Loading…
The Role of political and civic leadership leaders in State reconstruction
1
Transcript
The Role of Political and Civic Leadership in State Reconstruction
Horn Economic and Social Policy Institute
(an independent think tank working on the Horn Africa)
Governance and Leadership for Senior Government
Officials of Somalia and South Sudan,
Dec 9, 2013, Addis Ababa
Costantinos Berhutefa Costantinos, PhD
Professor of Comparative Public Policy, Graduate School, AAU & Trustee, Africa Humanitarian Action
Shewit Wolde Michael, IPPS MA Candidate
A fragile state is one that “has weak capacity to carry out basic functions of governing a population and its territory, and lacks the ability to develop mutually constructive and reinforcing relations with society”. States are fragile when “state structures lack political will and/or capacity to provide the basic functions needed for poverty reduction, development and to safeguard the security and human rights of their populations” (OECD/DAC, 2007). A state with a well-developed political process for matching services to expectations and for generating compliance with state obligations – can be fragile if its organizational capabilities are extremely low, or its resource base extremely thin (OECD, 2008a:19).
Why is State Building an Important arena of Political Theory & Public Policy?
It is widely accepted that the achievement of peace, stability and development requires effective and legitimate states able to fulfill their responsibilities of providing basic social services and security to citizens (OECD, 2008a). Though states have the central responsibility for insuring the security of their citizens and providing services, states can also be a source of insecurity, characterized by state fragility or collapse, which is manifested by violent disorder, conflict, lawlessness, and collapse of basic services.
There is growing concern among politicians, development agencies and academicians about weak, fragile, or failing states. This concern has been mainly driven by the recognition that fragile states serve as a base for terrorist groups, organized crime and other international security threats. Concern over the inability of fragile states to provide basic social services and security to their own citizens has also been widely recognized (OECD, 2008a: 11).
Security and development require resilient states that are able to fulfill their responsibilities to their citizens. Successful state building will contribute to human security, development and international stability. State building is a critically important though a highly challenging endeavor.
While most African states are considered fragile, Somalia is the most fragile with some indices going as far as categorizing it as a failed state. Followed by Somalia, DRC is a fragile state while South Sudan is the newest African state with the least developed state institutions. Egypt on the other hand has now become one of the fragile states in Africa.
What is state failure?
- The fundamental failure of the state to perform core functions necessary to meet the basic needs of its citizens characterizes failure.
- Such states are incapable of ensuring basic security for their citizens and are unable to maintain the rule of law and justice.
- Fragile states are also incapable of providing basic social services and economic opportunities to their citizens. The state also often lacks legitimacy and support from a significant amount of the population.
- The most severe form of state fragility is witnessed when all of these features are in play. Such a situation may lead to state collapse unless the state manages to ensure its legitimacy, provide the rule of law and justice and build its capabilities in delivering basic social services and infrastructure by establishing its income base.
- Since the end of the cold war, fragile states are considered to be a primary concern for global security as they are said to be ‘safe havens’ for terrorist groups (Lou: 209).
Analytical limitations in State Reconstruction in crises societies
- Dearth of paradigms for crisis states capacity building
- Naïve realism in understanding of crises states
- Inattention to problems of articulation of reversing state crises
- Civil society - agent or object of humanitarianism
- The role of New Global Donors in Crises States
The notion of naïve realism in the rhetorical over-simplification of the articulation of the state is invoked as the first mark of transition to ‘democratizing the state’ to point to certain conceptual shortcomings rent on political reforms perspectives in Africa.
Still another expression of naïve realism in existing perspectives and projects of humanitarianism is the common assumption that the proliferation of Northern non-governmental organizations is in and of itself an index of democratization of aid. They provide a range of social, humanitarian and relief services of varying proximity and relevance but do not function simply as instruments to those ends. They have their own inclinations, concerns and motivations.
A large part of the donor, NGO community and civil society organizations constitutes a parallel network of patronage and rent-seeking activity that coincides and diverges from the state network, depending on circumstances. Just as in the case of the state network, this network is also oiled by funds and guidelines from abroad. Leadership positions are used for personal enrichment and for the establishment of patronage networks. This structure is fundamentally inimical to the establishment of an effective and strong state, hence, African states have been given names such as neo-patrimonial, prebendal, vampire and various other exotic names.
Rationale, Research
Questions & Objectives of the Research
State building and the reconstruction of states has necessitated empirical research in the areas that guides national policies and the intervention of bilateral, regional and international organizations in fragile situations. Policy making in fragile situations requires accurate, deep and timely knowledge of the situation on the ground. This is because incorporating the risks of state fragility and the challenges and prospects of state building into various policy considerations would shift the policies in fragile states from a curative approach to a preventive approach. Currently, academic researches focus on curative measures through stabilization operations undertaken in post-conflict situations rather than on state building which is more effective in building a resilient state in the long run (Lou: 215).
Research Questions
- What are the trajectories of state fragility?
- What are the challenges of state building in fragile states?
- What are the measures taken to stem state failure?
- What are the good practices in state building in Africa?
- What is the role of leadership in public finance management?
Far more critical in determining both the level and quality of dialogue and strategic arenas is the political and economic context in which crisis states find themselves.
The concept of state fragility
- The concept of state fragility that originated in the political science field has seen a generalization across very different situations and problems in recent years. Providing a definition for the concept that could be accepted by different scholars, development agencies and governments has thus become problematic.
- DfID defines fragile states as occurring where ‘the government cannot or will not deliver core functions to the majority of its people, including the poor’, where core functions include service entitlements, justice and security (DFID 2005)
- USAID defines ‘states in crisis’ as those in which the ‘central government does not exert significant control over its own territory or is unable or unwilling to assure the provision of vital services to significant parts of its territory where legitimacy of the government is weak or non-existent, and where violent conflict is a reality or a great risk’ (USAID, 2005: 1)
- The World Bank identifies fragile states by weak performance on the Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA). Within this, it distinguishes a typology of business models, based on the extent of consensus between donors and government on development strategy, and the pace and direction of change. Such states ‘share a common fragility, in two particular respects’:
- first, they have ‘weak state policies and institutions: undermining the countries’ capacity to deliver services to their citizens, control corruption, or provide for sufficient voice and accountability’; and
- second, they risk ‘conflict and political instability’ (World Bank, 2005, p. 1).
Indicators of state fragility
- Authority failure occurs when the state lacks the authority to protect its citizens from violence of various kinds. This can take place when state authority does not extend to a significant portion of the country, due to high rate of criminality, political instability, ineffective justice system and corruption.
- Socioeconomic entitlement failure is witnessed when the state fails to ensure that all citizens have access to key services, such as basic education, health services, water and sanitation, energy and transport infrastructure as well as sufficient income to access these services.
- Legiatmacy failures is a situation where the state enjoys only limited support among the people
Out of the 79 poorest countries of the world – 39 are currently in Africa. Moreover, the majority of countries affected by state fragility are located in the same region.
Three factors have directly contributed to African state fragility linked to the colonial era state formation in Africa.
- The first is the overwhelming military imposition of state institutions that are socially and culturally different in character from the administrative institutions in the colonized territories. These institutions transplanted institutional structures that were adopted for the local context (Kaplan, 2009).
- The second reason is that state institutions were designed for the purpose of extraction and transfer of resources to the colonial power rather than fostering local development.
- Third, state institutions were designed to have tight economic and political linkage with the colonial powers, which continues to create problems of dependency.
Models of state building
- There are three models of state-building.
- legitimacy and accountability of states through democratic governance by holding elections and constitutional processes;
- economic liberalization;
- strengthening the capacity of states to fulfill core functions in order to reduce poverty (OECD-DAC, 2008);
- These activities are seen as essential for the development of ‘reciprocal relations between a state that delivers services for its people and social and political groups who constructively engage with their state’ (ibid).
- This ‘responsive’ model of state-building is distinguishable from ‘unresponsive’ state-building, which is characterized by rent-seeking and political repression and can lead to conflict (Whaites, 2008).
State legitimacy: States are legitimate when they have gained “the basis for rule by consent rather than by coercion.” (OECD, 2010c:).There are four main sources of legitimacy (OECD. 2011:32). These include:
- Input /process legitimacy relates to the observance of agreed rules of procedure through which the state takes binding decisions and organizes people’s participation.
- Output /performance legitimacy depends on perceptions about state performance, and the effectiveness and quality of the services delivered. The ability to provide security, basic social services and an enabling framework for economic development and employment are fundamental.
- Shared beliefs are shared narratives about what public authority should be, which is shaped by tradition, historical processes of collective identities, and structures of socialization. These include nationalism, culture, religion, and ethnicity. Legitimacy based on charisma is part of this.
- International legitimacy derives from recognition of the state’s sovereignty and legitimacy by external actors. This may also be a source of internal legitimacy, or may conflict with it. To have a positive effect, international legitimacy has to resonate with internal notions of legitimacy.
Key functions of leaders in a resilient state
- The delivery of security
- Ensure the rule of law
- Revenue and expenditure management
- Economic management
Key issues in the leadership of state capability:
- State capability refers to “the state’s capacity to provide services, including security, and to secure revenue from its population and territory to provide these services.”(OECD, 2011:35)
- Legal and political proviso
- Provide security, enforce the law and protect its citizens by centralizing the legitimate use of force in order to protect its citizens and the territorial integrity from internal and/or external threats;
- Make laws, provide justice and resolve conflicts through lawful means. The capacity to contain and resolve conflict, adjudicate through the independent, impartial, consistent, predictable and equal application of the law;
- Raise, prioritize and expend revenues effectively and deliver basic services in line with social expectations;
- Facilitate economic development by creating an enabling framework for trade, investment, employment and economic growth.
Who is responsible
for capacity building?
- Does capacity building enter crisis states as an external ideology, constructing and deploying its concepts in sterile abstraction from the immediacies of indigenous traditions, beliefs and values?
- Do donors equate the articulation of ideas and agenda with the production of broad-based concepts, norms and goals that should govern their state building objectives?
- Which types of capacity (service delivery, justice systems, security sectors etc) should be built in the crisis phase and which over the medium to long term?
- How can donors, new and old, balance the need for rapid, visible results to consolidate peace against the equally urgent demand for institutional development?
- State capacity can be attained only if full accountability, transparency and predictability are assured. Invariably, this entails capacity building for political culture development even before people go to the polls for elections that may be harbingers of more violent protests.
- This is a process of institutional learning, in which state and societal organizations develop a new and stable set of mechanisms to manage conflict peacefully (Zambia, Nigeria, Sudan-South Sudan, etc.
- States and donors must be aware different kinds of organizations that play a leading role during different phases of crisis engagement. It is necessary to take a snap-shot of the organizational landscape, compiling a record of basic background data on all local organizations.
- It is clear that for states to play a significant role in humanitarian and peace and security arenas, a balance should be created where civil societies, which function as an effective counter-weight to the power of the state and its bureaucratic machinery, can check the excesses of the heavy handed bureaucratic rule and bring about change in the institutional arbitrariness and the illegal actions of the local agents of the state.
Drivers of International Partnership for State Reconstruction
Genesis:
The percept of international partnership, surrounding technological, scientific, economic, social, security and health partnership among African nations may be said to have formally emerged as a universal principle during the seventies and eighties.
Institutional & Techno-innovation
For instance AHA is collaborating with the NY based AvailaMed to improve healthcare delivery. Our initial project in Liberia is working to link all 42 AHA managed hospitals with one another in order to share patient information and data. Community health workers are also being equipped with GPS supported tablets to enable them collect, update and monitor real-time patient data.
CSO Fundraising:
PayPal, Twitter, facebook
CSO are using PayPal to engage the African Diaspora and those interested in our programs to contribute at an individual level via this secure and easy medium.
Thank You
NEPAD Chair, 2005 Summit
These questions underline the fact that academia & the international community often does not efficiently realize the potential of the ideas and goals we promote and that the volume of interventions is not nearly proportional to their impact, raises the issue of whether the ideas in question are constrained fundamentally at the moment of their conception by the very technocratic structures that ground their articulation.
The strategy and process proceed through two basic steps.
While the explicit concepts of
capacity they promote may be consistent with goals of enhancing local institutional and human capacities, the initiatives tend to work in narrow technocratic terms, equating technocratic rationality & capacity with institutional purposefulness and strength
- The first step consists of a description of the central component of innovative dialogue & partnership strategy in objective terms.
- The second step is analysis of the strategy - examination of its sources, elements, features and limitations and its implications for crisis states.
Research Objectives
The objectives of the research augur on analysis of
- challenges of state building in fragile states in Africa.
- the trajectories of state fragility in Africa.
- the impacts of and measures taken to stem state failure in Africa.
- good practices in state building in Africa.
costy@costantinos.net
Meeting social expectations: Social expectations refer to the belief citizens hold as to what the state should provide to its citizens (OECD, 2008c). There are
- “realistic expectations” and “normative expectations” with regard to how society perceives the state (OECD, 2010a: 37).
- Normative expectations “are based on beliefs and perceptions about what a state should look like, what it should deliver, and how it should relate to society “ based on “political contestation, ideology and beliefs” (ibid).
- Realistic expectations refer to what the population expects the state to deliver in reality, based on previous experience (ibid).
- Political will: Political will refers to the willingness of the government to direct state resources and capacity to fulfill social expectations.
- State responsiveness: States are responsive when they have the capability and will to deliver security, social services and justice according to the prevailing societal expectations.