The Fund for Peace Fragile States Index 2015: Country Indicator Scores
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Fragile States Index 2015
FRAGILE STATES INDEX 2015 THE FUND FOR PEACE The Fund for Peace is an independent, nonpartisan, 501(c)(3) non-profit research and educational organization that works to prevent violent conflict and promote sustainable security. We promote sustainable security through research, training and education, engagement of civil society, building bridges across diverse sectors, and developing innovative technologies and tools for policy makers. A leader in the conflict assessment and early warning field, The Fund for Peace focuses on the problems of weak and failing states. Our objective is to create practical tools and approaches for conflict mitigation that are useful to decision-makers. Copyright © 2015 The Fund for Peace. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written consent from The Fund for Peace. Report Edited by Assessment Directed by J. J. Messner Nate Haken Report Written by J. J. Messner, Nate Haken, Patricia Taft, Hannah Blyth, Kendall Lawrence, Sebastian Pavlou Graham, Felipe Umaña Assessment Supported by Alex Young, Ania Skinner, Katie Cornelius Circulation: PUBLIC The Fund for Peace T: +1 202 223 7940 1101 14th Street NW, Suite 1020 F: +1 202 223 7947 Washington, D.C. 20005 www.fundforpeace.org The Fund for Peace is grateful for the support of: Foreign Policy magazine is the media partner of the Fragile States Index www.foreignpolicy.com www.fundforpeace.org Fragile States Index 2015: Overview The Fragile States Index is an annual The Index in Figures ranking of 178 nations based on their levels of Index of Country Analysis 2015 Map 4 stability and the pressures they face. -
Fragile Contexts in 2018
CHAPTER ELEVEN Leaving No Fragile State and No One Behind in a Prosperous World: A New Approach Landry Signé undreds of millions of people are left behind in fragile states despite the efforts of the international community to make progress on development Hand alleviate conflict. People in fragile states are victim to persistent poverty,1 enduring violence, poor public facilities, deteriorating infrastructure,2 limited civil and political liberties,3 deteriorating social conditions,4 minimal to nonexistent economic growth,5 and, often, humanitarian crises.6 Research and policies on state fragility build on concepts of limited state capacity, legitimacy, insecurity, stability and socioeconomic, demographic, human development, environmental, humanitarian, and gender contexts to determine states’ apparent effectiveness or ineffectiveness in fulfilling the role of the state. Within this -con text, fragility has become a catch- all concept encompassing fragile states, weak states, failed states, collapsing or decaying states, conflict- affected countries, post- conflict countries, brittle states, and states with limited legitimacy, author- ity, capacity, governance, security, and socioeconomic and human development. 1. Collier (2007). 2. Rotberg (2011). 3. Bah (2012). 4. Van de Walle (2004). 5. Brainard and Chollet (2007). 6. Nwozor (2018). The author would like to express his sincere appreciation to Payce Madden, Genevieve Jesse, and Elise El Nouchi, who contributed to the research, data analysis, fact- checking, and visual elements of this chapter. 239 Kharas-McArthur-Ohno_Leave No One Behind_i-xii_1-340.indd 239 9/6/19 1:57 PM 240 Landry Signé When used without conceptual clarification and contextual consideration, as is often the case, the concept of fragility lacks usefulness for policymakers, as the various types, drivers, scopes, levels, and contexts of fragility require differ- ent responses. -
Eu-Colombia Relations
EU-COLOMBIA RELATIONS Colombia is a key partner for the European Union in Latin America. The EU’s relations with Colombia are based on political dialogue, trade cooperation and joint efforts to achievesustainable development and support to peace-building. POLITICAL RELATIONS The European Union and Colombia hold consultations on political issues focussing on bilateral, regional and global issues and meet annually for high-level political and sectorial dialogues. A fruitful bilateral human rights dialogue and a security and defence dialogue complement relations between the European Union and Colombia. Priority areas and common challenges: Stable & Fighting Security Human Climate lasting illicit drugs & & Rights change & peace organised crime defence biodiversity PEACE PROCESS The EU has been supporting the peace process in Colombia since the very beginning. It does so in an integrated approach, using all its tools: diplomacy, international cooperation and development, humanitarian aid and civilian protection and investment and trade. Overall, the EU has invested over €645 million. This includes as its key instrument the EU Trust Fund, pledged loans by the European Investment Bank, short-term actions and ongoing programmes. Some examples: In strong political PEACE LABORATORIES & NEW PEACE TERRITORIES PROJECT €160 support of the These EU projects contributed to boosting economic development, million peace process, High human rights and democracy in Colombia from 2002 to 2017. Representative Federica Mogherini EU TRUST FUND FOR PEACE €125 appointed Eamon The Trust Fund supports the implementation of the Peace Agreement. million Gilmore as the EU’s Special Envoy for INSTRUMENT FOR STABILITY AND PEACE (IsCP) the peace process over €40 Actions under the IsCP focus on support for humanitarian demining, million in Colombia in 2015 - access to justice, the transitional justice system and reintegrating minors 2019. -
Shamieh, Luna,1 Molnár, Dóra2 the Impact of Counterinsurgency On
99 Shamieh, Luna,1 Molnár, Dóra2 The Impact of Counterinsurgency on Human Security. The case study of Iraq (2003-2011) DOI 10.17047/Hadtud.2021.31.E.99 Iraq mosaic formed of the different minorities survived for a long while; a beauty that has not remained for long. The mosaic changed to ruins following the counterinsurgency. The war in Iraq led to a complete chaos against all aspects of the society. It has caused a massive influx of migration and displacement; it also led to fragmentation in the society that eventually culminated in deterioration in human security of all the people from different communities. The political, personal and community security issues and challenges are discussed in the study showing political repression, human rights violations, lack of rule of law and justice, physical violence, human trafficking, inter-ethnic tensions and terrorism. KEYWORDS: insurgency, counterinsurgency, human security, political security, personal security, community security, Iraq Felkelés elleni műveletek hatása a humán biztonságra Esettanulmány Irak példája alapján (2003–2011) A különféle kisebbségekből kialakított iraki mozaik sokat látott és még többet túlélt, azonban mégsem maradhatott fenn. A felkelés leverése következtében a mozaik romokká vált. Az iraki háború a társadalom valamennyi szegmensében teljes káoszhoz vezetett, valamint hatalmas migrációs és kitelepítési hullámot idézett elő. A társadalom széttagoltságához vezetett, amely elkerülhetetlen következménye lett a különböző közösségekből származók humán biztonságának jelentős romlása. A tanulmány a politikai, egyéni és közösségi biztonsági kérdéseket és kihívásokat tárgyalja, kitérve a politikai elnyomásra, az emberi jogok megsértésére, a jogállamiság és az igazságosság hiányára, a fizikai erőszakra, az emberkereskedelemre, az etnikumok közötti feszültségekre és a terrorizmusra is. -
Chad Fragility Brief 2021
FRAGILITY ASSESSMENT OF CHAD THE NORMAN PATERSON SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS FRAGILITY ASSESSMENT OF CHAD Aisha Baig and Alex Dupuis December 2020 FRAGILITY ASSESSMENT OF CHAD CONTENTS About The Authors ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 1. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 4 2. Methods ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 3. End User ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 4. Background.............................................................................................................................................................. 5 5. Stakeholders ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 6. Fragility Drivers ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 Primary Drivers ..................................................................................................................................................... -
The Fragility-Grievances-Conflict Triangle in the Middle East
social sciences $€ £ ¥ Article The Fragility-Grievances-Conflict Triangle in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA): An Exploration of the Correlative Associations † Timo Kivimäki Department of Politics, Languages and International Studies, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK; [email protected] † For fruitful comments on previous version of this article, I am grateful to Talip Alkhayer, Rana Jawad and Olivia Perry as well as to the three anonymous referees of Social Sciences. I am also grateful for the UK Global Challenges Research Fund project “Conflict and peace-building in the MENA region: is social protection the missing link?” (Grant number AH/T003537/1) for funding this research. My funders or the commentators of this paper are naturally not responsible for the interpretations and possible mistakes in this study. Abstract: The intention of this special issue of Social Sciences is to study state fragility and its relationship with conflict and grievances in the post-Cold War Middle East and North Africa (MENA). This article will lay the foundation for such a study by offering a conceptual foundation, data and the identification of the correlative associations that are specific to the MENA region. This article suggests that the relationship between political legitimacy, factionalism of the state, and conflict needs special, MENA-specific emphasis, as this relationship seems more prominently different in the MENA region, compared to the rest of the world. While in the rest of the world, different aspects of state fragility all relate to grievances and conflict dynamics, in the MENA region political factionalism has a disproportionate role in the explanation of conflict grievances and violence. -
Building for Peace
Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Building for Peace Reconstruction for Security, Public Disclosure Authorized Equity, and Sustainable Peace in MENA Public Disclosure Authorized Building for Peace Reconstruction for Security, Equity, and Sustainable Peace in MENA © 2020 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpre- tations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because the World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to: World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; Fax: 202-522-2625; E-mail: [email protected]. The cover image is one of the 100 artworks produced by 500 Lebanese and Syrian children, who worked together for the art exhibition “Butterfly: Promoting Peace through the Arts” in Beirut, Lebanon, and Washington, DC, during October–December 2017. -
EUTF Monitoring and Learning System Hoa S1 2020 REPORT COVERING UNTIL 30 JUNE 2020
EUTF Monitoring and Learning System HoA S1 2020 REPORT COVERING UNTIL 30 JUNE 2020 Altai Consulting for the European Union – December 2020 © European Union December 2020 Unless specified otherwise, all pictures in this report are credited to Altai Consulting. Cover photo: Midwife training conducted by Strengthening Resilience in Eastern Sudan AICS project in River Atbara, Kassala State, Sudan. Cover photo credit: Michele Pasquale, AICS. ALTAI CONSULTING Altai Consulting provides strategy consulting and research services to private companies, governments and public institutions in developing countries. Altai teams operate in more than 50 countries in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. Since its inception 15 years ago, Altai Consulting has developed a strong focus on governance and civil society related research and programme evaluations. Contact Details: Justine Rubira (Project Director): [email protected] Eric Davin (Altai Partner): [email protected] www.altaiconsulting.com MLS HOA S1 2020 REPORT Altai Consulting 2 November 2020 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was prepared by Eric Davin, Justine Rubira, Philibert de Mercey, Bruno Kessler, Dhanya Williams, Emile Rolland, Hugo Le Blay, Marie Bonnet, Erick Ogola and Rebecca Christensen at Altai Consulting. We gratefully thank project staff from the implementing partners who took the time to sit with us and comply with our reporting requirements. We are specifically indebted to: AFD, IOM and WFP in Djibouti; ACF, AECID, Amref, the Administration for Refugee and Returnee -
Normandy Index
Mapping threats to peace and democracy worldwide Normandy Index 2020 STUDY EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Members' Research Service PE 652.039 – September 2020 EN Mapping threats to peace and democracy worldwide Normandy Index 2020 The 'Normandy Index', now in its second year, aims to measure the level of threats to peace, security and democracy around the world. It was presented for the first time on the occasion of the Normandy Peace Forum in June 2019, as a result of a partnership between the European Parliament and the Region of Normandy. The Index has been designed and prepared by the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS), in conjunction with and on the basis of data provided by the Institute for Economics and Peace. This paper sets out the findings of the 2020 exercise and explains how the Index can be used to compare peace – defined on the basis of a given country's performance against a range of predetermined threats – across countries and regions. It is complemented by 40 individual country case studies, derived from the Index. EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service AUTHORS Editors: Étienne Bassot and Monika Nogaj Author: Elena Lazarou, Members' Research Service Graphics by Nadejda Kresnichka-Nikolchova This paper has been drawn up by the Members' Research Service, within the Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services (EPRS) of the Secretariat of the European Parliament. The underlying data have been supplied by the Institute for Economics and Peace. The author would like to acknowledge the contribution of Philippe Perchoc to the conception and elaboration of the Normandy Index and to parts of this study. -
To Download the Fragile States Index Annual Report 2019 in PDF Format
FRAGILE STATES INDEX ANNUAL REPORT 2019 For over 60 years, The Fund for Peace (FFP) has been a world leader in developing practical tools and approaches for reducing conflict. With a clear focus on the nexus of human security and economic development, FFP contributes to more peaceful and prosperous societies by engineering smarter methodologies and smarter partnerships. FFP empowers policy-makers, practitioners, and populations with context-specific, data -driven applications to diagnose risks and vulnerabilities and to develop solutions through collective dialogue. FFP is an independent tax-exempt non-governmental organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. with offices in Abuja, Nigeria and Tunis, Tunisia. FFP boasts six decades of programmatic experience in over 40 countries, focused on conflict early warning, peacebuilding, and sustainable development. Copyright © 2019 The Fund for Peace. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written consent from The Fund for Peace. Cover images: Freeshot via 123RF Contents Page Image: Bumbledee via 123RF Report designed and edited by J.J. Messner. Assessment directed by Charles Fiertz. The Fragile States Index Team: J.J. Messner Charles Fiertz Nate Haken Patricia Taft Hannah Blyth Marcel Maglo Daniet Moges Christina Murphy Wendy Wilson Amanda Quinn Kevin Obike Kat Meyer Rhea Bhambani Chris Merriman Ignatius Onyekwere The Fund for Peace 1101 14th Street NW, Suite 1020 Washington, D.C. 20005 T: +1 202 223 7940 -
The Lingering Problem of Fragile States
Charles T. Call The Lingering Problem of Fragile States During his campaign, Donald Trump pledged a “very swift and decisive end” to nation-building if elected.1 His statement—identical to the pledge made by then-candidate George W. Bush—marks a reversal of a strong emphasis on failed and fragile states initiated by none other than President George W. Bush. In the wake of 9/11, President Bush declared that “America is now threatened less by conquering states than we are by failing ones.”2 He subsequently made “failed states” a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. He reoriented military and civi- lian capabilities toward these states, a practice continued by the Obama adminis- tration even as Obama sought to draw those two wars to a close. A policy paradigm of “failed states” emerged as U.S. allies, the European Union (EU), and the United Nations (UN) built new institutions to address these priority countries under the rubric of “state-building,”“reconstruction and stabilization,”“conflict mitigation” and “peacebuilding.” As Trump’s campaign rhetoric indicates, the failed states paradigm has receded. Traditional security challenges posed by Russia and China as well as nuclear threats from North Korea and Iran are higher priorities, and the U.S. military is pulling back from its decade-old emphasis on large-scale stabilization operations. Last year, the Defense Department expressed skepticism about a “fragile states strategy” proposed by the White House,3 and the Congress has no enthusiasm for ambitious new state-building operations. Michael Mazarr, political scientist at the RAND Corporation, argued: “the decline of the state-building narrative reflects a more profound underlying truth: the obsession with weak states was always more of a mania than a sound strategic doctrine.”4 Indeed, the failed- Charles T. -
Fragility in the Data
APRIL 2018 Fragility in the data Hannes Mueller Hannes Mueller is a tenured scientist at the Institute for Economic Analysis (IAE- CSIC) and a Barcelona Graduate School of Economics Affiliated Professor. About the commission The LSE-Oxford Commission on State Fragility, Growth and Development was launched in March 2017 to guide policy to address state fragility. The commission, established under the auspices of the International Growth Centre, is sponsored by LSE and University of Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government. It is funded from the LSE KEI Fund and the British Academy’s Sustainable Development Programme through the Global Challenges Research Fund. Cover photo: Flickr/Will De Freitas Fragility in the data Contents Background and definitions .................................................................................................... 2 Past fragility explains present welfare ..................................................................................... 3 Implications ...........................................................................................................................11 Indicators of fragility and failure .............................................................................................13 Fragility index data and welfare .............................................................................................15 Predictive capacity of fragility index data on future failure ......................................................17 Developing a model of risk of future failure ............................................................................18