Table 4: Lagged dependent variable model - Disaggregated consumption, nonfood spending, Tropical livestock Units (TLU), and a summary index _Z_ that aggregates information over the five main dependent variables (Kling et al, 2007).

||∆Log<br>expenditu|cons.<br>res per AE|∆Log c<br>stocks|ons. from<br>per AE|∆Log n<br>spending|onfood<br>per AE|∆Log<br>Live|Tropical<br>stock|∆<br>(Kling et|_Z_<br>al, 2007)|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||(1)|(2)|(3)|(4)|(5)|(6)|(7)|(8)|(9)|(10)|
|_Ex-combatant return in HH_|||||||||||
|CNDD+factions (_R_<sup>_CNDD_+</sup><br>_i_<br>)|0.306|0.069|-0.056|-0.007|0.431|0.181|0.016|0.014|0.131|0.068|
||(0.204)|(0.164)|(0.276)|(0.270)|(0.382)|(0.404)|(0.042)|(0.047)|(0.190)|(0.198)|
|FNL factions (_R_<sup>_FNL_</sup><br>_i_<br>)|0.141|0.158|-0.335|-0.394|-0.243|-0.261|-0.062<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.068<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.086|-0.110|
||(0.215)|(0.217)|(0.461)|(0.417)|(0.311)|(0.317)|(0.015)|(0.019)|(0.203)|(0.186)|
|_Demobilized in HH_|||||||||||
|CNDD+factions (_D_<sup>_CNDD_+</sup><br>_i_<br>)|-0.869<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.775<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.015|-0.059|-1.279<sup>∗∗</sup>|-1.158<sup>∗</sup>|0.016|-0.013|-0.341|-0.321|
||(0.312)|(0.256)|(0.480)|(0.503)|(0.583)|(0.684)|(0.047)|(0.041)|(0.225)|(0.232)|
|FNL factions (_D_<sup>_FNL_</sup><br>_i_<br>)|0.611<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.510<sup>∗∗</sup>|0.766|0.894<sup>∗</sup>|1.657<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|1.593<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.077<sup>∗</sup>|0.098<sup>∗∗</sup>|0.686<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.719<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|
||(0.227)|(0.246)|(0.522)|(0.486)|(0.388)|(0.424)|(0.046)|(0.046)|(0.221)|(0.218)|
|_# of demobilized in the hill (p_|_er 1000 in_|_hab.)_|||||||||
|CNDD+factions (_S _<sup>_CNDD_+</sup><br>_i_<br>)|-0.022<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.020<sup>∗∗</sup>|-0.002|-0.016|-0.049<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.042<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.003<sup>∗∗</sup>|-0.001<sup>∗</sup>|-0.020<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.020<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|
||(0.008)|(0.008)|(0.017)|(0.013)|(0.010)|(0.012)|(0.001)|(0.001)|(0.006)|(0.006)|
|FNL factions (_S _<sup>_FNL_</sup><br>_i_<br>)|0.020<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.020<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.015|0.013|0.031<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.031<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.002<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.002<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.015<sup>∗∗</sup>|0.016<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|
||(0.004)|(0.004)|(0.015)|(0.010)|(0.007)|(0.006)|(0.001)|(0.001)|(0.007)|(0.006)|
|_Lag_|||||||||||
|Lagged dependent variable|-0.789<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.833<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.858<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.889<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.794<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.837<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.858<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.878<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.759<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|-0.773<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|
||(0.038)|(0.040)|(0.042)|(0.041)|(0.040)|(0.040)|(0.056)|(0.050)|(0.040)|(0.042)|
|Constant|6.785<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|7.366<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|7.119<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|7.336<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|7.911<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|8.393<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.069<sup>∗∗∗</sup>|0.003|0.036|0.001|
||(0.333)|(0.352)|(0.379)|(0.505)|(0.365)|(0.414)|(0.007)|(0.028)|(0.083)|(0.169)|
|Controls|No|Yes|No|Yes|No|Yes|No|Yes|No|Yes|
|Province FE|No|Yes|No|Yes|No|Yes|No|Yes|No|Yes|
|Observations|985|974|796|786|857|850|968|952|690|683|
|_R_<sup>2</sup>|0.392|0.446|0.460|0.496|0.417|0.458|0.483|0.516|0.387|0.432|
|F-test (η1 =−β1) _p_-value|.15|.42|.45|.42|.72|.87|.3|.3|.87|.87|
|F-test (η2 =−β2) _p_-value|.45|.42|.3|.24|.54|.51|.15|.18|.24|.21|
|F-test(η3 =−β3) _p_-value|.78|.96|.48|.84|.18|.42|.54|.27|.57|.51|

_Notes:_ Authors’ analysis based on data described in the text. The table reports OLS estimates. The unit of observation is a household. This table relies on the second definition of demobilized ex-combatants ( _D_<sup>_CNDD_</sup> _i_<sup>+2</sup> and _Di_<sup>_FNL_2</sup> )): cross-checked self-reports and matches. Odd-numbered columns do not include control variables or fixed effects; the remaining columns include both. We report the _p_ -values of F-tests assessing whether the coefficients associated with CNDD+ and FNL variables are of similar size but of opposite sign. Controls include past violence, whether the household head changed, and the head’s sex, age, matrimonial status, education, and occupation. Outliers are excluded (as explained in Appendix B.1). Sampling weights are accounted for. Clustered-robust standard errors are in parentheses. * _p_ < 0.10, ** _p_ < 0.05, *** _p_ < 0.01 This finding is consistent with the theoretical framework, since at the time of the interviews, the demobilized FNLs were in the process of receiving the equivalent of 18-months’ salary in four cash installments. In a context of poorly functioning financial savings institutions,<sup>26</sup> none of the FNL households reported saving part of their allowance in financial assets. Instead, a large proportion of ex-FNLs reported buying consumption goods (46%), buying clothes (15%) and paying medical bills (8%). This observation is consistent with previous qualitative evidence from Burundi as well. Uvin (2007) showed that some ex-combatants, depending on the region they returned to, faced immediate needs such as building houses, paying medical bills, and buy-

> 26Our community data reveals the absence of formal financial institutions in 84% of the collines surveyed. Informal financial institutions are also scarce, with 87.5% of the collines lacking such associations.

21