Development in fragile states and situations: theory and critique

This chapter examines the evolution of ‘fragile’ and ‘failed’ state terminology noting the background to the ideas and examining the theorisation around the concepts, before surveying the literature on development in ‘fragile’ and ‘failed’ states in some depth. The OECD Principles for Good International Engagement in Fragile States and Situations are examined in particular, together with the follow-up OECD fragile state evaluations and related literature, as the primary and often normative guidance on development in ‘fragile’ or ‘failed’ states. A range of alternatives and critiques are explored. This chapter, therefore, sets the literature and theory in place as a backdrop for the diversity of case studies presented in Part II of this volume.

Development in difficult sociopolitical contexts fragile, failed, pariah preface

This edited volume explores development in the so-called 'fragile', 'failed' and 'pariah' states. It examines the literature on both fragile states and their development, and offers eleven case studies on countries ranking in the 'very high alert' and 'very high warning' categories in the Fund for Peace Failed States Index.

Beyond the usual suspects: complexity of fragility and analytical framework

Development in so-called ‘fragile states’ has become a key priority for the international community over the past few years, but international actors have not yet adequately incorporated sufficiently nuanced understandings of fragility into policies or practices. The increasing proportion of the world’s poor living in fragile contexts, the depth of human need in these contexts, and the potential regional spillover implications of this fragility, all make this an urgent concern. This chapter examines this growing need and discusses the origins and methodological approach in this volume, before setting up the rest of the book with definitions and an analysis framework. The chapter concludes with a summary of the book chapters and contributions.

Critiques and alternatives: development in contexts of fragility

The question of effective development in fragile contexts is increasingly significant, but as the literature and case studies throughout this volume have shown, the existing literature and principles for development effectiveness are built on a narrow conceptualisation of fragility. By exploring case studies that go well-beyond the ‘usual’ examples of ‘fragile states’, this volume has demonstrated that a much broader range of fragile contexts (set of causes and characteristics) exist, requiring a much more nuanced range of principles and approaches. This concluding chapter therefore summarises the key critiques of development theory and practice in fragile contexts found woven throughout the literature review and case studies, then offers tentative first steps towards more nuanced, context-specific recommendations for the roles of development actors, development approaches and modalities of interaction with structures and use of power in development, arranged according to thoughts around potential key drivers and characteristics of fragility, as illustrated by the case studies.

Development in a fragile pariah state: Myanmar 1990-2010

Myanmar was not only a ‘fragile state’ by most definitions during the 1990s and 2000s, but was concurrently isolated as an international ‘pariah’. The complexity of this paradoxical combination of poverty, fragility, pro-economic growth polity and international isolation created an enigmatic context for international agencies, and one in which existing frameworks for development in ‘fragile states’ do not appear overly relevant. Nonetheless, Myanmar experienced a surprising level of development activity, with equally surprising signs of effectiveness. This paper explores this activity, identifying actors, roles, approaches, and modalities of interaction with structures and authorities found to be most effective. The paper is divided into four sections, offering an overview of the historical context, summarising field observations, considering the effectiveness of interventions, and discussing these observations in the light of fragile state policy.