Power-sharing provisions have been included in many peace agreements intended to end intra-state violent conflict, including, for example, in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Sudan, and Lebanon. Power-sharing has been subject to extensive scholarly examination. Many of these examinations focus on the impact of power-sharing on peace, often defined as the non-recurrence of violent conflict. However, the results of these examinations have not generated a consensus as to the value of power-sharing as a conflict management tool. This lack of consensus highlights a need to more clearly understand the effects of power-sharing. To fully comprehend the role of power-sharing, we must move away from simply asking if it is associated with the reoccurrence of violence and explore the paths through which it can contribute to different outcomes of interest, for example, group relations or stable government. Both Hartzell and Mehler (2019) and Keil and McCulloch (2021) seek to address this current weakness in our understanding of power-sharing, albeit in quite different ways. These books show that by paying closer attention to the impact of power-sharing on different outcomes, including a focus on the mechanisms that link its different power-sharing provisions to specific outcomes, we can develop a fundamentally deeper understanding of power-sharing.

中文翻译：

---

权力分享：探索“谁”和“哪里”的必要性

许多旨在结束国家内部暴力冲突的和平协议中都包含了权力分享条款，例如在北爱尔兰、波斯尼亚、苏丹和黎巴嫩。权力分享受到广泛的学术审查。其中许多研究侧重于权力分享对和平的影响，通常被定义为暴力冲突不再发生。然而，这些检查的结果并未就权力分享作为冲突管理工具的价值达成共识。这种缺乏共识凸显了更清楚地了解权力分享的影响的必要性。为了充分理解权力分享的作用，我们必须摆脱简单地询问它是否与暴力的再次发生有关，而是探索它可以促成不同利益结果的途径，例如，群体关系或稳定的政府。Hartzell 和 Mehler (2019) 以及 Keil 和 McCulloch (2021) 都试图解决我们目前对权力分享理解的弱点，尽管方式截然不同。这些书表明，通过更密切地关注权力分享对不同结果的影响，包括关注将不同权力分享条款与特定结果联系起来的机制，我们可以从根本上更深入地理解权力分享。