 I'll talk today about some research on education in conflict-affected countries, a little bit on health and touch up on labor market participation and one last project that we have on the impacts of armed conflict on attitudes and experiences of domestic violence. So as you familiar with studies here, I'm an economist, so we use an approach, like we use an empirical approach and in studies that, in a set of studies that I looked at that were education on human capital and human capital health, we test for investment in child under distress and in most of the studies in the empirical studies that try to understand what is the impact of conflict, where a number of studies that use differences and differences framework, where you compare children from the affected region and affected age group to similar children who live over a similar age group who were living in the region, not affected by conflict or who were older or younger, so they even actually kind of escaped the brunt of a conflict at all. So that's most of the studies that we use this approach and we have to take them in this framework. And the population, many of the studies also use survey data, large public surveys collected by the World Bank or by USID or other organizations and combine them with conflict data from large data sets, either studies like individuals collected well on data or we've victimization data from surveys themselves. And the first topic looks at education and initially it kind of ties well with the education session that we attended yesterday, some of us, and it evaluates the impact of conflict on quantity of education as we initially started and quantity measured by attending school individuals or going and completing a number of classes. And the impact has been pretty much uniformly negative and the specific country level impacts depend on the context, whether it's type of education considered or I mean specific contextual impact of conflict and I'll go over a few impacts. And with quality of education there was a set of studies that says, okay, conflict actually impacts the resources because conflict affected areas or schools, they don't get the resources, teachers flee those areas and that impacts children directly. So one of the first studies in literature looked at Tajikistan and what I find that girls from conflict affected areas and households, we completed less schooling and we were less likely to be enrolled at the time the conflict ended. And we explained that during the conflict where it's sometimes difficult to go to school due to concerns about safety and girls from affected communities were less likely to go to school and it could be also that families took an income consideration that it's kind of an optional investment in women's education when she may not actually most likely in the context of Tajikistan or Punjab, they wouldn't work and bring support families later on. So there are studies also that look at and find negative impacts for boys, for example, study by Svi looking at Bosnia and Herzegovina finds that boys, young men, lost in their education and he explains by enlistment of men, young men, adolescent men in the army. When there are studies that say, okay, actually it's boys that the households kind of prioritized and sends them to get a job and also whereas great impact on boys' education in kind of we lose more in education relative to girls in the situations where girls already had very low education so they barely were going to school and girls were achieving greater number of grades but were taken out from school. So one of my favorite examples that looks at the contextual impact of conflict is when Christine Valentia looked at Maoist insurgency in Nepal and she finds that actually it's one of the few countries where educational attainment and educational attainment of girls in particular has a reason and she explains it by kind of a focus of Maoists on bringing education to the less advantaged segments of population in particular women. So that was one of the results of the paper. Another study says actually goes in more detail and each study since all of them use survey data, we use all available data to them so you may not be able to control for everything that you would like to control for but where women won by well, we were able to separate also poor and non-poor households impacts and what we find that in the context of Burundi, educational attainment of boys declines more than that of girls but it's similar to Rwanda because boys were actually going to school girls were not so for girls were very little to lose in education and poorer households they took out both boys and girls out of schools while wealthier households they took out for boys because boys were actually we're getting more education at the time. So there is a small set of studies that looks at the quality of schooling and those studies we explore the impact of different types of conflicts from second intifada in Palestine like to low level conflict in Turkey and to drug related crime in Brazilian favelas and studies we point out that test scores we do decline in the schools and affected areas and it matters if you're closer to reported violence especially in like one of them kind of most detailed studies is the last one on the slide that we have like an excellent data and we were able to look at the radius of schools and how far each conflict event occurred and what we find is that actually you would think that people would move in response to violence and try to take their children to different schools but we find very little mobility and most of the impact was through people not actually going to school due to this outburst of violence which were kind of sporadic but frequent and there was a big impact on school resources by teachers not coming to these areas and in Turkey for example areas affected by Turkish Kurdish conflict they are unable to attract qualified teachers basically teachers look they are allocated to their series because of educate programs they have to go for one year or two but we leave immediately so we do not stay and educated professionals we leave so there is an kind of education gap especially at the higher education and entry level exams so while for education we find some of the different results for boys and girls in its context specific what I found interesting that for when we are looking at health in particular measured by height for HZ scores which are long-term determinant of health the impact was very similar across countries also in magnitudes and with respect to who is being affected so children are being affected even of like this young age under five years old during the conflict we lose we're basically shorter than comparable children and the impact is very similar between boys and girls which I'd suggest that maybe those shocks are something that households were not prepared for and Akresh Budarvayet Akresh and Verwimf they show actually it's very well on study because we compare two types of shocks and they say that like with respect to crop shocks households were clearly kind of withholding girls from school while when the conflict started it's everyone who lost schooling and there is a large number of studies now like that exploring this impact and thankfully to this demographic and health service that collect good data on the subject so I'll go over one of the studies that we did with Kamelya Minayu kind of to go through a few details on the basic setup of the study and what the key results look like so we used 2002-2007 conflict in Kodiwa as a quasi-experiment to analyze its impact on child schooling we run a number of tests trying to see like if our results withhold like looking at the different sub-samples looking at the mortality and this of children looking at closeness to border and things like that and we do find that there are negative and sizable impacts and what this study was particularly interesting also because we were able to look at two types of conflict level common shocks which means that you lived in a municipality affected by conflict and also the government of Kodiwa took sort of a great care like we collected data on victimization among households right after the conflict ended not every country that went through the conflict does it in some countries we just like want to forget and not to talk about it here we collected fairly good information so this is how a map and in particular study each pretty much every study of this would include a map that shows the original distribution of conflict and as we go more further like quality increases because the quality of data has been increasing as well as the quality of programming so we used here armed conflict events and location dataset which is collected by a group of researchers and it has been come like very large and popular to use and we here like we combined basically we counted the number of events in each locality and we used with DACA areas representing more events and a lot of areas in the middle and to the side representing areas where the conflict didn't happen so we used it as a yes or no variable in this basically equation where we use as a dependent variable height for each discourse and we particularly interested here in estimating the coefficient on vice interaction between conflict region and child being in a vocahort meaning child was between ages like zero and five years old during the conflict time so we compare them to children who either were born after the conflict or children who were reached age five before the conflict started because we also have here before the conflict data so and we allow here as most studies do look to interact interaction between female and conflict exposure to see various differential impact on females so forgive me if our table is too tiny like the numbers but the basic result is the top row we've coefficient on the conflict interaction between conflict child being in a conflict region and from affected cohort and you see that in most of those cases this interaction is negative so we look at different ways kind of measuring conflict here being like basically you're alive during the war and you lived in the conflict affected area that would become one and two and then and seven and eight and then three and four we look at the how many months does it matter how many months and at what age you were exposed is it like for younger children that we see great impacts of for older and we do see great impacts for older children because if you're older you lived in the conflict area for longer period of time so your deficit in height is greater so that would be columns three and four and nine and ten and then five and six it's basically number of months in overall exposed to conflict so I said this study had a pretty the data had a good information on victimization and we compiled this average index of victimization into one for example now like there is a kind of a movement by households on conflict network and we published the paper trying to incorporate this victimization kind of model in all studies done in the post conflict areas so here we aggregated questions based on their meaning like economic losses health impairment displacement if a child if a household was a victim of violence so we've and we separate by conflict region and non-conflict and we see that pretty much uniformly there is a great victimization reported in conflict areas but you see also victimization being reported elsewhere as well so which there is a spillover it happens not only in that like dark shaded region but also elsewhere as well so that's where victimization map that looks a little bit different from what we saw before and we do more maps and kind of look at the details so here we just give one table results and we look at differences between migrants and non-migrant households full sample and non-migrant households we actually find little impacts little differences so which and Kodiwa was one of the studies that finds that you little differences between migrants and non-migrants so display like being displaced didn't impact child health as much or staying in the area but victimization did have a large impact on height for each discourse here it's a cross-sectional service so we do not have really kind of a kind of a pre-conflict control group yeah so so in this results like we confirm results from our studies children conflict areas did experience setbacks and the results actually quite consistent between across the studies even in the size of the impact so and in particular here we find the mechanisms because each study looks at mechanisms yeah we find this okay children are negatively affected but what has driven those impacts and we could say that migration didn't seem to matter in this particular case but economic losses may have impacted child health so I have maybe a couple of minutes to talk about our segments so there are several studies looking at women and women actually tend to I mean we may not go to school during the conflict but they typically go to work their studies like this study looks at women who didn't get education during the conflict but they seem to be more likely participating in the labor market after the conflict ended so there is some substitution going on and in Nepal and Colombia women also step up once the conflict hits their families so households they they tend to take on jobs in some cases vacated by men like so substituting for women the labor market so that's kind of a current project that is in progress now and this study looks at attitudes and experiences of women towards domestic women and men towards domestic violence and basically we match children from conflict affected regions and countries in sub-Saharan Africa it's a large cross-sectional dataset like previous studies most of them we will a case study type and what we find is that we are able to look at men and women's attitudes basically their acceptances of certain types of domestic violence like once beating a wife if she does XYZ let's say burns food goes out without telling him neglects children and experiences of domestic violence by women so what do we find is quite consistently that individuals who were exposed between age six and ten to the conflict they tend to report both greater acceptances of those domestic violence attitudes as well as experiences on the part of females of being experiencing domestic violence themselves and men also report greater acceptances of those attitudes but when we look at data in terms of percentages actually there is a greater acceptance percentage wise for men or sorry for women than men so which kind of is encouraging result because I mean it's encouraging but now I said also uh it would be interesting for us like to analyze what's the discrepancy coming from is it coming from the norm okay so yeah and um I'm done with the talk and yeah I'll let Marcus to transition so in deeper thank you