Attached is an example (Bohra and Massey 2011 summary) of what the literature review needs to include which is the research question; rationale; theory/hypothesis; data and method; results and findings. Also attached is the article of which this literature review needs to be on. Just needs to look like the summary.
Bohra-Mishra, Pratikshya and Douglas S. Massey. 2011. Individual Decisions to Migrate During Civil Conflict. Demography, 48: 401-424.
How does political violence affect individual migration? Specifically, how did violence from the Nepalese Civil War/Maoist Insurgency (1996-2006) influence the probability that individuals migrated to local, national, or international destinations?
1. Most prior research on the relationship between violence and forced migration is based on aggregate-level data (e.g. numbers of migrants). Very few studies have examined the effects of violence on migration at the individual-level. 2. Most studies have examined either internal displacement or international migration. Few studies have investigated the effects of violence on intra-national and international migration simultaneously 3. There is no clear consensus about whether violence has a threshold effect (i.e. it needs to exceed some basic level before it affects migration). 4. Research has not resolved whether the effect of violence on forced migration is direct or indirect. Note that the study is not able to answer this question.
Rational choice theory predicts that people will move to safety as the risk of violence increases. There is also some evidence of threshold effects; i.e. violence does not affect migration until it reaches some critical level. Some implicit hypotheses tested:
1. As violence increases, probability of migration will increase. 2. As violence increases, probability of migration to more distant areas will increase. 3. The effect of violence on the probability of migration increases as violence increases (i.e. threshold effect) 4. As violence increases, the impact of root causes/intervening factors will increase.
Data and Method
Data are from the Chitwan Valley Family Study (CVFS). The survey was based on a multistage cluster sample (N=3,802) of individuals in a rural area of Nepal. The CVFS survey included a monthly, longitudinal survey of respondents (1997-2006) and cross-sectional data on individuals and their households collected at baseline. Data on violent incidents (2002-2006) came from the South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP) and the Informal Sector Service Center (INSEC).
Dependent variable: Time-specific categorical measure of migration (0=No move; 1=within Chitwan, 2=Within Nepal, but outside Chitwan; 3=International). Key independent variable: Factor-based scale of 6 different violence measures (i.e. number of bomb blasts, number of casualties from bomb blasts, and number of casualties from major incidents for Chitwan and neighbouring districts). Incidents before 2002 and the State of Emergency were assumed to equal 0.
Data were analysed using multinomial logistic regression models controlling for age, sex, marital status, and ethnicity, measures of physical and human capital (e.g. education, owns farmland, household goods), plus measures of social capital or chain migration (e.g. migration by other household members at baseline)
1. The effects of violence differed by destination; i.e. the effects of violence increased with the distance of the move. Violence had the strongest effect on international migration. 2. Standard predictors of migration also mattered, irrespective of the level of violence. In other words, violence does not increase or decrease the effects of other contributing factors. 3. Differing levels of violence have different effects on migration. Low levels of violence reduce the changes of migration, but increases in the severity of violence increase migration. This is consistent with prior studies that have observed some threshold effects.