International peace building and the emerging inclusivity norm

Donais, Timothy; McCandless, Erin

doi:10.1080/01436597.2016.1191344

Cited by 44 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…11 Language promoting inclusiveness can also be found in much earlier frameworks such as the IMF's (International Monitory Fund) and World Bank's PRSPs (Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers) or in the strategic frameworks for peacebuilding of the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission. The implementation of the New Deal has also seen obstruction against civil society's participation and the meaning of inclusiveness open for interpretation by actors and politics on the ground (Donais and McCandless 2017). The document can be downloaded at: http://www.newdeal4peace.org/wp-content/themes/newdeal/docs/new-deal-forengagement-in-fragile-states-en.pdf, last visit 11 December 2017.…”

Section: International Framework To Support Civil Society In Fragilementioning

confidence: 99%

Deconstructing Civil Society Actors and Functions: On the Limitations of International Frameworks for Fragile States

Datzberger

Nguyen

2018

Social Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past three decades, there has been a steady increase of funds by the international community to support civil society organizations (CSOs) in fragile states. Surprisingly, this growing attention has not strengthened local civil society landscapes in a way that it would lead to processes of social transformation. On the contrary, civic freedom and space is shrinking around the globe. In analyzing prominent international aid-effectiveness frameworks and donor strategies towards civil society, this paper will put forward one central argument. The way in which civil society actors and functions are currently appropriated threatens deep-rooted social transformation thereby impeding processes of structural and political change-necessary for the transition from conflict to sustainable peace. In delineating, how actors and functional approaches informed peacebuilding and development policy and practice, their strengths and limitations will be examined. Doing so, we draw on different case studies and examples from the literature. We find that existing frameworks for fragile states operate on a presumed model of a public sphere and civil society that may or may not exist. Such an approach disregards an organic formation of a civil society landscape thereby impeding processes of structural, social, and political change in times of fragility.

show abstract

Section: International Framework To Support Civil Society In Fragilementioning

confidence: 99%

Deconstructing Civil Society Actors and Functions: On the Limitations of International Frameworks for Fragile States

Datzberger

Nguyen

2018

Social Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Those conclusions seem to apply to members of the g7+ grouping of FCAS like Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan and Yemen. In those societies, variants of authoritarian politics, war and external intervention trump 2GSSR, despite their governments' formal adherence to the New Deal for Peacebuilding and Statebuilding (Donais and McCandless 2016). 2GSSR also seems a chimera in middle-income FCAS like Iraq, Libya and Syria, which are plagued by war and intervention.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our earlier (Baranyi and Salahub 2011) use of constructivism assumed that material relations of power were central to the social construction of SSR processes. Yet that understanding has been sidelined in the literature on FCAS, where scholars often use constructivism to underscore how formal and informal norms shape international processes (for example, Donais and McCandless 2016). Moreover, the notion of ' critical institutionalism' more clearly reveals its roots both in materialist critical theory (Cox 1987) and in the historical institutionalism of Evans et al (1985).…”

Section: Global Debates and Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Second-Generation SSR or Unending Violence in Haiti?

Baranyi

2019

Stability: International Journal of Security and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the literature on security sector reform (SSR), there is a debate between mainstream analysts of post-9/11 approaches, who argue that second-generation SSR (2GSSR) is emerging in some contexts, and post-colonial critics, who argue that despite discursive changes, Western-driven, securitized practices still dominate. This article bridges those views, building on Larzillière's (2016) idea that the diffusion of global power offers southern actors room for maneuver to construct alternatives to first-generation SSR. Grounding the debate in the Haitian case, the paper explores the mixed record of police and rule of law reform in that relatively permissive environment. It concludes that while some stakeholders have used Haiti's margin for maneuver to advance 2GSSR, powerful actors are privileging narrow security goals in a political and socioeconomic context that greatly constrains the consolidation of a new approach. The article concludes by situating the uncertain gains that have been made in Haiti in comparative thinking about the uneven prospects for 2GSSR in diverse fragile and conflict-affected states (FCAS).

show abstract

“…Critical scholars commonly argue that the international aid architecture is oriented primarily towards aid agencies being accountable to their own governments rather than to governments or citizens in beneficiary countries (Buffardi, 2017; Dixon & McGregor, 2011; Edwards & Hulme, 1996; Oller, 2006). There is also keen awareness, amongst critical development scholars, of the uneven power relations between donors and recipient countries (Dixon & McGregor, 2011; Gibson, 2005; Groves & Hinton, 2013; Oller, 2006; Piron, 2005) and of the challenges of North–South partnerships in peacebuilding (Cohen, 2014) and the New Deal emphasis on inclusivity (Castillejo, 2014; Donais & McCandless, 2017).…”

Section: Accountability: Mechanisms and Narrativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Narratives of Donor Accountability in Support to Peace Processes: The Case of the Joint Peace Fund in Myanmar

Wells

2019

Journal of Peacebuilding & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing scholarly focus on the accountability of Northern donors in their work in recipient countries. Yet scholarly work on donor accountability has given limited attention to the complex challenges of accountability when donors are engaged in supporting peace processes. Further, literature on donor accountability often focuses on examination of accountability mechanisms and relationships, whilst the way accountability is understood amongst practitioners has received less attention. Using the example of donor support to peace processes in Myanmar, this article examines the way that accountability is narrated within donor agencies and amongst international and local networks of peace activists and analysts. When attached to simplified stories, accountability takes a variety of meanings and serves to position donors in different ways. Examination of these narratives, and their divergence, reveals that policy negotiation about accountability mechanisms is influenced by political assumptions about the legitimacy of donor agency engagement in peace processes.

show abstract

International peace building and the emerging inclusivity norm

Cited by 44 publications

References 14 publications

Deconstructing Civil Society Actors and Functions: On the Limitations of International Frameworks for Fragile States

Deconstructing Civil Society Actors and Functions: On the Limitations of International Frameworks for Fragile States

Second-Generation SSR or Unending Violence in Haiti?

Narratives of Donor Accountability in Support to Peace Processes: The Case of the Joint Peace Fund in Myanmar

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About