Conflictvity Index

In the first half of 2016, the number of incidents in the Collective Action dimension (259 incidents) greatly increased compared to the same period in 2015 (105 incidents) by 147%. Also, 85% of these incidents were classified as Policy Conflicts that relate to political decisions, policies, and laws. Additionally, 23% of Collective Actions were also related to conflicts relevant to Socio-Economic Development.
The regions of Beirut and Tripoli had the highest intensity of Collective Action. In Beirut alone there were 104 incidents of Collective Action mapped during this period, with 85% of these related to policy conflicts such as the waste management crisis, corruption, general amnesty, among others.
Baabda and Saida regions saw moderate levels of Collective Action intensity, mainly relevant to conflicts of Socio-Economic Development. In both districts, such incidents were mainly related to Palestinian refugees protesting due to their lack of access to resources.
The Conflictivity Index is a tool developed by Lebanon Support, in partnership with the United Nations Development Programme, based on the “Geo-located Mapping of Conflicts in Lebanon,” and using its data. Through the use of heat maps, the Conflictivity Index aims to give a broad overview of conflict intensity in Lebanon, focusing on 4 dimensions: Armed Conflict, Security, State Response, and Collective Action. Each dimension is comprised of a number of categories from the “Geo-located Mapping of Conflicts in Lebanon” and highlights the intensity of conflictuality associated with mapped incidents in each caza. To further explore each conflict incident category, refer to the “Geo-located Mapping of Conflicts in Lebanon.”


The Collective Action dimension encompasses mobilisations, including protests, sit-ins, strikes, solidarity movements, etc., within Lebanon. This dimension includes diverse collective actions relevant to policy, social discrimination, or socio-economic grievances. It can thus carry a negative conflictivity index value (low intensity of conflict) since it attests to the population’s freedom to mobilise and organise, and it may counter dynamics of conflictuality.