There is speculation among the press and aid agencies that DR Congo may be close to returning to widespread conflict. I've written before that earlier war in the country was an economic disaster. To recap, a war can lead to incomes which are lower by around US$1000 per person per year than they would have been. Over ten years, that's $10,000. For a population of 80 million, that's $800 billion.
One of the reasons that war is economically disastrous is that business operations are badly hit. With a very few exceptions, such as arms smugglers, it is hard for business to prosper during war time. Of course, there are wider economic consequences to consumers and government, and effects in the long term through changes in labour, education, and investment, but let's stay on business for the moment.
War can affect business operations by interfering with a firm's ability to identify new opportunities. Familiarity with, and knowledge of, an environment is an important way for business people to find such opportunities. When an environment changes radically under war, then business people's ability to identify opportunities is diminished. Any search procedures to identify opportunities - for example, by touring local markets, or surveys - may become dangerous or impossible. Further, the number of opportunities is likely to fall as well, as markets are disrupted. While the changing environment due to conflict will bring some new opportunities, the disruption of markets established over a much longer period seems almost certain to lead to large net loss of opportunities.
Additionally, formerly attractive opportunities may not be worth the risk after conflict starts. Capital is likely to be in short supply during wartime, driving up its cost. Extra risk, such as that brought by war, is usually compensated by higher returns as well. If an opportunity's expected return is the same or lower when conflict starts as before, then it may no longer meet the required investor return, and so not happen.
Another reason for war's effect on business operations is that it interferes with the ability of businesses to plan. War brings increased uncertainty about the future - the actions of the combatants are unknown, and future events that were previously likely may be disrupted. A planner would have to guess about the future to a greater extent, and additionally have to include the actions of the combatants. The number of future events the planner would have to consider would be much wider, and costlier to examine in full if that is even possible.
The ability to find solutions to any opportunities is also hampered by conflict. Earlier ways of formulating ideas may no longer be readily possible or suitable. For example, a company which previously examined the practices of other companies may find that those practices are no longer as visible, or the practices are no longer applicable in the wartime economy. If solutions are proposed, then testing their viability may be difficult, with methods such as surveys or limited launches likely to be more expensive during war.
What's more, war can interfere with a company's ability to implement any proposed solutions. Finance may be not accessible even if required returns can be met, and the available workforce is likely to smaller. Fixed capital stock would be a target for looting. Networks of potential business collaborators may be reduced in size.
Overall, then: war is bad news for business operations.