Transnational Partnerships: Conditions for Successful Service Provision in Areas of Limited Statehood

Beisheim, Marianne; Liese, Andrea; Janetschek, Hannah; Sarre, Johanna

doi:10.1111/gove.12070

Cited by 34 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The second part of the special issue concentrates on efforts by external actors to directly contribute to the provision of collective goods and services, such as access to clean water, sanitation, and nutritious food (Beisheim et al. 2014), public security (Hönke and Thauer 2014), and public health (Schäferhoff as well as Hönke and Thauer 2014).…”

Section: The Dependent Variables: State Capacity and The Provision Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…External state and nonstate actors can act alone or provide collective goods and services in failed states through public–private partnership (PPP; see Schäferhoff, Campe, and Kaan ; also Beisheim et al. 2014; Schäferhoff 2014). State actors include foreign governments and their (development) agencies as well as international organizations.…”

Section: The Dependent Variables: State Capacity and The Provision Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To avoid circular reasoning with regard to our dependent variable, we consider output legitimacy with regard to two processes: Local domestic actors and communities might consider international actors as legitimate in anticipation of their performance or because they trust their knowledge and moral authority. Over time, a virtuous cycle might evolve in which the initial performance of external actors meets the expectations of local communities which then increases the formers’ legitimacy and, hence, their effectiveness (see articles by Beisheim et al. 2014; Matanock 2014; Schäferhoff 2014). …”

Section: Explanations: Legitimacy Task Properties and Institutionalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This sounds trivial, but—as the article by Lake and Farris (2014) demonstrates—most efforts at external state‐building through imposition and trusteeships have not been provided with adequate resources over a long period of time (see also Beisheim et al. 2014).…”

Section: Explanations: Legitimacy Task Properties and Institutionalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This includes the ability of the governance structures to adapt flexibly to changing local conditions (Beisheim et al. 2014). “One size fits all” institutional arrangements are unlikely to be effective.…”

Section: Explanations: Legitimacy Task Properties and Institutionalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

External Actors, State‐Building, and Service Provision in Areas of Limited Statehood: Introduction

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article introduces the themes and arguments of the special issue. While virtually all polities enjoy uncontested international legal sovereignty, there are wide variations in statehood, that is, the monopoly over the means of violence and the ability of the state to make and implement policies. Areas of limited statehood are not, however, ungoverned spaces where anarchy and chaos prevail. The provision of collective goods and services is possible even under extremely adverse conditions of fragile or failed statehood. We specify the conditions under which external efforts at state-building and service provision by state and nonstate actors can achieve their goals. We focus on the extent to which external actors enhance the capacity (statehood) of authority structures in weak states, or directly contribute to the provision of collective goods and services, such as public health, clean environment, social security, and infrastructure. We argue that three factors determine success: legitimacy, task complexity, and institutionalization, including the provision of adequate resources.This special issue begins with the empirical observation that the idealtypical conception of a consolidated state is misleading rather than illuminating. A consolidated state enjoys the privileges of international legal sovereignty, including recognition, the right to enter into treaties, and to join international organizations. It is a full "Westphalian/Vattelian" sovereign: Domestic authority structures are autonomously determined. It exercises effective domestic sovereignty, what we term here statehood, that is, the monopoly over the legitimate use of force and the ability to successfully make, implement, and enforce rules and regulations across all policy arenas within its territory (Krasner 1999;Risse 2011).This ideal typical construct is far removed from the situation that exists in most of the world's polities. Most relevant for this special issue, there are wide variations in statehood. These variations are here to stay and it makes little sense to orient external efforts at capacity-building and service provision toward an ideal of consolidated statehood that only exists in some parts of the world.

show abstract

Section: The Dependent Variables: State Capacity and The Provision Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Dependent Variables: State Capacity and The Provision Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Explanations: Legitimacy Task Properties and Institutionalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Explanations: Legitimacy Task Properties and Institutionalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Explanations: Legitimacy Task Properties and Institutionalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

External Actors, State‐Building, and Service Provision in Areas of Limited Statehood: Introduction

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Collaborative governance for the Sustainable Development Goals

Florini

Pauli

2018

Asia & Pacific Policy Stud

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The advent of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals has refocused global attention on the roles of business and other nonstate actors in achieving global goals. Often, business involvement takes the form of collaborations with the more traditional actors-governments and non-governmental organizations. Although such partnerships for development have been seen before, the scale and expectations are new. This paper explores how and why these cross-sector collaborations are evolving, and what steps can or should be taken to ensure that partnerships create public and private value. The arguments are illustrated with reference to cases of market-driven partnerships for agriculture in Southeast Asia that are intended to engage marginalized smallholder farmers in global value chains in agriculture. The aims of these cross-sector collaborations coincide with several targets of the Sustainable Development Goals such as poverty alleviation, decreasing environmental impact, and achieving food security. This is a hard case for mechanisms intended to protect public interests, given that the target beneficiaries (low-income smallholder farmers and the environment) are unable to speak effectively for themselves.We find that structures and processes to align interestsThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

show abstract

Meta‐Governance of Partnerships for Sustainable Development: Actors' Perspectives from Kenya

Beisheim

Ellersiek

Goltermann³

et al. 2017

Public Admin & Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development promotes multi‐stakeholder partnerships (MSPs) as a means of implementation while at the same time putting renewed focus on the need for national‐level ownership and implementation. Despite the fact that an ever growing body of literature on the merits and drawbacks of MSPs delineates several success conditions for partnerships, efforts to translate this knowledge into national‐level meta‐governance for MSPs remain marginal to date. This study outlines the benefits the literature alleges for such “meta‐governance” frameworks, before it uses a country‐level study with a series of stakeholder interviews to take a closer look at national‐level context conditions and lessons learned with regard to two water partnerships in Kenya. Our findings suggest that to date the existing meta‐governance for partnerships in Kenya is rather weak and fragmented. Yet respondents support the view that MSPs could benefit from such a framework, in particular regarding local ownership of MSPs and the potential to scale successful cases. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Transnational Partnerships: Conditions for Successful Service Provision in Areas of Limited Statehood

Cited by 34 publications

References 9 publications

External Actors, State‐Building, and Service Provision in Areas of Limited Statehood: Introduction

External Actors, State‐Building, and Service Provision in Areas of Limited Statehood: Introduction

Collaborative governance for the Sustainable Development Goals

Meta‐Governance of Partnerships for Sustainable Development: Actors' Perspectives from Kenya

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About