|PSU dummies|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Year dummies|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|
|Women controls|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|
|Partner controls|No|No|No|No|No|No|No|No|No|
|Observations|2,315|2,315|1,678|2,258|411|2,315|2,315|2,290|2,222|
|R-squared|0.146|0.147|0.187|0.145|0.435|0.145|0.146|0.142|0.137|

**_Intensity of violence._** Our measure for conflict classifies the intensity of conflict into low, medium, and strong intensity districts in terms of number of events. It follows that this measure does not indicate the degree of violence associated with these events. To account for that, we include the number of fatalities as an additional control, both on its own and interacted with the difference-in-difference estimators. Results are presented in Table 4, and as shown in column 2, the effect of medium exposure to conflict on FDI remains positive and statistically significant, while strong exposure to conflict leads to no change in FDI compared to low exposure districts. The interaction term with the number of fatalities is positive, but it is not statistically significant. This means that all medium conflict districts have witnessed an increase in FDI compared to low conflict districts regardless of the number of fatalities that have occurred.

**_Additional controls._** Our main specification is rich with district and individual controls. Nevertheless, there could be other factors affecting the results that have been excluded.

Firstly, we include the number of children living in the households, which could affect women’s ability to participate in decision making, especially if these decisions are related to their needs. This data was not complete when collected in 2014 and thus excluded from the main specification. However, when controlling for this in column 3 we see the results do not change.

Another factor is whether the household head is polygamous or not. Having multiple wives can be associated with a limited ability of a given wife to decide on related household matters. However, polygamous households represent a tiny fraction of the sample (2.5%), and are unlikely to be driving results. Nevertheless, in column 4, we exclude polygamous households and find that the estimated coefficient for medium conflict districts has actually slightly increased. This implies that the main result is not driven by polygamous households.

Finally, we focus on interview conditions and test whether the presence of the woman’s husband or other men during the interview might have affected the women’s responses. In column 5, we limit the analysis to a small sub-sample of women who have been interviewed privately. We still find that women in medium conflict district have a higher participation in decision-making, but the effect is not statistically significant. However, this is likely due to the smaller sample size of 411 women who were privately interviewed.

**_Measures of conflict._** For the main specification, the measure for conflict intensity is constructed by summing up the number of violent events over the period 2015-2021 at the district level. To check the sensitivity of the results to time variation in conflict occurrences, we recalculate our

17