Understanding War Through Data: The Ultimate Conflict Analysis Collection

After nearly three decades of relative détente, geopolitical upheaval is once again placing war data analysis at the forefront.

While the bipolar USA-China system had already been challenged by Russia’s resurgence with the invasion of Ukraine, today’s landscape is even more uncertain. Indeed, the American apparent disengagement from international affairs raises many questions about the future of foreign policy, alongside the possible structure the system will undertake in the medium-long period.

As expert opinions and political statements abound, it becomes increasingly important to clarify historical data on warfare. Understanding the world around us today, somehow unluckily, requires awareness of the various types of conflicts, their human and economic impact, and the methodologies used to build reliable datasets on large-scale violence.

The DataHub.io team has curated a collection of prime-level databases enabling anyone to deepen their understanding of global conflict trends. This initiative not only fuels the democratization process of such crucial data but also empowers journalists and experts in shaping informed narratives about large-scale conflicts.

1. Why is data about war important?

We are often led to think that war is a simple concept: from playing with toy soldiers as children to hearing about it frequently on television, it is perhaps one of the concepts we are most familiar with. Yet, in reality, armed conflicts are much more complex than they may seem at first glance.

Statistics about systemic large-scale violence have evolved over time, increasingly incorporating variables related to economics, technological resources, and territorial insights - especially linked to soil resources and manpower. Just to give you an idea, numbers themselves have been shaping even the very definition of war per se for several decades in peace and conflict research.

The standard definition of interparty violence still indicates conflict as a clash between two specific parties causing at least 25 deaths in battle per year; if the casualties exceed 1,000 in one year, then the conflict is classified as a war. This standardization of war’s definition by Singer et al. “The Wages of War” (1972) still holds both as a blueprint for contemporary research efforts and as an example of clear definition criteria to international relations theory-building.

Starting from the definition, therefore, numbers define a war’s nature, as well as its impacts on states and civilian populations. Considering the figures linked to systemic violence becomes the only way to understand phenomena that often seem too vast to grasp with mere intuition.

War data has become even more central since populations have been systemically involved in conflicts - both as victims of attacks, whether lawful or not, and as the driving force behind the wartime economies. With the strengthening of collective war efforts against third parties, war has increasingly become an issue that directly concerns the entire population. For this reason, we believe that the entire population should be able to form an independent understanding of the implications of large-scale violence.

Sadly yet fortunately, war-related statistics are among those that receive the most media coverage, which is further supported by numerous open-source sources and countless specialized studies. The constant work of frontline reporters and academics usually allows civilians to have at least a basic understanding of the trajectory of a war, complementing the numbers with narrative and emotional aspects that help grasp the horrors associated with it.

But what if mass media coverage overlooks certain aspects of war that interest us? And most importantly, how can we find reliable numbers about past conflicts, which are no longer at the center of attention?

2. The identikit of our War and Peace collection

Luckily enough, several tools collect in-depth figures on wars and their correlated variables. And DataHub.io has gathered the most relevant and reliable ones in one compact and homogeneous collection that anybody can consult.

In practice, we are talking about three highly influential databases on war and conflicts. We aim to provide our community with a reliable and encompassing overview of armed conflicts that shaped international relations through centuries of events and long-term developments.

In this section, we will go through the content of the War and Peace collection’s components:

• The Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP);
• The Correlates of War Project (COW);
• Brecke’s conflict catalog.

The Uppsala Conflict Data Program

The Uppsala Conflict Data Program has a long history dating back to almost 40 years of collecting data about wars and conflicts. It comprehends an open-source and easy-to-be-read rationalization of the adopted definitions and a detailed, yet clear methodological notes section that allows for replication and eventual confutation of any presented data analysis.

The project, encompassing the most diverse initiatives from research projects up to a podcast series on researching peace, stands as one of the main points of reference for the academic community on peace and conflict studies. And it’s easy to understand why.

It encompasses:

• 23 datasets on conflicts, classified into four groups. Each of them comes with a complete list of historical subsequent versions of the same dataset.

  • Disaggregated datasets;
  • Yearly datasets covering the 1946-2023 and 1989-2023 periods;
  • Other datasets, including for instance data on organized violence within country borders, peacemakers at risk, and violent political protests.

• 17 pre-crafted maps and data visualization, mostly under Creative Commons license;

• Replication datasets, ie, links to several cases in which the UCDP data were re-used or quoted in other research, offering an overview on the knowledge-building process around conflict and wars.

Correlates of War Project

The Correlates of War Project (COW) is deeply embedded in the study of international relations, having been established in 1963 by renowned political scholar J.D. Singer and later joined by historian M. Small. Their goal was to create a cohesive and practical dataset on war. From its inception, the project has placed a strong emphasis on labelling methodology, clearly defining fundamental concepts such as “war” and “state” to build a solid foundation for analyzing large-scale armed conflicts.

One of the most significant components of the COW project is the “War Data, 1816–2007 (v4.0),” which provides extensive information on conflicts dating back to the post-Napoleonic era. This dataset is particularly valuable as it includes detailed academic descriptions of each variable, coding rules, and the modifications made over time. It comprehensively covers various types of conflicts, including:

• Non-state wars;
• Intra-state wars;
• Inter-state wars;
• Dyadic inter-state war datasets.

Beyond this noteworthy section, the project offers a diverse range of additional resources, including:

• COW Country Codes;
• Territorial-related variables: direct contiguity, colonial/dependency contiguity, territorial change
• International relations data: diplomatic exchange, trade, state system membership, intergovernmental organizations, defense cooperation agreements, formal alliances
• Militarized interstate disputes and their locations
• Socio-economic indicators: national material capabilities, world religion data

With its comprehensive scope and meticulous methodology, the COW project remains a cornerstone for scholars analyzing war dynamics and international relations.

Brecke Conflict catalog

Professor Peter Brecke of the Georgia Institute of Technology has been developing a conflict catalog as part of an initiative to create a computerized Conflict early warning or alert system (CAS). Drawing a parallel between advancements in peace and conflict research and the state of cancer treatment in the 1960s, he advocates for a rigorous classification of conflict types. His work centers on fostering a deeper understanding of the relationships between the structure of the international system and the dynamics of violent conflict.

The project originated in 1998 as an effort to develop a predictive model and, as noted in the catalog’s 2012 presentation, was still expected to grow by an additional 20%. Initially designed to assess the impact of international conflicts on global structures, particularly in relation to the then-dominant realist theories of international relations, it ultimately inspired research leading to two key papers:

• Violent Conflicts 1400 A.D. to the Present in Different Regions of the World by P. Brecke, presented at the 1999 Peace Science Society.
• The Long-Term Patterns of Violent Conflict in Different Regions of the World by P. Brecke, presented at the 2001 Uppsala Conflict Data Conference.

This initiative has significantly contributed to the field of conflict research, shaping discussions on predictive modeling and the classification of global conflicts.

3. Who can benefit from these datasets?

The era of imperial peace under the American-dominated international system has definitively ended. A tripolar or multipolar order now looms, heightening the risk of a third world war and raising alarm across all sectors of society. The Geopolitical Risk Index has surged since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and in a 2024 World Economic Forum survey, 83% of respondents identified geopolitical tensions as the primary threat to global economic growth in 2025. A striking example? Five billionaires who attended Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration have collectively lost nearly $210 billion as of March 11, 2025 (source: ANSA).

Access to the War and Peace data collection on international conflicts is valuable for a wide range of individuals.

• Concerned citizens who wish to gain a deeper understanding of global affairs can benefit from such information, whether they seek a clearer picture of the near future or simply have a general interest in warfare, military strategies, and armaments.
• Business owners also have a strong incentive to monitor geopolitical developments, as large-scale conflicts can significantly impact industries, affecting supply chains, market stability, and long-term investments.
• For professionals engaged in conflict research and analysis, open-source datasets on war and conflict represent an invaluable resource. Experts, researchers, and journalists can thus rely on credible sources to produce reliable analyses, shaping both academic discourse and public understanding.

Effectively leveraging and combining the resources provided by the three leading projects on conflict data is the stepping stone not only to crafting high-level narratives, but also to form a personal opinion based on fact. In an era of rising instability, access to sound conflict data has never been more crucial.

4. Recap table

📥 Get the Data & Start Exploring → Download now

Interested in other ground-breaking dataset collections? Discover 5 databases to fall in love with immediately!