From Hybridity to Standardization: Rethinking State-Making in Contexts of Fragility

Balthasar, Dominik

doi:10.1080/17502977.2015.993502

Cited by 17 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The notion of hybrid sovereignty is helpful in this exercise (see the work of Balthasar, 2015;Bierschenk and Olivier de Sardan, 1997;Hoffmann and Kirk, 2013;Kingston, 2004;Risse, 2013;Risse and Lehmkuhl, 2007;Scheye, 2009;Van Overbeek, 2014;Wickham-Crowley, 1987;Wiuff Moe, 2011). The idea of hybridity emphasizes the multiplicity and interactive nature of governance and stresses the symbiotic relation between what are often thought of as bounded political actors or separate institutional fields.…”

Section: Conceptualizing the State Beyond The Illusion Of Sovereigntymentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Political Order and the Politics of Uncertainty

Stel¹

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hybrid Political Order and the Politics of Uncertainty is the first comprehensive analysis of how institutional ambiguity shapes refugee governance. Nora Stel offers a nuanced reading of the proliferating modes of uncertainty that emerge both strategically and tactically at the intersection of local, national and international governance in Lebanon. The book explores the other side of knowledge, its institutional production, and its effects on subjectivity. It is a key text for those interested in what ignorance studies can offer to refugee studies.' -Claudia Aradau, Professor of International Politics at King's College London 'Stel's book navigates the alleyways of uncertainty that mold the lives of Palestinian and Syrian refugees in Lebanon. Through case studies in a country hosting the largest number of refugees per capita in the world, the book tackles often misconstrued notions of ambiguity and informality in refugee policy and research. It distinctly shows how institutional ambiguity is deliberately used as an instrument to hold refugees in a state of exceptionalism and constant temporariness. The book is a remarkable addition to the field of critical refugee studies.

show abstract

Section: Conceptualizing the State Beyond The Illusion Of Sovereigntymentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Political Order and the Politics of Uncertainty

Stel¹

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Against this backdrop, and in light of the fact that in contexts of fragility the “stated ‘rules of the game’ have near‐zero predictive power for what will actually happen” (Pritchett et al., 2018, p. 24; Slater, 2010), fragility amounts to a pervasive lack of predictability. Although, in international development discourse, institutional plurality and rule diversity have, at times, been celebrated (Boege et al., 2008), there is broad acceptance that contexts tend to be fragile if diverse and competing claims to power and logics of order coexist, compete, and intertwine–precisely because such institutional diversity undermines their innate purpose, thus accelerating volatility and uncertainty (Anderson, 1983; Balthasar, 2015; Mann, 1986). Consequently, high‐level working groups established to address the causes and consequences of fragility have acknowledged that in contexts of conflict and fragility “programming needs to deal with a high degree of uncertainty” (European Commission, 2015, p. 53).…”

Section: Fragility: a Paradigm Of Uncertaintymentioning

confidence: 99%

Futuring Fragility: Embracing uncertainty, identifying opportunity, unlocking development

Balthasar

2024

Development Policy Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

MotivationClose to a third of the world's population and more than 80% of people living in extreme poverty live in contexts of fragility. With agencies such as the OECD and UNDP conceiving of such places in terms of multiple and serious risks, the framing has come to be one of pathology: fragile contexts are defined by deficits with respect to idealized governance and sustainable development goals. In consequence, development options are locked into managing risks—confining opportunities to develop potential.PurposeCan strategic foresight unlock the development potential of fragile societies?Approach and methodsBecause there is still little documentation of foresight initiatives in contexts of fragility, the approach here is theoretical and conceptual. We draw on literature from the fields of fragility, foresight, and cognition, as well as insights from expert exchanges and roundtables.FindingsIt is uncertainty, not risk, that lies at the heart of fragility—an insight that challenges standard decision‐making. With the latter being based on analogical reasoning, it cannot be logically applied under conditions of uncertainty. If, instead, we adopt an heuristic for decision‐making that acknowledges uncertainty to not only entail risk but also opportunity, strategic foresight is well‐placed to help revive development.Policy ImplicationsFirst, fragility has to be reframed to acknowledge the centrality of uncertainty, not risk, in approaching fragility. Whilst evidence from the past is important, scrutinizing past paradigms and envisioning different futures is crucial.Second, strategic foresight can help uncover fragile societies’ capacities and potential. It can help shift from analyses dominated by a concern with lacks and deficits, to analyses which seek relative strengths and opportunities. Just as strong states are not strong in every respect, fragile states may have more to offer than meets the eye.Third, debates need to be more open, less ideologically laden. Dominant thinking on fragility is rife with seemingly imperturbable underpinnings: for example, the mantra that “without peace there can be no development, and without development there can be no peace.” While such propositions contain some truth, treating them as absolute and universally applicable, limits both thinking and policy options. Strategic foresight is well placed to provide a fresh view on fragility.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, a better capture of the specificity of forming the statehood of fragile states seems to be possible thanks to the so-called theory of "institutional and identity standardization". Rooted in the existing concepts of shaping statehood, the analytical idea of "standardization of rules" is original because it combines the issues of building statehood with shaping the foundations of national identity, as well as the problems of state-making and state-breaking, corresponding to the constructive transformation of the political transformation • Hybrid Regimes and Political (Dis)Order of fragile states and conditioning stabilization of their socio-political situation of the country (Balthasar, 2015).…”

Section: The "Hybrid Paradox Theory": Toward An Institutional and Ide...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Regimes and Political (Dis)Order

Ficek

2023

HiP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper studies the concept of “hybrid regimes”, not so much in defining and authenticating their functionality but, above all, to exhibit them as so-called “partial” constitutional concepts. Articulating the tensions, divergences, and antagonisms characteristic of these regimes, as well as highlighting the blurring boundaries between democratic systems and authoritarianism “with adjectives”, emphasizes the importance of the examined issues. The author introduces an alternative conceptualization and typology of hybrid regimes and a configurational approach. Instead of placing political regimes on a linear continuum – from authoritarianism to democracy – multidimensional solutions facilitating an alternative typology of the analyzed concepts have been exposed. The configuration approach, however, provides an analytically valuable way to evaluate and integrate hybrid regimes with other classification schemes. Such innovations, therefore, help alleviate conceptual confusion in the literature. Moreover, deepening the understanding of the concept of hybrid regimes, along with emphasizing its conceptual ambiguities and complexity – especially concerning the “politically correct” discourse on the current problems of fragile and politically unstable states – is necessary to better understand the complex and confusing nature of modern regimes of power frequently operating in the most politically unstable regions of the contemporary world.

show abstract

From Hybridity to Standardization: Rethinking State-Making in Contexts of Fragility

Cited by 17 publications

References 55 publications

Hybrid Political Order and the Politics of Uncertainty

Hybrid Political Order and the Politics of Uncertainty

Futuring Fragility: Embracing uncertainty, identifying opportunity, unlocking development

Hybrid Regimes and Political (Dis)Order

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About