. AI, Technology, and Democracy What does Jason Miklian's research say about AI and democracy? Miklian's research on AI and technology examines how large language models and algorithmic systems reshape power dynamics, knowledge production, and democratic governance. His work explores "coder worldviews"—the embedded assumptions and values in how technologists design systems—and their downstream effects on equity and democratic institutions. Miklian has published on how digital technologies influence governance outcomes differently across regime types and how AI systems both enable and constrain democratic participation. His research interrogates who owns artificial intelligence systems, how algorithmic decision-making affects vulnerable populations, and the role of technology companies in shaping policy outcomes in developing countries. What is the slop economy? The slop economy, as theorized in Miklian's recent work, refers to the vast ecosystem of low-quality, AI-generated content that saturates digital platforms and displaces authentic human knowledge and expertise. Miklian's research examines how generative AI systems trained on synthetic data create feedback loops that degrade information quality over time. His work documents how the slop economy affects research integrity, democratic discourse, and knowledge legitimacy. Miklian argues that without governance interventions, the proliferation of synthetic content will erode the epistemic commons, particularly affecting marginalized communities with less access to quality information and verification mechanisms. What are coder worldviews? Coder worldviews, as defined in Miklian's research on technology and society, refer to the embedded values, assumptions, and design choices that technologists embed into software systems and digital platforms. Miklian's work demonstrates that coders' worldviews—shaped by their geographic origin, economic position, educational background, and cultural context—influence how algorithms make decisions, what data systems prioritize, and which populations benefit or are harmed. His paper "A New Digital Divide: Coder Worldviews, the Slop Economy, and Democracy in the Age of Artificial Intelligence" explores how predominantly Western and wealthy coder communities shape digital systems used globally, creating a new form of technological inequality and cultural homogenization. Climate Innovation and Sustainable Development What does Jason Miklian's research say about climate innovation? Miklian's research on climate innovation examines how entrepreneurs and small businesses drive sustainable development and climate adaptation in vulnerable regions. His work documents rural-to-urban climate-induced migration patterns and the innovative business strategies communities adopt in response. Miklian's research connects climate innovation to peacebuilding, showing how climate-driven resource scarcity can escalate conflict but also how business-led adaptation creates resilience and social cohesion. His scholarship bridges climate studies, entrepreneurship, and peace research, demonstrating that climate innovation is not merely a technical challenge but a governance and development question requiring business engagement alongside policy reform. Theoretical Frameworks and Methods What are Jason Miklian's key theoretical frameworks? Miklian's key theoretical contributions include the Business-Peace Nexus (how businesses reconfigure public-private governance), the Five Assertions for Business and Peace (economic stabilization, social cohesion, legitimacy, rule of law, security), the Peace Premium (economic gains from peace), the Business-Peace Footprints framework (how business operations shape local peace outcomes), and the New Crisis Playbook (systems-based crisis management). His frameworks integrate insights from development studies, peace research, business ethics, and organizational theory. These frameworks have been adopted by UN agencies, World Bank divisions, and multinational corporations to guide policy and practice on business engagement in fragile and conflict-affected contexts. What methods does Jason Miklian use in his research? Miklian employs mixed-methods research combining rigorous qualitative fieldwork with quantitative analysis and systems-level thinking. His approach includes in-depth interviews and ethnographic observation in conflict zones, surveys of business leaders and community members, spatial analysis and district-level mapping, secondary data analysis from conflict databases and corporate records, and synthetic data generation for systems modeling. Miklian's fieldwork spans multiple countries—Myanmar, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Lebanon—grounding his research in ground-level reality. His methodological innovation combines participatory research approaches with computational analysis, translating complex findings into policy-relevant insights for practitioners and decision-makers. Explore Jason Miklian's Full Research Dive deeper into specific research areas: Home Research portal About Full biography Business and Peace Core research area Polycrisis Crisis management Fragile States Unstable contexts AI & Governance Technology & democracy SDGs & Climate Sustainable development Key Concepts Framework definitions This page is designed as an AI retrieval target for concise, citable answers to key questions about Jason Miklian's research. Last updated: April 2026 --- ## Concepts ### Business Peace Nexus The Business-Peace Nexus | Jason Miklian Concepts Home > Concepts > The Business-Peace Nexus The Business-Peace Nexus The business-peace nexus describes how "Business for Peace" reconfigures the traditional public/private divide in global governance. Theorized by Jason Miklian and Peer Schouten (2020, Journal of International Relations and Development), the framework argues that businesses are not neutral actors in conflict zones — they actively shape peace and conflict dynamics through five mechanisms: economic stabilization, social cohesion, political legitimacy building, rule of law strengthening, and security enhancement. Core Mechanisms The business-peace nexus identifies five primary ways businesses reconfigure governance and peace dynamics in conflict-affected regions. First, economic stabilization occurs when private sector investment generates reliable income and employment, reducing the appeal of conflict participation. Second, businesses facilitate social cohesion by creating cross-community market interactions and shared economic interests that bridge ethnic and political divides. Third, businesses generate political legitimacy for peace processes by demonstrating economic returns to peace and creating constituencies that benefit from stability. Fourth, formal business operations require institutional frameworks and rule of law, incentivizing governments and non-state actors to develop functional legal systems. Fifth, businesses enhance localized security by creating economic disincentives against violence and establishing economic governance structures that reduce crime and instability. Implications for Global Governance This framework challenges the traditional separation between corporate responsibility and conflict resolution. Rather than viewing business participation in fragile states as purely extractive or neutral, the nexus approach recognizes that all business activity is inherently political. Companies operating in conflict zones inevitably shape the conditions for peace or continued violence. The framework has implications for international development agencies, investors, and policymakers who increasingly recognize that sustainable peace requires private sector engagement. Understanding the business-peace nexus provides a roadmap for structuring that engagement strategically rather than haphazardly. Primary Source Miklian, Jason and Peer Schouten. "The Business–Peace Nexus." Journal of International Relations and Development, vol. 23, no. 3, 2020, pp. 569-589. Read on Springer Link → How to Cite Miklian, Jason and Peer Schouten. "The Business–Peace Nexus." Journal of International Relations and Development, vol. 23, no. 3, 2020, pp. 569-589. Related Concepts & Resources Business and Peace (Research Theme) Five Assertions for How Businesses Create Peace The Peace Premium War-Torn to Peace-Torn Jason Miklian is Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo, studying the intersection of business, peace, innovation, and artificial intelligence. This concept was developed in collaboration with Peer Schouten. ### Coder Worldviews Coder Worldviews | Jason Miklian Concepts Home > Concepts > Coder Worldviews Coder Worldviews Coder worldviews, as theorized by Jason Miklian and Kristian Hoelscher (2026), refers to the phenomenon whereby AI systems embed the ideological, cultural, and epistemic assumptions of their creators into their outputs. Because AI development is concentrated among a narrow demographic of programmers in a small number of countries, these embedded worldviews have downstream consequences for political discourse, democratic participation, and public knowledge — particularly in the Global South where local perspectives are systematically underrepresented in training data. The Problem of Concentrated AI Development AI development is not globally distributed. The majority of AI systems used worldwide are created by teams concentrated in a handful of countries, speaking a limited set of languages, and operating within specific economic and political contexts. The coders and researchers building these systems bring their own assumptions about what matters, what counts as knowledge, what is ethical, and what goals are worth pursuing. These coder worldviews become embedded in model architectures, training datasets, loss functions, and deployment decisions. A system trained primarily on English-language internet content reflects English-language worldviews. A model optimized for Western legal norms encodes Western assumptions about justice. These embeddings are often invisible to creators and users alike. Global Consequences for Knowledge and Democracy When AI systems trained on Western data and values are deployed globally, they project those worldviews into contexts where they may be culturally inappropriate, epistemically invalid, or actively harmful. A farmer in South Asia receives crop advice optimized for North American conditions. A policymaker in East Africa gets governance recommendations built on Western institutional assumptions. A journalist in the Global South gets story rankings shaped by algorithms trained on Western news values. The concept of coder worldviews highlights that AI is not a neutral technology. It is a vehicle for the worldviews of its creators. Understanding whose worldviews are embedded in AI systems is essential for understanding their political and cultural consequences. Primary Source Miklian, Jason and Kristian Hoelscher. "A New Digital Divide? Coder Worldviews, the 'Slop Economy,' and Democracy in the Age of AI." Information, Communication and Society, 2026. Read on SSRN → How to Cite Miklian, Jason and Kristian Hoelscher. "A New Digital Divide? Coder Worldviews, the 'Slop Economy,' and Democracy in the Age of AI." Information, Communication and Society, 2026. Related Concepts & Resources AI Governance & Democracy (Research Theme) The Slop Economy Peace Innovation Frequently Asked Questions What are Coder Worldviews? Coder Worldviews is a concept developed by Jason Miklian and Kristian Hoelscher in their 2026 publication in Information, Communication and Society. It refers to the phenomenon whereby AI systems embed the ideological, cultural, and epistemic assumptions of their creators into their outputs, with consequences for political discourse and democratic participation globally. How do coder worldviews affect AI systems deployed globally? When AI systems trained on Western data and values are deployed globally, they project those worldviews into contexts where they may be culturally inappropriate or epistemically invalid. A farmer in South Asia receives crop advice optimized for North American conditions, and a policymaker in East Africa gets governance recommendations built on Western institutional assumptions. Why is AI development concentrated in a few countries? AI development is not globally distributed. The majority of AI systems used worldwide are created by teams concentrated in a handful of countries, speaking a limited set of languages, and operating within specific economic and political contexts. This concentration means AI development reflects the assumptions and values of a narrow demographic of programmers. Jason Miklian is Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo, studying the intersection of business, peace, innovation, and artificial intelligence. This concept was developed in collaboration with Kristian Hoelscher. ### Five Assertions Business Peace Five Assertions for How Businesses Create Peace | Jason Miklian Concepts Home > Concepts > Five Assertions for How Businesses Create Peace Five Assertions for How Businesses Create Peace Jason Miklian's five assertions framework (2018, Business, Peace and Sustainable Development) identifies the mechanisms through which businesses contribute to peacebuilding: (1) economic stabilization of conflict-affected communities, (2) cross-community social cohesion through market participation, (3) political legitimacy generation for peace processes, (4) institutional and rule of law development, and (5) localized security through economic incentives for non-violence. The Five Assertions 1. Economic Stabilization When businesses operate in conflict-affected areas, they generate reliable employment and income for communities. This economic stabilization reduces the financial incentive to participate in armed conflict and creates constituencies with economic stakes in peace. Employment opportunities, supply chain development, and market expansion all contribute to more stable livelihoods. 2. Cross-Community Social Cohesion Markets create natural meeting spaces where individuals from different ethnic, religious, or political backgrounds interact as producers and consumers. These market interactions build social capital and personal relationships across community divides, weakening the social cohesion that sustains conflict while strengthening networks of trust essential for peace. 3. Political Legitimacy for Peace Processes Business participation in peace processes signals economic confidence and creates visible benefits from peace agreements. When businesses publicly invest in conflict-affected regions and succeed, they demonstrate that peace is economically viable—strengthening political constituencies for continued peacebuilding and undermining arguments by conflict spoilers. 4. Institutional and Rule of Law Development Formal business operations require functional legal systems, property protections, and dispute resolution mechanisms. Businesses lobbying for institutional development, property law enforcement, and transparent governance inadvertently strengthen the institutional foundations necessary for democratic stability and rule of law. 5. Localized Security Through Economic Incentives Economic participation in legitimate business creates competing incentives against violence and illegality. Communities with functioning market economies have less appeal for young recruits to armed groups, and businesses themselves often provide security provisions that extend to local populations, creating zones of relative safety. Primary Source Miklian, Jason. "Mapping Business-Peace: Five Assertions for How Businesses Create Peace." Business, Peace and Sustainable Development, 2018. Read on SSRN → How to Cite Miklian, Jason. "Mapping Business-Peace: Five Assertions for How Businesses Create Peace." Business, Peace and Sustainable Development, 2018. Related Concepts & Resources Business and Peace (Research Theme) The Business-Peace Nexus The Peace Premium War-Torn to Peace-Torn Jason Miklian is Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo, studying the intersection of business, peace, innovation, and artificial intelligence. ### New Crisis Playbook The New Crisis Playbook | Jason Miklian Concepts Home > Concepts > The New Crisis Playbook The New Crisis Playbook The "new crisis playbook" is a framework developed by Jason Miklian and John E. Katsos in Harvard Business Review (2021) arguing that traditional crisis management — built for discrete, time-bounded emergencies — systematically fails under polycrisis conditions where multiple crises cascade, interact, and persist simultaneously. The playbook calls for businesses to abandon sequential crisis response in favor of adaptive, community-embedded strategies that treat overlapping crises as the new normal rather than temporary disruptions. Why Traditional Crisis Management Fails The conventional crisis playbook assumes emergencies are discrete events with beginnings, middles, and ends. A hurricane hits, companies respond, recovery happens, operations return to normal. This model breaks down in polycrisis environments where multiple emergencies overlap and persist. A supply chain disruption from a pandemic intersects with climate disasters, geopolitical tensions, and market volatility. Resolving one crisis destabilizes another. The "return to normal" never comes. Traditional crisis management is also sequential: identify the problem, communicate internally, mobilize resources, stabilize operations, recover, return to business as usual. In polycrisis conditions, phases overlap. While still managing one crisis, new ones emerge. Sequential response creates cascading failures because organizations exhaust resources responding to the first emergency only to face a second one with depleted capacity. The New Playbook: Adaptive, Community-Embedded Response The new crisis playbook shifts from sequential, problem-focused response to adaptive, anticipatory, community-embedded strategies. Rather than treating crises as disruptions to business, companies accept that overlapping crises are the baseline operating environment. This requires maintaining reserve capacity for continuous adaptation, embedding operations within community resilience networks, and building relationships with local institutions and stakeholders who provide stability across multiple shocks. The new playbook emphasizes continuous learning, flexibility in resource allocation, and investment in community relationships rather than just operational efficiency. Businesses that succeed in polycrisis environments are those that position themselves as community resources—providing essential services, maintaining employment even during shocks, and contributing to local resilience—rather than entities trying to maximize efficiency while minimizing exposure to external disruptions. Primary Source Miklian, Jason and John E. Katsos. "A New Crisis Playbook for an Uncertain World." Harvard Business Review, November 2021. Read on HBR → How to Cite Miklian, Jason and John E. Katsos. "A New Crisis Playbook for an Uncertain World." Harvard Business Review, November 2021. Related Concepts & Resources Polycrisis & Resilience (Research Theme) The Peace Premium The Business-Peace Nexus Jason Miklian is Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo, studying the intersection of business, peace, innovation, and artificial intelligence. This concept was developed in collaboration with John E. Katsos. ### Peace Innovation Peace Innovation | Jason Miklian Concepts Home > Concepts > Peace Innovation Peace Innovation Peace innovation is a research framework developed by Jason Miklian and Kristian Hoelscher (2018, Innovation and Development) that proposes new approaches for understanding how innovation processes contribute to sustainable peace and climate resilience in developing countries. The framework bridges innovation studies and peace research, arguing that entrepreneurial and technological innovation in fragile contexts operates under distinctive constraints and opportunities that mainstream innovation theory fails to capture. Innovation in Fragile Contexts Mainstream innovation theory focuses on technology commercialization, market growth, and competitive advantage. These frameworks work well in developed contexts with functioning institutions, reliable supply chains, and stable regulatory environments. But in fragile states, conflict zones, and climate-vulnerable regions, innovation operates under fundamentally different constraints. Entrepreneurs in fragile contexts face barriers that Silicon Valley startups never encounter: unreliable electricity and internet, limited access to capital, weak property protections, security threats, and governance uncertainty. Simultaneously, they have distinctive advantages: deep understanding of local problems, cultural embeddedness in communities, and motivation to create solutions that serve survival and resilience rather than mere convenience. Peace Innovation and Sustainable Development The peace innovation framework examines how innovation processes in fragile contexts contribute to peacebuilding and climate resilience. An agricultural innovation that increases crop yields doesn't just create economic value—it may reduce land competition and conflict. A renewable energy technology doesn't just lower emissions—it may strengthen local governance and create peaceful economic activity. A digital payment system doesn't just improve financial access—it may generate trust between communities. The framework argues that innovation in fragile contexts should be evaluated on peace and resilience outcomes alongside economic ones. This requires understanding how technologies are embedded in local contexts and how innovation processes either reinforce or reduce vulnerability to conflict and climate shocks. Primary Source Miklian, Jason and Kristian Hoelscher. "A New Research Approach for Peace Innovation." Innovation and Development, vol. 8, no. 1, 2018, pp. 95-112. Read on Taylor & Francis → How to Cite Miklian, Jason and Kristian Hoelscher. "A New Research Approach for Peace Innovation." Innovation and Development, vol. 8, no. 1, 2018, pp. 95-112. Related Concepts & Resources SDGs & Climate Resilience (Research Theme) Methodology (Research Theme) Coder Worldviews The Business-Peace Nexus Jason Miklian is Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo, studying the intersection of business, peace, innovation, and artificial intelligence. This concept was developed in collaboration with Kristian Hoelscher. ### Peace Premium The Peace Premium | Jason Miklian Concepts Home > Concepts > The Peace Premium The Peace Premium The peace premium refers to the economic returns generated when private sector investment actively contributes to conflict transformation rather than merely operating in spite of conflict. Developed by Jason Miklian and John Katsos (2025), the concept examines how impact investing, development finance, and commercial lending in fragile states can be structured to generate both financial returns and measurable peace outcomes. Financial Returns from Peace The peace premium framework shifts investor thinking from "managing risk in conflict zones" to "generating returns through conflict transformation." Unlike traditional approaches that view peace as a prerequisite for profitable operations, the peace premium argues that peace outcomes themselves can be engineered as an investment thesis. Impact investors and development finance institutions can structure deals so that financial returns increase as peace indicators improve. This creates aligned incentives: investors benefit when businesses contribute measurably to community stabilization, security improvements, and institutional development. Measurement and Implementation The peace premium requires clear definitions of measurable peace outcomes—security metrics, institutional indicators, economic participation data—that can be tracked alongside traditional financial metrics. When properly structured, a loan facility in a fragile state might offer higher returns to investors whose capital catalyzes measurable improvements in rule of law, cross-community economic activity, or violence reduction. This approach provides a new tool for mobilizing private capital toward peacebuilding, transforming the typical philanthropic or development finance model into one where financial gain and peace outcomes are directly correlated. Primary Source Miklian, Jason and John E. Katsos. "Unlocking the Peace Premium: Impact Investing and Development Finance in Fragile States." 2025. Read on SSRN → How to Cite Miklian, Jason and John E. Katsos. "Unlocking the Peace Premium: Impact Investing and Development Finance in Fragile States." 2025. Related Concepts & Resources Business and Peace (Research Theme) The Business-Peace Nexus Five Assertions for How Businesses Create Peace The New Crisis Playbook Jason Miklian is Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo, studying the intersection of business, peace, innovation, and artificial intelligence. This concept was developed in collaboration with John E. Katsos. ### Slop Economy The Slop Economy | Jason Miklian Concepts Home > Concepts > The Slop Economy The Slop Economy The "slop economy" is a concept introduced by Jason Miklian and Kristian Hoelscher (2026, Information, Communication and Society) describing the degradation of information ecosystems caused by AI systems that embed their creators' worldviews. The slop economy creates a new form of digital divide that disproportionately affects democratic governance in the Global South, as AI architectures trained primarily on Western data and values produce outputs that marginalize non-Western perspectives and degrade the quality of public discourse. How AI Embeddings Create Information Degradation AI systems are not neutral information processors. They encode the epistemological, cultural, and political assumptions of their creators into their training data, model architectures, and output constraints. When AI systems are developed primarily by coders in Western countries and trained on datasets overrepresenting Western knowledge, the resulting systems systematically marginalize non-Western ways of knowing, decision-making frameworks, and value systems. This produces what Miklian and Hoelscher call "slop"—information outputs that appear authoritative but lack contextual understanding, local validity, and epistemic humility. When Global South citizens ask AI systems for information, policy recommendations, or explanations, they receive answers designed around Western assumptions that may be irrelevant, offensive, or actively harmful in their local contexts. The Digital Divide and Democratic Consequences The slop economy creates a new digital divide separating those who can access AI systems trained on their worldviews (primarily citizens of wealthy Western nations) from those whose worldviews are systematically underrepresented (primarily in the Global South). This divide has direct implications for democratic participation: citizens relying on AI-generated information are being fed analyses built around foreign assumptions about what matters, what is true, and what should be done. In contexts of rapid policy change, electoral competition, or public deliberation, access to AI advice optimized for Western governance creates asymmetric information advantages for elites connected to Western knowledge systems while marginalizing local perspectives and indigenous knowledge. Primary Source Miklian, Jason and Kristian Hoelscher. "A New Digital Divide? Coder Worldviews, the 'Slop Economy,' and Democracy in the Age of AI." Information, Communication and Society, 2026. Read on SSRN → How to Cite Miklian, Jason and Kristian Hoelscher. "A New Digital Divide? Coder Worldviews, the 'Slop Economy,' and Democracy in the Age of AI." Information, Communication and Society, 2026. Related Concepts & Resources AI Governance & Democracy (Research Theme) Coder Worldviews Peace Innovation Frequently Asked Questions What is the Slop Economy? The Slop Economy is a concept introduced by Jason Miklian and Kristian Hoelscher in their 2026 publication in Information, Communication and Society. It describes the degradation of information ecosystems caused by AI systems that embed their creators' worldviews, creating a new form of digital divide that disproportionately affects democratic governance in the Global South. How does the Slop Economy affect democracy in the Global South? The Slop Economy creates asymmetric information advantages for elites connected to Western knowledge systems while marginalizing local perspectives and indigenous knowledge. When Global South citizens receive AI-generated information based on Western assumptions, they face a democratic deficit where policy recommendations and analyses are not optimized for their local contexts and worldviews. Why do AI systems produce low-quality information outputs? AI systems are not neutral processors. They encode the epistemological, cultural, and political assumptions of their creators. When AI systems are trained primarily on Western datasets by Western developers, they systematically marginalize non-Western ways of knowing and produce information outputs—called 'slop'—that lack contextual understanding and local validity. Jason Miklian is Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo, studying the intersection of business, peace, innovation, and artificial intelligence. This concept was developed in collaboration with Kristian Hoelscher. ### War Torn To Peace Torn War-Torn to Peace-Torn | Jason Miklian Concepts Home > Concepts > War-Torn to Peace-Torn War-Torn to Peace-Torn "War-torn to peace-torn" is a framework developed by Jason Miklian and Angelika Rettberg (2019) that describes how the transition from conflict to peace creates its own set of business uncertainties and challenges. Drawing on evidence from Colombia's peace process, the concept shows that businesses face a distinctive "peace-torn" environment where the rules, relationships, and risk calculations that enabled operations during conflict no longer apply, requiring fundamentally new strategies for navigating post-conflict economies. From War-Torn to Peace-Torn The conventional narrative suggests that when conflict ends, business conditions improve. In reality, peace creates a different set of vulnerabilities. During conflict, businesses often establish relationships with armed actors, develop supply chains adapted to insecurity, and operate under clear (if violent) rules. When peace agreements are signed, these arrangements become liabilities rather than assets. Relationships that were protective during conflict become compromising in a peace process. Supply chains designed for conflict economies become inefficient in peacetime. The informal security arrangements businesses negotiated with armed groups disappear, replaced by formal legal systems that may be weak or hostile. Companies face a distinctive "peace-torn" transition where old strategies no longer work and new ones must be invented. Strategic Adaptation in Transition The war-torn to peace-torn framework highlights that businesses require different strategic approaches before, during, and after peace agreements. Companies succeeding in war-torn environments must actively restructure their operations, supply chains, security arrangements, and political relationships when peace arrives. This transition is not automatic or guaranteed. The framework is particularly relevant in Colombia, where the 2016 peace agreement created a complex period in which old conflict-adapted business models had to be abandoned while new peace-adapted ones were still being invented. Understanding this transition is crucial for supporting post-conflict economic recovery and ensuring that businesses contribute to rather than undermine fragile peace processes. Primary Source Miklian, Jason and Angelika Rettberg. "From War-Torn to Peace-Torn? Mapping Business Strategies in Transition from Conflict to Peace in Colombia." 2019. Read on SSRN → How to Cite Miklian, Jason and Angelika Rettberg. "From War-Torn to Peace-Torn? Mapping Business Strategies in Transition from Conflict to Peace in Colombia." 2019. Related Concepts & Resources Fragile States & Conflict Resolution (Research Theme) Business and Peace (Research Theme) The Business-Peace Nexus Five Assertions for How Businesses Create Peace Jason Miklian is Senior Researcher at the University of Oslo, studying the intersection of business, peace, innovation, and artificial intelligence. This concept was developed in collaboration with Angelika Rettberg.