The New Biopower: Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers and the obfuscation of international collective responsibility

Tan, Celine

doi:10.1080/01436597.2011.584720

Cited by 6 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…115 The mandatory nature of the PRSP process has even been noted to render the content of the PRSPs close to binding requirements. 116 As a point of departure across regimes in such contexts, vulnerability is defined on a case-by-case basis, with the nation State at the heart of that determination. This has been noted to lend the vulnerability concept to a dual use of, on the one hand, providing a mechanism for compelling State response, while on the other hand legitimating regressive State agendas that increase intervention and control.…”

Section: Imposed Vulnerabilisation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Vulnerabilisation: Between mainstreaming and human rights overreach

Engström

Heikkilä

Mustaniemi-Laakso

2022

Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an ongoing process of ‘vulnerabilisation’ of international protection. This process is the outcome of the establishment of special protection regimes within human rights law and of extending and specifying the scope of existing norms. Vulnerabilisation also increasingly takes place through the expansion of the sphere of international actors embedding the protection of vulnerable groups as a core element of their policymaking. This article takes hold of this ongoing vulnerabilisation and sets out to explore some of its consequences. Vulnerabilisation, the article claims, is a necessary and important element of ensuring protection of those most in need. However, the development also comes with possible downsides. Vulnerability-reasoning enables selectivity and prioritisation, which can turn into exclusion and politicisation. The vulnerabilisation phenomenon also comes with compartmentalisation and potential instrumentalisation of protection. As such, vulnerabilisation walks a tightrope between mainstreaming and overreach.

show abstract

Section: Imposed Vulnerabilisation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Vulnerabilisation: Between mainstreaming and human rights overreach

Engström

Heikkilä

Mustaniemi-Laakso

2022

Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result of these many requirements, partnerships are difficult to achieve, particularly between organisations or individuals with historic power differences. For example, the partnership model underpins the framework for developing poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs) and is based on the ideal of shared responsibilities and mutual commitments between traditional donors in the North, aid recipients in the South and international development organisations (Tan ). However, these countries and organisations have long histories of power imbalance, non‐reciprocity and lack of transparency, trust and accountability.…”

Section: Defining Partnershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Rhetoric and Reality of Partnerships for International Development

Schaaf

2015

Geography Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past 60 years, the international development landscape has become far more complex. There is now a much wider range and number of organisations involved in some aspect of poverty alleviation, and an increasing emphasis on collaborative activities and forming partnerships to achieve development goals. This approach has been reinforced by the eighth Millennium Development Goal, which calls for a global partnership for development, the emerging Sustainable Development Goals, as well as recent multi‐stakeholder partnerships including the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation, which evolved from the Busan Partnership agreement devised at the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness. However, there are many challenges to partnerships, both in terms of defining their form and operation, but also achieving sustainable, mutually beneficial partnerships for development. The advocating of partnerships in development policy suggests significant normative advantages to a more collaborative approach; however, other literature are more cautious, highlighting a number of pitfalls including reductions in effectiveness, difficulties in implementation and conflicts of interest. This article reviews the contemporary nature of partnerships for international development and considers their role in achieving more effective development cooperation.

show abstract

“…In practice, these opportunities for participation are overlooked by many development agencies (United Nations institutions such as the World Bank, International Non Governmental Organizations) and limited to mere consultation. This disconnect of where the term “participation” can be used to describe a variety of processes (that may or may not question power dynamics) explains why many development interventions fail to address economic inequalities and social injustice resulting from the current globalization process [ 11 , 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring participation for persons with mental illness: A systematic review assessing relevance of existing scales for low and middle income countries

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundParticipation is increasingly becoming an important outcome for assessment in many fields, including development, disability and policy implementation. However, selecting specific instruments to measure participation has been a significant problem due to overlapping conceptual definitions and use of different theories. The objective of this paper is to identify participation instruments, examine theories/definition supporting their use and highlight scales for use in low and middle-income countries for persons with mental illness.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted to identify instruments intended to measure participation for individuals with severe mental illness. The search was limited to peer-reviewed articles published in English between 2003 and 2014. Instruments that measured related concepts of well-being, quality of life and social functioning were also identified and screened for items that pertained to participation, defined as empowerment and collective capabilities.ResultsFive scales met established criteria for assessing participation and were determined to contain questions measuring empowerment and/or collective capabilities. However, each scale largely assessed individual functioning and capacity, while neglecting collective aspects of the community. All scales were developed in high-income countries and none were used in low and middle-income countries.ConclusionsThere is an urgent need for participation scales to focus on empowerment as well as collective capabilities. Further, development of participation scales should clearly delineate theoretical foundations and concepts used. Finally, participation scales used in low and middle income countries should consider how contextual factors like medicine, poverty and disability, particularly with regards to mental illness, impact content of the scale.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40359-015-0093-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

The New Biopower: Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers and the obfuscation of international collective responsibility

Abstract: As successors to structural adjustment programmes, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers

Cited by 6 publications

References 1 publication

Vulnerabilisation: Between mainstreaming and human rights overreach

Vulnerabilisation: Between mainstreaming and human rights overreach

The Rhetoric and Reality of Partnerships for International Development

Measuring participation for persons with mental illness: A systematic review assessing relevance of existing scales for low and middle income countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About