Suchergebnisse

Abstract: "To what extent is making peace not a neutral or impartial exercise? By analysing the peace initiatives undertaken in Somalia and Somaliland (1991-95), this article questions the positionality and alignment of the actors involved, and claims that neither process has been an impartial exercise. To explore this argument the article first theoretically frames how supporters and critics of liberal peace elaborate on the dilemma of neutrality and impartiality. Departing from Lederach's criticism of impartiality, I claim that the UN-US intervention in Somalia has been an instrument of division, as well as leverage for political and military advantage. External interveners have initially subverted the internal distribution of power, but they lacked the commitment and material capacity of sustaining the preferred 'winning' faction. By unpacking the category of 'local' I then map the protagonists of the Somaliland pacification, as well the mechanism of institution-building that enabled a multi-scale of stakeholders to sustain the conflict resolution. This analysis contributes to reconceptualise the political architecture of making peace. It also helps to disentangle the study of peace and violence from the myths of the liberal, neutral, intervention doctrine." (Seite 280)

This Working Paper is a background paper delivered to frame the workshop 'Global Governance by Indicators: Measuring corruption and corruption indicators' convened by the Global Governance Programme of the European University Institute in Florence on 17 and 18 October 2013. Successively it was developed further in EUI RSCAS WP 2014/37 - http://hdl.handle.net/1814/30582 ; The development of more sophisticated corruption measures has been stimulated by consistent and compelling demands for more effective action against corruption. However, the production of these indicators has rarely been addressed as a 'technique of governance' (Davis et al., 2012), or an instrument of 'governance without government' (Rosenau & Czempiel, 1992). The first section (1) reviews the major existing measures of corruption, by focusing on different categories of indices and indicators. The second part (2) pays particular attention to the major ontological and methodological criticisms, constraints and pitfalls, connected with these indicators. The third part (3) presents a comparative analysis of two of the most widely used indicators of corruption: the World Bank's Control of Corruption indicator (CC) and Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index (CPI). The fourth section (4) evaluates the policy implications embedded in the construction and employment of indicators, while the last part of the paper (5) concludes by summarizing the most important questions raised by this analysis.

This Working Paper is a background paper delivered to frame the workshop 'Global Governance by Indicators : Sustainability and Sustainable Public Finances' convened by the Global Governance Programme of the European University Institute in Florence on 10 and 11 April 2014. Successively it was developed further in EUI RSCAS WP 2014/78 http://hdl.handle.net/1814/31914 ; The concept of sustainability emerged on the global governance agenda during the 1970s, when, the economic crisis put the spotlight on environmental and social risks associated with economic growth. Although much has been written about it, the literature on pillars, dimensions and measures of sustainability has developed quite independently from the discussions on the idea of sustainability as a set of interlinked and interdependent concentric thematic circles (that is its environmental, social, economic and institutional dimensions). Beginning with this conceptual debate, the present paper argues that indicators of fiscal sustainability are caught between demands of a solvency criterion and the principles of inter- and intra-generational equity. Bypassing their function as a mere representation of reality, these indicators have played a key role in de facto regulating the current fiscal crisis and in eclipsing the other dimensions of sustainability. To discuss this argument, the paper's first section explores the literature on sustainability indicators and composite indices of sustainable development. Its second part focuses on indicators of fiscal sustainability evaluating concepts, measures and demands. The third part gives insight into two measures, the United Nations' (UN) Debt to GNI ratio and the European Union's (EU) fiscal sustainability gap indicators. The fourth part concludes by summarising conceptual, normative and ontological questions.

How is the space for contemporary interventions constructed? This article deepens our understanding of counterterrorism as a dialectical form of intervention by highlighting the importance of unifying rationalities in the creation of "ungoverned spaces" as abstract spaces for intervention purposes. We combine dialectical and decolonial thinking to track how unifying rationalities in Nigeria and Libya are deployed across cognitive, normative, and operational constructs. The article examines how interventions are cognitively tied to coloniality of knowing, being, and power, which exploit identity, religion, or societal divisions to justify ungovernance and normalize state and foreign violence. The simultaneous and reciprocal globalization of local security concerns and localization of global security predicaments facilitates the formation of abstract spaces for counterterrorism purposes. Empirically, our analysis shows how portraying Libya and Nigeria as ungoverned creates a void of meaning, putting external actors in charge of restoring governance and protecting human security, modernity, and civility. Interveners in Libya contributed to normalizing a broader spectrum of violence, frequently internalized by competing actors through their normative tropes. In Nigeria, state and foreign interventionism and counterinsurgency have been responsible for the widespread use of violence against entire communities.

Intro -- Preface -- Contents -- Notes on Editors and Contributors -- Abbreviations -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- List of Boxes -- 1: Introduction: Of Numbers and Narratives-Indicators in Global Governance and the Rise of a Reflexive Indicator Culture -- Knowing, Governing, and Changing the World with Quantification -- Global Governance and the Salience of the Contemporary Avalanche of Indicators -- Indicator Cultures and the Handbook of Indicators in Global Governance -- Post-Metrological Realism and Reform -- Limitations of Concepts and Data as Inherent and Subject to Contestation -- Complex Effects of Indicators -- Chapters in This Handbook -- References -- Part I: Conceptualising and Contextualising Indicators as Instruments of (Global) Governance -- 2: Good Governance: Measuring the Performance of Governments -- Introduction -- Governance and Democracy -- Political Goods and Measuring Governance -- Inputs or Outputs? Quality or Capacity? -- Outcome Measures -- What Measuring Performance Provides -- Conclusion -- References -- 3: How International Rankings Constitute and Limit Our Understanding of Global Governance Challenges: The Case of Corruption -- Introduction -- Corruption Rankings and the Distorting Lens of Methodological Nationalism -- A Transnational Perspective on Corruption and Kleptocracy -- Why Are Professional Intermediaries Important? -- The Transnational Channels of Corruption -- Shell Companies -- Foreign Real Estate -- Investor Visas and Second Citizenship Programmes -- Corruption and Transnational Networks: China Revisited -- The Chinese State Strikes Back Transnationally -- The Jianjun Qiao Case: The Transnational Chinese Grain King -- Conclusions -- References -- 4: Measuring Governance As If Institutions Matter: A Proposal -- Introduction -- Institutions and Development -- Measuring Institutional Quality

This Working Paper is the elaboration of discussion emerged during the workshop 'Global Governance by Indicators: Measuring corruption and corruption indicators' convened by the Global Governance Programme of the European University Institute in Florence on 17 and 18 October 2013. It is based on the workshop's background paper published as EUI RSCAS WP 2014/13 http://hdl.handle.net/1814/29872 ; While, in the last decades, the proliferation of corruption indicators has stimulated an increasing sophistication of both data collection and management, academics and policy-makers have been confronted with significant challenges and criticisms over their efforts to elaborate anti-corruption strategies. Both theoretical and methodological issues related to the use of corruption indicators highlight the need to better consider the narrative emerging from the use of numbers; in particular by evaluating both policy context and implications involved in the construction of corruption through governance indicators. The present working paper promotes the idea of approaching corruption indicators from a broader multidisciplinary and multifocal perspective. It addressed three core dimensions of the analysis of key governance indicators: the construction of corruption indicators and their use as well as the discourse about them.