Post‐conflict Statebuilding and State Legitimacy: From Negative to Positive Peace?

Roberts, David

doi:10.1111/j.1467-7660.2008.00495.x

Cited by 32 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Once initial service provisions have been met, expectations may then shift upward to higher levels of service provision (Roberts 2008). In this scenario, citizens will reward relative quality of performance rather than absolute improvements, such that the relationship may only be observed longitudinally, rather than cross-sectionally as in the present study.…”

Section: Revisiting Instrumental Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 87%

“…The widespread inability of conflict-affected states to gain sufficient legitimacy has been described as 'the most disappointing aspect of post-conflict reconstruction' (François & Sud, 2006, p.151). Some argue that norms of legitimacy in the developing world are not well-established enough to allow the Western notion of legitimacy to take hold in domestic populations in non-Western societies (e.g., Roberts, 2008).…”

Section: Institutional Legitimacy In the Post-conflict Statementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rebuilding institutional legitimacy in post-conflict societies: a case study of Nepal

Fisk¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Legitimacy refers to the perceived rightfulness of authorities, and is central to citizens' perceptions of institutions such as the government. Legitimate authority is linked to acceptance of institutions and long-term stability of societies. As such, rebuilding the legitimacy of institutions such as the government and judiciary ('institutional legitimacy') is essential for stability in post-conflict societies. In this thesis, I explore the factors that lead citizens to view their government as legitimate following the reconstruction of central government institutions after a conflict. I draw on sociological, political science, social psychological and statebuilding theories to develop and present a theoretical model of post-conflict legitimacy.The model has three key components. The first encompasses relational and instrumental antecedents of legitimacy. Relational antecedents encompass fair and neutral decision-making, as well as respectful and dignified treatment, and are referred to collectively as procedural justice. Instrumental antecedents are those which involve outcomes to citizens, and include distributive justice (fairness in outcome distribution), outcome favourability (personal gain in outcomes), and government performance (the ability of the government to function effectively and provide services to citizens). These main variables are investigated along with contingencies relating to social groups that may influence the relationship between procedural justice and legitimacy, such as national identification and group power. Testing of the first model component revealed that procedural justice was by far the strongest predictor of post-conflict institutional legitimacy, and was significantly stronger than instrumental variables such as distributive justice, government performance, and outcome favourability. Further, the relationship between procedural justice and legitimacy was moderated by national identification and group power, suggesting that procedural justice operates through social identity to exert its positive effect. Moreover, the effect of procedural justice on government legitimacy was not simply due to trust and performance perceptions of local institutions, and was not diminished by the government's ability to provide essential services (as predicted by the statebuilding literature). 4Testing of the second model component revealed that two elements of local ownership-voice and local influence-weakly predicted legitimacy, with these relationships varying according to participants' position in the Nepalese caste hierarchy.Testing of the third model component revealed a significant social interaction effect, such that citizens' legitimacy beliefs are influenced by the legitimacy views of those around them. This effect persisted even when demographic, regional, and individual-level variables were controlled.This thesis concludes that procedural justice is more predictive of post-conflict institutional legitimacy than instrumental outcomes. Further, the relationship appears to operat...

show abstract

Section: Revisiting Instrumental Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Institutional Legitimacy In the Post-conflict Statementioning

confidence: 99%

Rebuilding institutional legitimacy in post-conflict societies: a case study of Nepal

Fisk¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, positive peace is an ambitious approach towards peace and looks at the presence of elements that render a state not merely functional, but also flourishing. Negative peace, on the other hand, is broadly understood as the absence of war (Roberts 2008). In contrast to positive peace that counts the presence of various elements, negative peace rather counts absences, and in particular, the absence of violence.…”

Section: Defining Fragility Peace and Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Twenty Years After Dayton: Bosnia-Herzegovina (Still) Stable and Explosive

Kartsonaki

2016

Civil Wars

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines how fragile Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) is and whether it is indeed in danger of collapsing, as significant amount of academic literature often claims. The research finds that BiH is not in an immediate danger of collapse. BiH remains peaceful, despite the numerous challenges it faces. However, it comprises an alarming amount of causes of conflict that have been mitigated because both international actors and local elites benefit from the current status quo. Thus, BiH finds itself in a peaceful stalemate, which is likely to continue until a structural change occurs that triggers the outbreak of violent conflict.

show abstract

“…La literatura sobre los conflictos y posconflicto ha mostrado que el origen, sostenimiento o reaparición de los conflictos puede deberse a muchos factores que deben ser incluidos en estudios futuros: la defensa de los derechos humanos (IPA, 2003), la diplomacia internacional (Lister & Wilder, 2005), cambios institucionales y transformacio-nes estructurales en el mediano y largo plazo, como la participación ciudadana y el fortalecimiento del capital social, la lucha contra la corrupción, la descentralización administrativa, la protección de derechos civiles y la provisión de los servicios esperados por la población del Estado, todo esto con el objetivo de aumentar la gobernabilidad y legitimidad del gobierno y la efectividad de sus programas (Baranyi, 2006;Barnes, 2001;Bates, 2008;Bigombe, Collier & Sambanis, 2000;Brinkerhoff, 2005;Davoodi et al, 2001;Elbadawi, 2008;Koppel & Sharma, 2000;Ottaway, 2002;Quinn, Mason & Gurses, 2007;Roberts, 2008;Widner, 2001 …”

Section: Conclusiones E Investigación Futuraunclassified