
Why This Question Matters
Scholars and policymakers rely on long-run trends in combat fatalities to assess whether the world is becoming more or less deadly. A recent article that used Correlates of War (COW) data from 1816–1997 argued that the risk of death in battle was roughly constant across that period, a finding with grim implications for claims about a long-run decline in organized violence.
What Bethany Lacina, Nils Petter Gleditsch, and Bruce Russett Did
The authors reexamine the underlying battle-death information and the interpretation of those earlier results. Focusing on revised estimates of battle deaths covering 1900–2002, they diagnose irregularities in the COW deaths series that bias conclusions when different conflict types are treated as directly comparable.
How They Reanalyzed the Evidence
Key Findings
Why This Matters for Research and Policy
These results challenge a pessimistic reading of long-run battlefield lethality and underscore how measurement choices shape inferences about trends in organized violence. Lacina, Gleditsch, and Russett caution researchers to check comparability and provenance of death-series in conflict datasets—misuse can bias both scholarly conclusions and policy discussions about global security trends.

| The Declining Risk of Death in Battle was authored by Bethany Lacina, Nils Petter Gleditsch and Bruce Russett. It was published by Oxford in ISQ in 2006. |