Search

Begin New Search Topic Fragile States Publication Year within 10 Years

41. External Authority - Compensation for Limited Statehood in the Provision of Collective Goods?

Author:
Luisa Linke-Behrens and Lisa van Hoof-Maurer
Publication Date:
07-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Collaborative Research Center (SFB) 700
Abstract:
The vast majority of areas of limited statehood are subject to the authority of external actors, be it the IMF or regional organizations. These actors typically provide authority structures – institutions and rules – that are complementary or alternative to the state’s domestic authority structures. It is reasonable to assume that these external actors may either deliver collective goods directly, or the authority structures provided by them might work indirectly to that effect. In this paper, we systematically investigate whether external authority compensates for limited statehood with regard to collective goods provision. Our analysis shows that this is not the case. On the contrary, in fragile states with extremely limited or even absent statehood, the presence of external authority in domestic authority structures seems to have the opposite effect and is associated with poor collective goods provision.
Topic:
Fragile States, Political structure, Statehood, and Authority
Political Geography:
Global Focus

42. Xi Jinping’s Maoist Revival

Author:
Suisheng Zhao
Publication Date:
07-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Democracy
Institution:
National Endowment for Democracy
Abstract:
After making himself one of the most powerful leaders in PRC history, Xi Jinping launched the largest ideological campaign that China has seen since Mao—a mixture of communism, nationalism, and Leninism that is meant to strengthen and discipline the CCP, reinforce its grip on power, maintain political stability, and (more nebulously) achieve the “China dream” of national rejuvenation. Xi’s ideological gambit now looks less like a show of strength than an embarrassing confession of regime fragility in a twenty-first century China buffeted by fears of economic slowdown, impatient liberals, and a public angered by rampant corruption.
Topic:
Communism, Nationalism, Fragile States, and Political stability
Political Geography:
China and Asia

43. A Better Approach to Fragile States

Author:
John Norris
Publication Date:
06-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
Today, the world is groaning under the weight of unresolved crises, wars, terrorism, and the demands of dealing with more than 65 million people who have been forcibly displaced around the globe. Paradoxically, as recently as five years ago, the international community was quietly celebrating historic progress in reducing serious conflict, the number of people forced to migrate, and deaths on the battlefield. Concerted efforts toward conflict prevention, resolution, and peace building were paying real dividends.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, International Cooperation, Fragile States, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus

44. State Legitimacy, Fragile States, and U.S. National Security

Author:
CAP National Security and International Policy
Publication Date:
09-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
When the 45th president of the United States takes office in 2017, he or she will inherit a century-old mantle of global leadership. The new president will immediately confront questions about America’s influence in the world and its ability to protect American interests and maintain global peace and stability. Today, some of the greatest threats to U.S. national security originate from the very forces of growing interconnectedness that the post-World War II order has enabled. For years, global businesses and expanding communications have been connecting the peoples and nations of the world together at faster and faster rates, and these changes have produced tremendous opportunities and prosperity in the United States and around the world. But at the same time, the rise of global interconnectedness means that it has become easier for transnational security threats—from terrorism to organized crime—to spread. These threats, which increasingly overlap to comprise an illicit world that parallels the state system, put at risk the international system that has upheld peace and prosperity. In addition, other transnational threats—from climate change to health pandemics—increasingly threaten the United States and countries around the world and require coordinated, effective efforts to tackle them. The majority of these threats originate in or are exacerbated by areas where a state’s citizens do not see their government as legitimate, or where legitimate governments are unable to extend their lawful powers across their entire geographies. From states in open conflict in the Middle East to states in Latin America and Africa that still struggle with vast ungoverned territories, the lack of legitimate governing institutions is an invitation for illicit transnational forces to grow. Terrorists find their greatest safe haven in countries where governments cannot or will not control their territory; pandemic diseases go undetected and untreated due to governments not properly addressing health care needs; organized criminal groups can create regional and global networks when corrupt governments are complicit or absent; and climate change wreaks even greater havoc when there is no effective government to take steps to mitigate the threats. The missing links in all of these cases are legitimate governing institutions that can reflect the will of their people, respond to their needs, and extend their authority across the entire populace.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, National Security, Military Strategy, Fragile States, and Legitimacy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

45. Fixing fragile states: a country-based framework

Author:
Seth Kaplan
Publication Date:
11-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Centre for Conflict Resolution
Abstract:
Although there is growing awareness in the development field of the need to better assess fragile states and customise policies to their particular needs, there has been limited progress in these areas. The new Country Fragility Assessment Framework, which systematically examines the societal and institutional sources of fragility, can help decision-makers make more precise diagnoses and better target interventions. It builds on the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States, but offers a more comprehensive framework to assess the forces that can drive a society together or apart. It does this by analysing 12 societal and institutional sources of fragility. The combination of poor social cohesion and poor institutionalisation yields a vicious cycle as instability and underdevelopment feed each other. Social divisions hamper efforts to improve governance and foster economic opportunity, which in turn create discontent and a zero-sum struggle for power and resources. As such, change must target one of these two elements. Even though the framework does not directly provide solutions, it can be used to suggest policy options that are most likely to work, or at least rule out some that will surely fail.
Topic:
Civil Society, Development, Fragile States, and Institutionalism
Political Geography:
Global Focus